Interview

A Middle East expert envisioned two paths for Israel. Then October 7 happened

French-Israeli geopolitical scholar Michael Horowitz had nearly finished his book, ‘Hope and Despair,’ when Hamas massacred 1,200 people in Israel. He’s still cautiously optimistic

Reporter at The Times of Israel

Author Michael Horowitz's new book is 'Hope and Despair.' (Courtesy)
Author Michael Horowitz's new book is 'Hope and Despair.' (Courtesy)

Although it seems difficult, French-Israeli geopolitical expert Michael Horowitz finds reason for optimism about Israel’s future in the Middle East.

Admittedly, his may be cautious optimism — but zoom out, view things with a macro lens, and consider Horowitz’s premise: The Middle East has changed from decades past, when it was characterized by authoritarian regimes hostile to Israel.

Those paradigms have shifted due to relatively recent events — first, the Arab Spring, which jolted autocrats with public calls for democracy, then the Abraham Accords, which saw unprecedented normalization between Israel and four Arab and/or Muslim-majority countries in the region — the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan.

Such dramatic changes offer promise for Israel even in the wake of the October 7 Hamas terror onslaught, which saw 1,200 people brutally massacred in southern Israel and 251 kidnapped to the Gaza Strip. That’s a takeaway from Horowitz’s new book, “Hope and Despair: Israel’s Future in the New Middle East,” published by Hurst.

“It is hard, especially these days, to see hope or to see reasons for hope,” Horowitz told The Times of Israel over Zoom. “It’s very easy to find reasons for despair.” Yet, he added, “if you look at the regional picture, there are opportunities.”

The author was up to the challenge. In writing the book over two years, he drew upon expertise from his day job as head of intel for Le Beck International, a security consulting firm headquartered in Bahrain, as well as his previous experiences in the IDF Spokesperson’s Unit, where he served on the European desk.

After Horowitz had sent what he thought was the final draft to the publisher, and revisions were underway, the unthinkable occurred on October 7. The Hamas atrocities sent the author scrambling to update the text — and to dedicate the book to the memory of Sigal Levi, a Supernova music festival massacre victim.

“I felt like we needed to address, obviously, what had happened,” Horowitz said. “At the same time, I felt really very uncertain what would happen after October 7. We still don’t know the consequences in the long term.”

In writing “Hope and Despair,” the author focused on a moment from June 12, 2020, shortly before the signing of the Abraham Accords. The Emirati ambassador to the US, Yousef al-Otaiba, took an unprecedented step in urging Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu against annexation of land in the West Bank. Al-Otaiba, who is also a minister of state, took his message directly to the Israeli people through an op-ed in the Yedioth Ahronoth daily that was published in Hebrew.

UAE Ambassador to the US Yousef al-Otaiba joins the Israeli embassy’s virtual Hanukkah lighting, December 12, 2020. (screencapture via Twitter)

“In the UAE and across much of the Arab world, we would like to believe Israel is an opportunity, not an enemy,” al-Otaiba concluded, according to an English translation on the website of the UAE embassy in Washington, DC. “We face too many common dangers and see the great potential of warmer ties. Israel’s decision on annexation will be an unmistakable signal of whether it sees it the same way.”

“It was really interesting,” Horowitz said, “the first time an Arab leader from an Arab country was talking to Israel — citizens of Israel, not just the government — trying to explain their position: a choice that he sort of described as between isolation, annexing the West Bank at the time, or a path that could be a lot more exchange and normalization with the Arab world.”

“To me, it was kind of groundbreaking,” he added.

And it reflected the “new Middle East” of the book’s subtitle, one in which there are increased possibilities for smoother relationships between Israel and its neighbors. Yet these prospects face a spectrum of threats. Some of the threats come from Israel’s enemies, notably Iran. And some have been self-inflicted by Israel. Just look at how al-Otaiba described Netanyahu’s annexation plan in his op-ed.

“A unilateral and deliberate act, annexation is the illegal seizure of Palestinian land,” the ambassador wrote. “It defies the Arab — and indeed the international — consensus on the Palestinian right to self-determination. It will ignite violence and rouse extremists. It will send shock waves around the region, especially in Jordan whose stability — often taken for granted — benefits the entire region, particularly Israel.”

Israeli security forces near the scene where three civilians were murdered in a terror shooting attack at Allenby Bridge, a crossing between the West Bank and Jordan, September 8, 2024. (Yonatan Sindel/Flash90)

The murder of three Israelis at the Allenby Crossing with Israel on September 8 in a terror attack by a Jordanian truck driver was celebrated in the streets of Amman, as frustration with the ongoing Israel-Hamas war continues to rise and Israel’s National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir threatens to change the status quo on Jerusalem’s Temple Mount, which prohibits public displays of prayer by non-Muslims. Meanwhile, hardline Islamist parties made significant gains in Jordan’s September 10 parliamentary elections.

