Will the war in Gaza spill over to the Middle East?

ERBIL, Kurdistan Region - Relentless airstrikes pound the besieged Gaza Strip with fierce fighting underway on the ground as the Israeli army pushes deeper into the blockaded enclave. Israel says it is targeting Hamas militants who on October 7th paraglided into Israeli cities and launched a surprise attack. The United States and Iran have been engaged in a war of words, both warning the other against expanding the conflict regionally. 

Over 8,400 people have been killed by Israeli airstrikes in Gaza in less than a month. The renewed conflict sparked widespread anger across the Arab world where the Palestinian cause has always been a call to arms. The Palestinian people have also expressed their frustration with Arab states, particularly those which have normalized ties with Israel. The US was also pushing towards normalization between Saudi Arabia and Israel, a move Riyadh will be reluctant to make under the current circumstances. 

Almost daily exchanges of fire between the Israeli army and Hezbollah in the south of Lebanon, cruise missiles launched from Yemen, foreign missions evacuating staff, and additional US military deployments in response to attacks on its troops in Iraq and Syria have raised concerns of a regional spillover of the war. 

Analysts and experts on the region do not rule out the possibility of a wider conflict, but argue that it remains the most unlikely scenario of how events may transpire in the Middle East as neither the US nor Iran seem to be willing to be dragged deeper into the fray. 

Iran and Hamas: A relationship of convenience

According to Israeli officials, Hamas members stormed into Israel on October 7 and killed at least 1,400 people, both civilians and soldiers, and took over 220 hostages. Shortly after, a debate emerged on whether Iran had helped Hamas carry out the attack. Iranian officials have repeatedly denied any involvement despite Tehran’s ties to Hamas. 

The US has long accused Iran of supporting Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. White House National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby last week said Iran was “certainly complicit” in the attack, adding that without Tehran “there  is no Hamas… there is no Hezbollah.” Whether Iran was aware of the attack or involved in its planning remains irrelevant to the scale of Israel’s response on the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip.

Since the inception of the Islamic republic, Tehran has formed a network of influence in the Middle East in a pragmatic way and not based solely around religious ideology. Its Quds Force, part of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), is the center of coordination with the proxy groups, and is believed to be sending them weapons and funds, as well as providing them with training. These groups are most prevalent in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen where it predominantly backs Shiite groups with Hezbollah being the heart of the network. Iran has not shied away from creating ties with Sunni groups and political parties across the region, including in Palestine and Afghanistan, to create deterrence around itself against its enemies. 

The proxy groups, also known as the “Axis of Resistance,” have been an essential tool for Iran’s goals to expand its hegemony in the region and to counter the influence of Western powers, mainly the US. These groups also share Iran’s view that Israel does not have the right to exist. 

The use of proxy groups allows Iran to evade direct blame for any violence or attacks inflicted on American and Israeli interests in the region. More notably, the involvement of these groups in conflict with either the US or Israel does not necessarily mean that Iran will also enter direct conflict. 

Iran and Hamas are bound by their animosity towards Israel in a convenient alliance but they do not share the same ideology of Shia Islam as Tehran and Hezbollah do, for example. Hamas and Tehran have also been at odds in the past, particularly over Iranian support for the Syrian regime. 

Hamas is a valuable strategic asset for Iran because it gives Tehran the credibility needed to boast of being a staunch supporter of the Palestinian cause, but the defeat of the group is not an existential threat to Iran, argues a geopolitical expert in the energy sector who chose to remain anonymous. “Hezbollah is the crown jewel of the Iranian network.” 

Having emerged from nationwide anti-government protests last year, Iran has consolidated its position within the region. With an economy on an upwards trajectory, Iran’s oil exports are estimated to be just under 2 million barrels per day (bpd) according to figures received by Reuters, the highest since 2018. Tehran has also improved regional relations. It restored diplomatic ties with Saudi Arabia in March and conducted a prisoner exchange with Washington this year. The question remains whether Tehran would jeopardize its progress in order to save Hamas. 

Iran and the US: A war of mere words?

The tension between the US and Iran is evident in the threats directed at one other. The Islamic republic lauded the Hamas attack on Israel and condemned the heavy bombardment of Gaza, describing Israel’s response as “genocide.” However, anti-American and anti-Israeli rhetoric have been at the core of Iranian foreign policy since 1979 and are not enough to indicate that Tehran is willing to escalate beyond aggressive language. 

Since the outbreak of the war in Gaza, Tehran has been vocal, and Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi on Sunday took to X to warn that Israel’s bombardment of Gaza “may force everyone to take action.” 

“Washington asks us to not do anything, but they keep giving widespread support to Israel. The US sent messages to the Axis of Resistance but received a clear response on the battlefield,” he added. 

“Iran considers it its duty to support the resistance groups, but... the resistance groups are independent in their opinion, decision, and action,” Raisi said in an interview with Al Jazeera on Saturday, perhaps an indication that it was seeking to distance itself from the actions of Hamas and Hezbollah. 

Iran appears to be reluctant to get actively involved in conflict, calling for restraint despite US bases in Iraq and Syria having come under a string of attacks by groups under the umbrella of Iranian influence, further increasing the possibility of escalation in the region. 

“Iran is happy to use its proxies, rather than carrying out attacks itself. The Iranian regime's main priority is survival, and I don't expect that they will expose themselves to attacks, unless they are directly attacked,” Michael Horowitz, head of intelligence at Le Beck International, told Rudaw English on Sunday. 

“Tehran would be wise to caution restraint to its regional proxies and partners, as Washington has made clear that Tehran will be held responsible for the actions of Hezbollah and others,” Jonathan Lord, senior fellow and director of the middle east security program at the Center for a New American Security, told Rudaw English on Tuesday.

Attacks on US forces and risk of conflict with Iran

US forces in Iraq and Syria as part of an international coalition to fight the Islamic State (ISIS) have been the target of a recent spate of drone and rocket attacks blamed on Iran-backed militia groups angry over Washington’s support for Israel’s war on Gaza. There are around 2,500 US troops in Iraq and 900 in Syria. 

A Pentagon spokesperson told reporters on Tuesday that US forces came under at least 27 separate rocket and drone attacks this month.

“Washington is not seeking escalation or expansion of the conflict occurring between Israel and Hamas, any attack launched against U.S. forces in Iraq and Syria is unprovoked and a cowardly attack,” Lord said. 

A newly-emerged group calling itself the Islamic Resistance in Iraq has claimed responsibility for the majority of the attacks in both Iraq and Syria. So far, the damage has been limited, as 21 members of the US personnel suffered minor injuries and one contractor died of a heart attack during a false alarm. However, the possibility of the situation worsening looms. 

The US has been trying to pivot away from the Middle East in the last few years to focus on countering Russia and China. In the last three weeks, Washington seems to have reversed its policy of reducing military presence in the region and deployed two aircraft carrier groups to the Mediterranean. 

“To be clear, Washington does not want to get dragged into a regional escalation, and is signaling that it will only defend itself,” Horowitz said. 

Concerns for escalation in Iraq and Syria

The Iraqi government has condemned the attacks on foreign troops in the country, calling on the militia groups to exercise restraint. 

However some voices within Iraq’s political framework of the country have encouraged the aggression. Analysts have stated that the fact that the attacks are being claimed by only one group shows that there is a supportive consensus among the Iran-backed factions. Hadi al-Amiri, a prominent Shiite politician close to Iran on Monday said that targeting US troops in Iraq is a “natural reaction” to Washington’s support of Israel.

“The Palestinian cause holds significant importance for most Iraqis, and Iran has exploited this sentiment to fill a gap throughout the region,” Hayder al-Shakeri, research fellow at Chatham House, told Rudaw English on Tuesday regarding the way Iran is leveraging the support of Iraqis “as part of its messaging to the West regarding potential escalation.” 

Popular Iraqi Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr on Friday called on the Iraqi government and parliament to close the US embassy in Baghdad while also calling for diplomatic missions to be protected from militia groups.

“With renewed attacks against US bases in Iraq, the Sudani government, which enjoyed Western support to a certain extent, seeks to distance itself from these actions,” Shakeri said of the different messages conveyed by Iraqi political actors and the government under Prime Minister Mohammed Shia’ al-Sudani. 

“Muqtada al-Sadr has also entered the fray by calling for the closure of the US embassy, possibly to challenge PMF [Popular Mobilization Forces] leaders and consolidate his own supporters,” he added.

As the crisis deepens, the US, Canada, and the UK have warned their citizens not to travel to Iraq and have taken measures to protect their missions there. 

Iraq and Syria have served as the theatre of war for the US or Israel with Iran and its proxies.  On Monday, Israel said it carried out air strikes on military infrastructure inside Syria.

Geir Pedersen, the United Nations special envoy for Syria, warned the UN Security Council on Monday that Syria is at its “most dangerous” point as instability has been exacerbated by the war in Gaza. 

"Spillover into Syria is not just a risk; it has already begun,” he warned.

Iran-US confrontation: The unlikely scenario 

Analysts and experts argue that while attacks on American interests may increase, the potential for direct confrontation between Iran and the US remains unlikely. 

“Iran will not fight the US directly. As it has done recently, Tehran will use its regional proxies including Iraqi militia groups and Houthis,” Randa Slim, director of conflict resolution and track II dialogues at the Middle East Institute in Washington DC, told Rudaw English on Sunday. 

Yemen’s Iran-backed Houthis on Tuesday pledged to carry out more attacks against Israel, saying they had already fired drones and missiles on three separate operations. 

However, if any miscalculation by the proxy groups leads to the death of American nationals, then Washington has warned it will respond forcefully. But, it depends on whether they respond against Iran or its proxies.

At the peak of tension between the US and Iran in 2020 following the killing of IRGC commander Qasem Soleimani, when Iraqi militia groups were firing at American bases in the country and inflicting casualties, Washington’s response was directed at the groups and not directly at Tehran, avoiding a full-blown escalation. 

Slim noted that the exception to this would be “if Israel were to use this conflagration as an opportunity to hit Iranian targets particularly nuclear installations,” saying that this would result in Iran directly targeting US interests in the region. 

Iran and Israel have been engaged in a shadow war consisting of long-running covert attacks on Iranian military and nuclear facilities, as well as sabotage and cyber-attacks.

“We are vigilant, because we are seeing elevated threats against our forces throughout the region, and an elevated risk of this conflict spreading to other parts of the region,” US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan told CBS on Sunday, adding that Washington would respond to any attack. 

Last week, the US said it carried out airstrikes targeting IRGC facilities in eastern Syria in response to the ongoing attacks on its bases in the country and in neighboring Iraq. US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin at the time said the strikes were ordered by US President Joe Biden.

“But the mere amount of US military assets deployed and the fact that the US is deploying significant defenses also gives Washington plenty of room to escalate if Iran does not stop its attacks. Tehran would be wrong to think this is ‘business as usual’,” Horowitz said. 

The same warnings were echoed by US officials in the wake of the attacks in Iraq and Syria.

“The United States does not seek conflict and has no intention nor desire to engage in further hostilities,” Austin said, adding “If attacks by Iran’s proxies against U.S. forces continue, we will not hesitate to take further necessary measures to protect our people.”

Israel has exchanged fire with Hezbollah and Palestinian factions in Lebanon almost on a daily basis since October 7, raising fears that a new front could emerge in the conflict. Lebanese caretaker Prime Minister Najib Mikati told AFP on Monday that he is worried escalation between Israel and Hezbollah could drag Lebanon into another war, and said that he was working to prevent it. 

If a second front opens on Israel’s northern border with Lebanon, experts believe that Israel will fight both Hezbollah and Hamas, while the US is there to deter proxies across the region.

“I expect that Israel will be ready to take it on, but also that the US will get even more involved, either against Hezbollah or other Iranian proxies in the region,” Horowitz said. 

The exchange of fire between Hezbollah and Israeli forces has typically been limited to villages near the border, most of which have been evacuated. Israeli forces are also likely to continue targeting Iran-backed militias and Hezbollah positions in Syria. 

“Opening a second front will have a devastating impact on Lebanon. Similarly, Hezbollah now has the military capacities to exact a high cost from the Israelis including targeting hits on critical infrastructure in Tel Aviv,” Slim said. 

As noted by the geopolitical expert who spoke to Rudaw, the key metric when assessing escalation with Hezbollah is not the frequency of the attacks, but rather their depth. If numerous attacks take place and are limited to areas such as the Shebaa Farms, then escalation is unlikely, but if Hezbollah’s strikes hit deeper in Israeli territory, then heavier retaliation against Lebanon should be expected.

Whether a regional spillover happens will depend on how the US, Iran, and Israel will react to any perceived aggression. Within Israel, there seems to be a lack of appetite for an escalation in conflict with Israelis angry at the government for not preventing the October 7th attack and failing to bring the hostages home. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu may not have the popular support needed expanding the conflict.

An opening of a second front with Hezbollah or the death of foreign troops in attacks by Iran-backed proxies remain the main triggers of further expansion of the conflict, but it can still be avoided if the retaliation is limited.