The Tectonic Shifts in the Middle East As President Trump Assumes Power Transcript

Disclaimer: This transcript is an edited version version of a transcript created using AI technology and may not reflect 100% accuracy.

The video can be found here.

Sarah: Good morning. We are observing Tectonic shifts in the Middle East. Iranian backed Hezbollah was considered the most powerful non state group in the region. Since the pager episode of September 2024, Israel has weakened Hezbollah significantly and has eliminated most of its command structure. Yet with the ceasefire about to expire in Lebanon, Naim Qassem, Hezbollah’s current commander, is threatening Israel. Qassem said recently, “Our patience may run out before the end of the 60-day ceasefire.” A recent piece claimed that two Lebanese groups are circulating flyers for youth to join Hezbollah to, “fight the armed resistance in southern Lebanon.”

As regards Hamas, the IDF claims to have eliminated 80% of their infrastructure in Gaza, but they have not been destroyed. Yoni Ben Menachem of the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign affairs published a piece this week. He claimed that Hamas has just recruited 4,000 new fighters in exchange for money, humanitarian aid and medical treatment. It seems like another IDF soldier is wounded or killed in Gaza every day. Three more soldiers were killed this week, bringing the toll in Gaza alone to approximately 328. Hamas has been considerably influenced by funds flowing in from Turkey, from Qatar and from Iran.

With the fall of Bashar Al Assad’s government in Syria, the land bridge from Tehran to Beirut has been destroyed. Unfortunately, Israel now is facing new challenges presented by Mohammad Al Julani of Hayat Al Shams (HTS). Al Julani has his roots in the radical Sunni group, Shabbat Al Nusra, a spinoff from Al Qaeda and ISIS. Israel’s policy toward him is one of, “respect but suspect.”

Turkey is threatening military action against the Kurds in Syria. The Kurds have shown tremendous loyalty to the United States, and we will have to wait and see what evolves on that front.

Since 2023, the Houthis have been attacking shipping lanes in the Red Sea. They have targeted US and other vessels there. They have also been firing suicide drones and missiles at Israel on an almost daily basis.

While Israel has made a great deal of progress in its battles against its enemies, tremendous challenges remain. Tehran has been seriously weakened, but Ankara is a rising threat. The IAEA’s August 19^th report noted that Iran is continuing to enrich uranium. Iran has enough uranium for four nuclear bombs and it continues to turn away the IAEA inspectors. Iran might now feel threatened enough to lurch towards a nuclear attack.

David Wurmser is here today to discuss all of this and more. David is a Middle East analyst from the Center for Security Policy here in Washington, and the Misgav Institute for National Security and Zionist Strategy in Jerusalem. David was a key advisor to Vice President Dick Cheney and to National Security Advisor, John Bolton. He recently wrote a masterful column in JNS. His article opens with the words, “The desolation wrought on Hezbollah by Israel and the humiliation inflicted on Iran has not only left the Iranian access exposed to Israeli power and further withering, it has altered the strategic tectonics of the Middle East. The story is not just Iran anymore. The region is showing the first signs of tremendous geopolitical change and the pieces on the board are beginning to move.”

David, first of all, please discuss the changes in the strategic tectonics we are seeing in the Middle East.

David Wurmser: All right. First of all, the Iranian axis of evil still exists. It is wounded. It is on the decline and it has left a vacuum in Syria and elsewhere. However, Iran is like a wounded cobra and one should never turn one’s back on a wounded cobra. That is the first thing to make absolutely clear as we look into the future. Israel needs to finish the jobs of the past, even as it organizes itself strategically for the future.

The events following the Battle of the Bulge, at the end of World War II, are analogous to the situation Israel faces today. After the Battle of the Bulge, it was very clear the Nazi regime was close to defeat. It was also increasingly clear that Russia was emerging as the next threat and the United States would need to start organizing to deal with the Soviets. There were some voices calling for a ceasefire with the Nazis. There were also Nazis who entertained the idea of signing a ceasefire with the United States and Himmler was one of them. However, it was essential that we finished the Nazis off before we could organize to deal with the Soviets strategically. We could not reintegrate Germany into the Western alliance structure until we had vanquished the Nazis. We could not move forward until we had finished with the past.

That is where we are with Iran right now. Iran is extremely dangerous. It still has assets and it can still make a comeback. It can still cross the nuclear threshold and try to destroy Israel with a nuclear weapon. So, the Iranian cobra lives, it is venomous and it still has enough energy to strike. One cannot turn one’s back on it. The cobra has to be slain before we can deal with the shifting tectonics of the region.

Sarah: Yesterday we observed Iran’s military maneuvers around the Natanz military, or nuclear facility. How much do you think Israel’s recent retaliatory attacks weakened Iran’s nuclear infrastructure?

David: I do think Iran’s nuclear facilities have been weakened and I think the Israelis are able to access them. However, the Israeli advantage is perishable on two levels. Firstly, the Iranians are able to change places and resolve bottlenecks as their nuclear program advances. Secondly, intelligence can become stale and it can go bad over time.

Once the Iranians cross certain thresholds, the results cannot be reversed and there is a real fast ticking stopwatch on that. The Iranians did not concede defeat to Israel. They are spending every minute of every day to find ways to challenge Israel. So again, the advantage Israel gained is eroding over time and is perishable.

We do not know for sure if Russia, China or Iran have the answers to Israel’s air power at this point. They probably do not have the answers just yet, but you can bet that they are spending every morning, afternoon and evening thinking about obtaining them. So, Israel’s advantage is perishable on many different levels. The nuclear issue is key for the Iranian government right now. The Iranian government follows a totalitarian ideology and they do not understand the concept of moderation.

The Iranian regime will reach that point where its monopoly on power is a problem for the people and then it will have to make a choice. It will need to choose where to give up its monopoly on power and reform or whether to revert to a Stalinist response. Such a response would need to be externalized with aggressiveness. That is where Iran is right now. It is a government that relies on the image of omnipotence, self-confidence and brutality. Its omnipotence was suddenly turned to impotence by the Israeli army and Israeli Air Force and it has obviously lost self-confidence because of that. It is still a brutal regime but its ability to maintain its empire through brutality has been destroyed. It is on the verge of collapsing and it has to reverse that trajectory.

Iran’s nuclear program provides the means for the country to re-establish some of its power. It will not fully reverse what they have lost but it will help counter it. Nuclear weapons will not make Iran omnipotent but will make it a powerful country. Iran is not giving up and it is confident about finding answers. The Iranian regime is telling its people that it is not done yet. A nuclear weapon would allow them to continue their brutal regime. So, the nuclear program is the game now for Iran. That is why I think your question was so relevant.

Sarah: In 2024, Iran executed more people than any other year. It is a brutal regime both domestically and internationally. How likely do you think it is that Tehran would attack Israel with a nuclear weapon?

David: I think it is highly likely because it is the only way for the regime to survive. We think of the Iranian regime as suicidal. They really do not care if they lose half their population. I say that not based on my analysis, but based on what they have said themselves at times. They believe in great battles between good and evil similar to the great battle prophesied between Gog and Magog, or the struggles between the Antichrist versus Christ, among Christians. Their ideology includes the equivalent to the end of days war. The old-line clerics believe the preservation of the regime is paramount and a certain caution is in order. Their caution should not be mistaken for moderation. The old-line clerics are not moderate in any way, but they want the regime to survive. Then there is the crowd anchored to the IRGC. They believe in pushing forward some sort of an apocalypse that will show faith. They believe it will bring about the great war that leads to the great final victory.

More and more of the people we are dealing with in Iran are immune to deterrence policies. Soleimani believed that creating capabilities to destroy Israel and the US, was the appropriate means to establish the faith that would allow the regime to survive. Similar to the old-line clerics, Soleimani believed in regime survival. However, he was aligned with the crowd that believed in apocalyptic means to achieve this survival. Saeed Jalili, a past national security advisor, was part of this crowd. It also includes Esmail Qaani and others. As such, the idea that we can deter Iran is not realistic at this point.

Sarah: The huge conflict prophesied between Gog and Magog seems to be playing out in Syria right now. Could you discuss Ankara’s rise and Tehran’s fall and what is happening internally within Syria?

David: Yeah, there are a lot of people smitten by Hayat Tahrir al Shams (HTS) right now. HTS, led by Ahmed al Sharaa, has taken over Syria. Ahmed al Sharaa is currently known as Mohammad Al Julani. HTS’ rebel strategy succeeded but Israel created the conditions for their victory.

The core of the Syrian regime deteriorated during the Arab spring and civil war ensued. By 2011, the Syrian regime was no longer able to protect itself. It needed Russian air power. Russia provided a few mercenary forces and took control over one or two Syrian army divisions. However, the IRGC and Hezbollah provided more critical support on the ground. The IRGC and Hezbollah were the real workhorses of repression and combat over the last decade and a half in Syria.

When Israel destroyed the IRGC and the combat capabilities of Hezbollah in Syria, the Syrian regime was essentially left undefended. The fall of Assad’s regime in Syria, was really an Israeli victory. The problem is the Israelis are not yet set up to deal with the consequences of their victory. They will be, but not quite yet. Russia and Iran have suffered a major blow. We hear that Russia decided to give up. I think they just did not have sufficient assets to continue the fight.

Syria is 40% Sunni Arab. The Sunni Arabs are Al Julani’s people. There are also Kurds, Druze, Alawites, Christians and Yazidis in Syria. The idea that Syria is a Sunni Arab country has great currency and great anchoring, but it is not accurate. The majority of the population in Syria right now is not Sunni Arab. It is obvious the Turks were behind HTS and ISIS. They are flooding Syria with Islamists from all over the world. These include Uyghurs, Kazaks and others. Turkey has infused a huge number of Islamists into Syria and it has triggered something very dangerous.  Damascus is the most important city for Sunni Arab nationalism and for Islamists. It is the seat of the Umayyad Empire and I will explain why this is significant.

When Mohammad died, he was replaced by Ali. Ali disliked the corruption and lack of true Islamic faith in the Umayyad world. He cracked down. The cousin of the Caliph in Damascus subsequently launched a coup against him and won. That was essentially the beginning of the Sunni Shiite conflict. For our purposes here, it is important because it was the beginning of the true Sunni Arab imperial project, the Umayyad.

The Salafis believe in the purity of the first hundred or so years of Islam. They believe that if Islam returns to the purity of its first hundred years of faith, it will be able to resume its imperial expansion. It will be able to take over the world and convert or kill everybody who does not succumb. The first years of Islam the Salafists revere, are the years when Islam that was followed in the Umayyad Empire. The Abbasids took over around 100 years later and moved the Empire to Baghdad. According to the Salafists, that was the beginning of the corruption of Islam and they believe it led to the decline of Islam. So, from the Salafi or Islamic-purist perspective, the Umayyad Empire is the symbolic heart of the resurgence of Islam and of the potential for global success. In that sense, Damascus is even more important than Mecca for them. It is the symbol, the core and the heart of Sunni Arab power and ambitions.

It is important for us to realize the impact of the time it took for the Umayyads to conquer Mecca. There was a huge civil war under Ibn Zubayr and it took the Umayyads almost 60 years to conquer Mecca. This was the reason the Umayyads focused on Jerusalem. They demonstrated their power by asserting dominance over the Christians and over Jerusalem. They also placed some sort of a memorial on the Jewish temple to show dominance over the Jews. They did this prior to gaining control over Mecca. So, the order of importance for them is Damascus and then Mecca. Prior to conquering Mecca, they conquered Jerusalem.

We need to determine whether or not Julani ascribes to the Salafist ideology. Islamism is a totalitarian ideology and buy-in to this totalitarianism does have an on off switch. EMET, for example, has worked with Islamists who have decided Islamic totalitarianism is not the right path and you know what that looks like. Those who reject Islamism can be compared to communists who reject communism. They become the most outspoken anti-Islamists because they know exactly what they are dealing with. One such example is Musab Yusuf, the Green Prince. People like Musab illustrate that belief in Islamic totalitarianism does have an off switch.

Those who really want to moderate Islam, typically go all the way and reject it altogether. Julani is laying one over on us. There is no Islamism with a humanitarian face. There is no alternative path for Islamism, just like there was never one for communism. The Czechs found that out in 1968. So, we should view HTS’ takeover of Damascus in its appropriate historical context and we should understand the symbolic importance of it as well.

We have not yet witnessed the full impact of their takeover. Political revolutions are not like economic revolutions. In economics, the thing that breaks a paradigm is usually the thing that replaces it. When the paradigm of the typewriter was destroyed by the word processing computer, the word processing computer became the new paradigm. Politics, on the other hand, is a two-step process. During the French Revolution, the Girondists were the more moderate revolutionaries who actually worried about liberty and equality. They were followed by people like Robespierre and Marat who unleashed terror against them. In Russia, Kerensky’s February Revolution was followed by Lenin’s October revolution. In Iran, Shapour Bakhtiar took over from the Shah and then Khomeini took over from Shapour Bakhtiar. Similarly, we anticipate the conquest of Syria will be a two-step process and we have not seen the scope of what will emerge.

I can already see that the powers under the surface are the most ghastly and dangerous ones there are. The Turks have created a Frankenstein monster and that monster can become uncontrollable. The Turks want to reestablish an Islamic caliphate under Sultan Erdogan, but they have now triggered the Umayyad caliphate and there is no room for more than one caliphate. At the end of the day, this will likely result in a fissure between them.

When Islamists or Arab nationalists have problems between them, they overcome their internal fratricidal fight by externalizing it. They focus on Israel, Zionism and the West. They try to blame divides between them on Israel. So, Israel is headed for a very dangerous period and must prepare for it strategically. For these Islamist organizations to maintain cohesion, it is imperative for them to be able to continue focusing externally. They hate each other and will implode if they are forced in on themselves. Israel must force this implosion. Israel must rack up victories against this new emerging coalition of Sultan Erdogan and Caliph Julani. If the fratricidal fissures break into fratricidal murder and warfare, frustration will set in and their attacks against Israel will be unsuccessful.

Sarah: Most of the world appears to have fallen for Mohammad Julani’s charm offensive. I think it is really important to remember that he said, “first Damascus, then Jerusalem”. He is also receiving a tremendous amount of backing from Turkey. Since October 7^th, the US has exerted almost no pressure on Turkey. Do you think that the US could pressure Ankara into some kind of a political pivot or does Erdogan’s unbridled ambition to reestablish an Ottoman caliphate make it impossible?

David: I think we can change neither Erdogan nor Julani. We also cannot change the people surrounding them. For this reason, we have to impose strategic pressure on them. This will force the internal fissures between them to erupt in frustration.

Turkey is doing what it always does. Turkey does not fight the wars directly. They let others do the fighting and then they swoop in and fill the vacuum. That is what they did in Syria with HTS. When America defeated ISIS during the first years of the Trump administration, the Turks sat by and did nothing. They allowed ISIS fighters to go in and out of Syria. They actually “liberated” some jails and announced they would take care of the prisoners. They then repackaged these terrorists and sent them to Libya and other places. They also used them against others in Central Asia.

The Turks definitely want the right to swoop in right now, but they have a real problem. They do not control the democratic area of northeast Syria. This is the Danes area where groups like the Kurds, Yazidis, Chaldeans and others live. Until now, the people in this area have received American support and hopefully it will continue. These people have a reasonable shot of maintaining self-governance. Of course, Turkey sees that as a major strategic issue. This is the vulnerable flank that could prevent them from consolidating their control of Syria.

The Alawites are another impediment to Turkish Islamist control over Syria. The Alawites are not just the enemy of Sunnis, they are particular enemies of the Turkmens. The Turkmens are swooping down to Syria from Turkey’s Hatay Province and so there is an awful lot of bloodshed there. Turkey also needs to consolidate control over the Christians and make them realize they now have to accept dhimmi status. The 6,700,000 Jabal Druze in Syria and the pockets of Druze near Israel’s border also present a problem for the Turks.

All of the minorities I mentioned know the true nature of who they are dealing with. Unlike Western elites, they have to deal with reality. They are aware they are headed for dark times. Unless they extract themselves from the control of the central Syrian government, they are facing a deep, if not existential, threat. The Kurds and Yazidis know that this could be the end for them. The Druze know they are looking at decades of Gehenna, of hell. This is why some of the Druze want to be part of Israel.

What is HTS up to? First of all, they know they have to consolidate the Kurdish area under their control. They are aware it will eliminate the threat to the government and end the idea of splitting Syria into pieces. With respect to the Kurds, HTS is trying to put forward a moderate face while the Turks are the hammer. It is a good cop, bad cop game.

Second, the name Julani means Golan. Julani’s decision to take this name, provides a clear indication that his primary goal is to take the Golan. Julani’s given name is not Julani, it is Sharaa, like Farouk al Sharaa. He is actually a relative of Farouk al Sharaa. Farouk al Sharaa was the foreign minister of the Ba’athist Syrian regime. This illustrates how fluid these identities are.

Julani was part of Al Qaeda in Iraq, under Abu Musab al Zarqawi. Urban Arabs in western Iraq and in Jordan, comprised the core of Zarqawi’s support. Zarqawi comes from Zarqa in Jordan. So, the followers of Al Qaeda Iraq were anchored in northern Jordan. Nobody knows that better than HTS and Al Julani. Once they have shut down the Kurds, they will target northern Jordan. Northern Jordan provides them the opportunity for Julani to arc back to the Palestinians and to Jerusalem.

Sarah: The Kurds were on the forefront of our fight against ISIS and many Kurds died for us. Right now, we have about 2,000 US troops stationed in Syria around the Kurdish areas. Do you think these troops will remain there under Trump? Will they protect the Kurds?

David: The incoming president believes we have done enough in the Middle East and we are tired. This does not imply disengagement. I want to emphasize this for those who support Israel and the Abraham Accords. This is not a policy of isolationism. That said, we do need to recognize that there are isolationist elements in the conservative movement and some of them are adopting antisemitic overtones. People like Massie and Tucker Carlson have begun to cross the line. However, they do not represent the position of the bulk of the Republican movement. The majority still believe in America as a strong global power although they do not want to keep investing in endless wars.

This actually translates into increased support for our allies like Israel. An Israeli victory and Israeli power will allow America to invest less in the Middle-East. Over the last decade, many people intervened to restrain Israel in its effort to improve its position in the region. The irony is that they got it upside down. Israeli victory and Israeli power will actually allow the US to disengage from the region.

Israel’s enemies are our enemies. When Israel’s enemies are weak and defeated, they start imploding. This results in the US being able to invest less in the region. I think the incoming administration gets it with respect to Israel but I am not sure how much they get with respect to groups like the Kurds. I think it is a learning process.

I think they are skeptical toward Turkey. Many people think that Erdogan will pull the wool over President Trump’s eyes. That said, there are many people in this administration who know exactly what they are actually dealing with as regards Turkey. I think this includes the President himself. The incoming administration may not fully appreciate the extent of the ideological trends, movements and tectonics we have addressed here, but I think reality will set in. I think we will continue to see support from the US in northeast Syria, even if this does not translate directly into a huge number of boots on the ground.