The book also notes that al-Otaiba’s op-ed drew a firestorm of Israeli criticism. Taking a wider view, Horowitz worries about increased interest in Israel self-isolating itself through fortified borders, a concept with a long history. The idea of an “Iron Wall” was referenced in 1923 by the early Zionist leader Ze’ev Jabotinsky. It became a metaphor for a military buildup to deter hostile neighbors.

Yet there’s a caveat: Even Jabotinsky did not rule out peace entirely. Horowitz faults the Israeli right wing for ignoring this in calling for a more extreme Iron Wall 2.0, based on unilateral policies in Gaza and the West Bank. He also views Israel as isolating itself economically, and uses cottage cheese as an example. Despite Israel’s strategic geopolitical location, it cannot negotiate lower prices for this popular dairy product on its supermarket shelves.

Horowitz urges Israel to build upon the Abraham Accords and find more negotiating partners in the Middle East. He’s aware of the challenges in finding such partners, whether it be for a Palestinian peace deal or an agreement with Saudi Arabia.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, left, US President Donald Trump, Bahrain Foreign Minister Khalid bin Ahmed Al Khalifa and United Arab Emirates Foreign Minister Abdullah bin Zayed al-Nahyan pose for a photo on the Blue Room Balcony after signing the Abraham Accords during a ceremony on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington, September 15, 2020. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon, File)

“Israel has the opportunity to potentially sign a landmark historic deal with Saudi Arabia,” Horowitz said. “The Saudis have signaled they are ready for a deal, for their own reasons.” Yet, he added, “If Israel signs that deal, there is a price for it in terms of concessions for Palestine.”

As for the Palestinians themselves, he said, “I still believe that peace is possible, if we wanted to. Finding a partner on the Palestinian side is a problem. Theoretically, we can find an agreement.”

In practice, Horowitz’s hopes for peace have been frustrated by figures on both sides, including Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich.

The author called Abbas “a controversial figure because he lost opportunities to potentially make peace with Israel, since he’s not really found a formula for trying to defend Palestinian nationalism without violence.” As for Smotrich, “he’s very determined to legalize more than 100 illegal outposts. He’s doing it quietly, with the war in Gaza ongoing. It’s something that could radically change the picture of whether peace is possible. The minute you have a majority of settlers living very close to major Palestinian centers, it’s going to make it very, very difficult.”

In this February 6, 2012 file photo, then-Emir of Qatar, Sheikh Hamad Bin Khalifa Al-Thani, center, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, left, and then-Hamas leader, Khaled Mashaal, arrive to sign an agreement in Doha, Qatar. (AP Photo/Osama Faisal, File)

The book analyzes possible scenarios for the future of Israel and the Middle East, which often makes for the most despair-filled reading — whether it’s about a succession crisis within the PA, the logistics of extricating settlers from the West Bank, or the difficulty of destroying the Iranian nuclear program or of fighting a conflict with Iran and its ally Hezbollah across multiple fronts — even the assessment that should the Iranian government fall, its replacement might be just as hostile to Israel.

Nevertheless, Horowitz offers a measure of hope, sometimes through counterintuitive statements.

“A lot of Israel’s enemies, whether it be Iran or Hezbollah,” he said, “only dominate by force.” Iran “may seem very strong, and in a way is very strong, by very carefully and intelligently increasing its ambitions. It can also disappear, in almost a matter of months, because of the way people in Iran perceive it. It’s the same if you look at Hezbollah… the perception that Hezbollah is a major element of the crisis Lebanon is experiencing. It’s a reason for hope.”

“At the end of the day, I don’t think Israel will resolve its conflicts, whether it be Hezbollah or Iran, militarily,” Horowitz said. “I don’t think it’s going to be the solution. The only solution for the conflicts is for the people of Lebanon, the people of Iran, to rise against Iran and these Iranian proxies. It may seem like fantasy. It’s not.”

There is one distinguishing feature between hope and despair: Hope has an expiration date. Consider the author’s long-term prognosis for an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement.

“What’s lacking is the political will to convince people it’s the right thing to do,” Horowitz said. “In 10 years or 20 years, even if people are convinced peace is the right idea and it should be done, it may no longer be possible. To me, the major strategic failure for Israel is removing the possibility for peace.”

Most Popular
read more: