Regional stability depends on strong Arab cooperation

Trump’s existential threats against Iran, together with Israel’s decision to launch this illegal and unprovoked war against Iran, have left diplomacy badly damaged and made an early end to the conflict far less likely. This war is already broader than when it began, with Iran and its allies now active across several fronts in the region.
In Lebanon, Hezbollah remains a powerful force and has so far acted with relative restraint. What started with limited fire has now developed into sustained attacks and heavier retaliation, with the potential for major destruction inside Lebanon. Lebanon is already under severe economic and political pressure, and any wider escalation would deepen that crisis. In Iraq, Iran-aligned militias have attacked US bases in incidents that are difficult to attribute. Attacks of this kind can continue for long periods without a clear turning point, gradually increasing the danger of a broader confrontation.
Ansar Allah's attacks on shipping routes in the Red Sea have demonstrated the damage these can do to the global economy, and once these attacks resume, the greater the risk that outside powers will become more directly involved. What makes the situation especially dangerous is the way these different fronts are unfolding at the same time. This is not one war in one place. It is a set of overlapping confrontations, each feeding into the others. That creates a far more difficult environment for military planners and diplomats alike. There is no single front that can be treated as decisive, and no obvious point at which the conflict can simply be declared over.
The role of the United States has been central to the breakdown in trust. Trump’s threats to destroy Iran, combined with his duplicity during peace talks, have made any diplomatic settlement much harder to achieve. Iran is unlikely to accept further negotiations if it believes talks are being used as cover for another attack. That mistrust now stands as one of the biggest obstacles to any credible peace process. Regional intermediaries remain essential. Qatar has often played a useful role in sensitive negotiations. Oman, long known for quiet diplomacy, continues to be one of the few countries able to maintain working channels with Iran and other parties. Pakistan can also act as a bridge, though it has its own interests. China has expanded its diplomatic role by drawing on its economic influence. These countries cannot end the war on their own, but they can help preserve the possibility of dialogue at a time when direct communication is badly strained. Without such channels, the risk of miscalculation rises sharply.
The wider political consequences are also serious. If the conflict is eventually contained through negotiation, it could leave room for more flexible alliances and a calmer regional order. If it escalates further or ends only through force, the region is likely to harden into clearer blocs, with states aligning more firmly against one another. Major escalation in Lebanon, increased attacks in Iraq or Yemen, or direct confrontation between larger powers would make any settlement even more difficult.
Israel’s unwillingness to compromise is a major factor in prolonging and escalating the conflict. The attacks on Iranian civilians and civilian infrastructure are war crimes. The Zionist aim is, and always has been, to achieve hegemony in the Middle East by creating divisions between Arab states. Arabs must stand shoulder to shoulder or risk becoming the vassals of foreign powers again. They must learn from history.