If Iran is removed from the picture, everything will become easier. As discussed, we cannot turn our backs on the Iranian cobra. Dealing with Iran is urgent because it can go nuclear. At the end of World War II, we needed Germany to integrate into Western defense against the Soviets. Similarly, we need a post Ayatollah Iran to help us out in the region. We do not need their help in an imperial way obviously, we have had enough of their imperial side. We need them to help us stabilize Iraq so that we can use it as a foundation for stabilizing the Danes area. This will convince the UAE and Saudi Arabia to focus on the impending threat of this neo-Umayyad caliphate bearing down from the north. All of a sudden, we will have opened up a number of possibilities here.

Sarah: The Iranians have attempted to assassinate President elect Donald Trump, Mike Pompeo’s life and John Bolton. In light of this, do you think the incoming administration will provide Israel with what it needs to destroy Iran’s nuclear program?

David: Yeah. What emerged over the course of the war is that Israel had the power it needed to win, but not all the resources. Its troops are definitely tired and this is largely because of the length of the ground wars that they had to fight in Gaza. I believe they had to fight such long wars because the Biden administration would not let them win. I think the war in Gaza could have been over within 2 or 3 months. After that, Israel could have vastly reduced its footprint there having taken and held the territory and established military control over all of Gaza. I think Israel was in a position to do it but faced a number of obstructions.

The first was that Biden’s administration was simply unwilling to let Israel win. It was terrified of essentially reversing Oslo. The administration did not want the Israelis to admit that Oslo failed and they had to reoccupy Gaza. This was in spite of the fact that it was obvious that was the only possible military strategy.

The second impediment was that Israel’s military had convinced itself to follow a new ethos at the institutional level. Over the past 20 or 30 years. Israel’s top level military structure absorbed the idea that Israel will never conquer or take back territory. The doctrine they followed, convinced them they needed to find Arabs to collaborate with. These Arabs were deemed essential to help Israel control its borders and to control the areas beyond its borders. Israel continually sought out Palestinian moderates to govern, so as to avoid having to retake territory using its own forces. These strategic concepts had social and cultural impacts in Israel. Israel’s ground forces were devalued. Their budgets, arms and supplies were cut and this played a significant role in the events that unfolded on October 7^th.

We also witnessed an internal societal upheaval in Israel. The old elites began losing control over the opinions of the regular man on the street and subsequently retreated into their core institutions to maintain power. This was apparent in education, the courts and in the military. The major threat to Israel was Iran and the air force and intelligence were critical players in that fight. As such, the elites directed resources to these military branches. They also had their kids serve in these branches because it set their careers. This allowed them to claim that they owned Zionism. They claimed their children were the ones paying the price to defend Zionism. The ground forces were filled with all the people they devalued. The elites maintained that those troops did not really own Zionism, even if they were religious nationalists.

Of course, the war has changed all this. Those devalued elements of society are the ones who have fought and died for Israel. After the war, they are going to claim that they too own Zionism and that the elites will need to share.

I went off on a little bit of a tangent on that. The bottom line is the Israeli military itself had a culture of not acquiring territory by force. We saw that play out in Lebanon as well. After the beeper operation, they should have immediately scrambled up to the Litani river. They should have gone hard against Hezbollah. As regards Hamas, we can argue about whether or not they should have taken that ten day pause to secure the return of some of the hostages. Irrespective, after that, they should have gone into Gaza with full force and they should have finished the job. It could have been completed by New Year.

So, the Israeli military’s exhaustion is really a function of the way the war was fought. The US controlled that by depleting Israel’s resources. The US would choke the Israeli army to force them to slow down. The alliance between the Americans and the elite of the IDF also played a role in this. That unholy union delivered a long and indecisive war in Gaza. There will also be a two-part war in Lebanon because Hezbollah is not dead yet.

So, Israel has the power to be a regional power. It just needs an America that provides the tools it needs and does not stand in its way. If nothing else, I think the incoming administration will not impede the flow of weapons to Israel and will not tie both of Israel’s hands behind its back. This means Israeli power becomes the main factor impacting its ability to achieve victory

Sarah: We still have a few more minutes, so let’s discuss Egypt. Egypt is the recipient of the second largest amount of US military aid. Egypt receives about $1.2 billion in direct military assistance and $1.5 billion overall from different agencies in the US. You wrote that Cairo, “put its finger to the wind and is slowly drifting towards the Muslim Brotherhood.” Egypt appears to be playing both sides. Could you explain Egypt’s motivations here?

David: Before addressing Egypt, I want to just add one more thing about Hamas because I think Hamas and the Palestinians are a litmus test for regional politics in the Middle East. One might think that Hamas is on the ropes because its patron, Iran is dead. However, Hamas is not on the ropes, it has just shifted to become a Turkish organization. Hamas is a Sunni Muslim Brotherhood organization and it is feeling the same energy that inspired the New Orleans terrorist. The Muslim Brotherhood has gained new energy following the Islamists takeover of Syria. They are deluding themselves and crediting Allah for the Syrian victory. They believe that the true purist Islam under this Salafi spirit has won and can now sweep the world. They have forgotten that their perceived victory was due to Israel and its power. They are now seeing the next big horse riding onto the scene and they are beginning to shift to attach their cart to it.

In answer to your question, the Egyptians observed which way the wind was blowing and acted to appease those they perceived as a threat. The problem is that Egypt’s appeasement strategy is not effective. As of late as December, I think they still imagined they could cut a deal with Erdogan. They did not expect Erdogan to respond so aggressively and so fast. Erdogan engaged in an imperial project in Libya and North Africa, and one in the Horn of Africa. Erdogan is beginning to encircle Egypt and the Egyptians are terrified.

I think Egypt also did not anticipate Russia’s implosion. Egyptians placed their fingers in the wind and appeased Turkey but increasingly relied on Russia. By destroying the Syrian regime, the Israelis blew the Russians out of the water in the Middle East. Israel’s actions destroyed Russian strategic position both in Syria and in North Africa, a major logistics hub for them. Their activity through to the Sahel region was impacted. The Sahel region is the area below the coastline region of the Sahara and North Africa. It was the area where the Wagner forces were stationed. The Russians were making a huge play in that area.

I want to emphasize the impact of Israel and Israeli power once again. There is a difference between real and perceived power. The Middle East operates on perception, but real power wins in the end. The Israelis were the real power that destroyed the Syrian regime.

The peace of the Abraham Accords came about because Israeli power was available to replace American power. Under the Obama administration, American power was becoming AWOL and fickle and the Abraham Accord signatories understood they could rely more on Israeli power. Recent events have reinforced this reasoning.

Peace between Egypt and Israel did not come about for the same reason. I am a fan of Sadat. To his credit, he realized the Soviet bloc was going to fall and that it would no longer be able to compete with the West. He predicted this in 1974 or 1975 when we were retreating from Vietnam and looked horribly defeated. Even at that time, Sadat understood that the West would come back and win. For him, the West was the strong horse. He understood there was a down payment to be made before he would align with the West. That payment was peace with Israel.

Over the past few years, the Egyptians saw the West declining. They observed the expansion of Chinese economic power, Russian strategic power and Iranian power. Now, they are watching the successes of the Muslim brotherhood. America is no longer at the top of the list of entities they need to appease. Peace with Israel, the down payment they paid to remain on good terms with America, is now valueless. I do not know if they want to go to war with Israel right now, but the peace with Israel is valueless. Egypt is strategically devaluing its peace with Israel and it has whiplash trying to navigate all of the moving parts in the region. I think the bottom line is that they are going to have to appease the Turks and that is going to be dangerous.

Sarah: I have so many more questions for you, but I will ask you just one more because I know you need to leave for the Pentagon. If you were a member of Israel’s cabinet or in the US Administration today, how might you advise the Prime Minister or the President?

David: Both Israel and the US need a security strategy. Israel has not had a security strategy since the early 50s and the United States has not had one since the late 80s. When the Soviet Union collapsed, the US had the NSC68. This governed our Cold War outlook. It was so robust that it was still relevant 40 years later. Israel also had an effective strategy which was set in the early 50s. Unfortunately, Oslo erased the strategic outlook Israel had internalized and this led to its current flailing strategic position. The same is happening in the United States. So, the first thing I would do if I was king of Israel, would be to develop a strategy that is not dependent on another country.

Israel has no defined strategy against Iran. It has no strategy against the rising neo-Ottoman Sultanate, or the neo-Umayyad Caliphate. The Israelis need to develop a strategy based on their own societal structure, power, organization, and geography. The strategy should be designed to combat any combination of threats that might emerge over the next 50 to 100 years. It should be based on the same parameters and metrics that Israeli and American governments used to set their respective strategies between 1948 and 1952. At that time, they did not consider the Soviet Union exclusively. They thought more broadly. Thinking broadly is something America has done since it was founded. It never knew who its next enemy would be and so it set a strategy to deal with any enemy. Israel has to think that way as well. Even if it makes peace with Julani tomorrow and he turns out to be Thomas Jefferson, they will not be dealing with the same leader in 50 years-time.

Surrendering territory is a permanent act, strategic realities shift. Israel has to create a geographic, strategic, societal reality capable of weathering any combination of future events. Israelis need to start thinking more broadly about the threats that could face them. They need to determine which territory is essential for them to defend against anyone who attacks them. They need to consider whether their military is organized in a way that is amenable to countering threats from any side. Israel is a democracy and it is small. This means it relies on mobilization and its people do not have a military ethic. Most people want to go about their own business but they also need to defend their country. They go to the reserves where they serve and then they return home. Similar to the Americans, the business of Israelis is to mind their own business, However, sometimes Israel is attacked and has to mobilize. So, Israel relies on mobilization. Because of Israel’s size, it needs to mobilize far beyond what is a sustainable structure.

Israel cannot mobilize 700,000 troops and leave them in place for four years. As such, Israel must rely on geography and technology. Israel needs buffer zones so that it has time to mobilize when attacked. So, Israel has to imagine its geography in terms of that basic requirement. As discussed, Israel is a mobilization society that will have a smallish standing army with limited power. That army needs to mobilize when attacked and buffer zones are therefore crucial. Technology is not a buffer zone. We found that out on October 7^th. Geography is a buffer zone.

The oceans are the United States’ buffer zone. This is why our constitution says we must maintain a navy but raise an army. We mobilize the army when we are attacked but we maintain the navy. This is because the navy is linked to our buffer, the sea. Israel must employ a similar concept. It must maintain a standing army in specific geographical locations and defend them when attacked. This will provide time for raise their army.

Sarah: Brilliant. I loved that you reminded us that giving up territory is permanent. The reality in the Middle Eastern changes constantly. As such, Israel must maintain defensible borders to continue to wield the power it has now. Israel is a tiny country but it is fighting battles on behalf of all of us. I cannot thank you enough, David Wurmser.

To our audience, please support David in his work at the Misgav center in Jerusalem or the Center for Security Policy, https://centerforsecuritypolicy.org/ . Please also support EMET at https://emetonline.org/. We educate policymakers and their staffers on Capitol Hill almost every day. We provide them with accurate facts and analysis about critical policy decisions impacting the Middle East and our efforts have been successful.

Thank you very much, David. It is always a pleasure.

David: It’s an honor.

[END]