ROLES Insights Number 2023-5 October , 2023

ROLES INSIGHTSROLES Insights is a commentary series written by our staff and project members on pressing issues relating
to politics, security, religion, and society. Views expressed in the analyses are those of the authors and do not
represent the official position of ROLES, nor necessarily the author’s affiliations. The commentaries may be
reproduced electronically or in print with prior permission from ROLES, but with due recognition to theauthor/s and ROLES. Please email: office@me.rcast.u-tokyo.ac.jp

What the October 7 attack and the Israel-Hamas War means for the Middle
East and the World
NumberOctober 12, 2023

2023-5
By Takuya Matsuda

1. Introduction
A half-a-century after the 1973 Yom Kippur War, Israel was once again struck by a surprise
attack on October 7, 2023. The horrific images of Hamas terrorists infiltrating the Israeli-Gazanborder, brutally murdering innocent civilians, and kidnapping dozens of Israeli civilians andsoldiers to Gaza shocked the world. As of writing this article, the total death toll of both Israelis andPalestinians have reached 2400. In addition to relentless retaliatory air strikes, the Israeli Defense
Force (IDF) appears to be preparing to launch a ground offensive into Gaza. As Israel and the world
grapple with the scale and magnitude of this unprecedented assault, it is certainly premature to
predict how these events may unfold in the coming weeks and months. Nevertheless, given thepotential regional and global consequences of the October 7 attack, the underlying context thatshaped this unprecedented terrorist attack as well as how that may shape the trajectory of this war
deserves our attention.
Barely over a week prior to this devastating attack, U.S. National Security Adviser, Jake Sullivan
observed that the Middle East “is quieter today than it has been in two decades”. A sense of

RCAST Open Laboratory for Emergence Strategies
Research Center for Advanced Science and Technology, the University of Tokyo
4-6-1 Komaba, Meguro-ku, Tokyo 153-8904 JAPANhttps://roles.rcast.u-tokyo.ac.jp/en
office@me.rcast.u-tokyo.ac.jp

ROLES Insights Number 2023-5 October , 2023

complacency or even hubris existed among policymakers and observers both in Israel and beyond,including the United States. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict was seemingly under control withHamas being reduced to a "manageable nuisance". A possible normalization of diplomatic ties
between Israeli-Saudi in the horizon had also offered a sense of optimism that the region could
finally enjoy some degree of stability. This potential peace settlement brokered by the United States
was part of the Biden administration’s attempt to create a favorable strategic environment in theMiddle East to enable Washington’s gradual downsizing of its regional presence so as to refocus its
attention on great power competition in the western Pacific and Europe. The attacks on October 7seem to have been designed to disrupt, if not upend, this emerging status quo, including a potential
peace settlement between Israel and Saudi Arabia. As a preliminary analysis, this article examines
the factors that led to this deadly attack and some of the important flashpoints in assessing how thiswar may reshape global politics.
2. The Erosion of the Two-State Solution
The so-called “two-state solution” that envisions a Palestinian state co-existing with the state ofIsrael has been assumed as the desired endgame of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict since the end of
the Cold War. Since the 1993 Oslo Accord, Israel and Palestine had been engaged in a peaceprocess where both parties sought to bridge their differences for a shared goal to create two statesthat peacefully coexists in the west of the Jordan River. This peace process reached an impasse at
the 2000 Camp David Summit where Israel and the Palestinian Authority failed to come up with anagreed framework to realize the two-state solution. While the Oslo Process had seemed obsolete,
the two-state solution was, nevertheless, assumed as the ultimate endgame. However, as a result, assome scholars articulate, the two-state solution has become no longer reflective of the realities on
the ground. Israel is a liberal democracy yet its identity as a Jewish state also plays a central role intheir statehood. These two concepts are not easily reconcilable. As the aspirational two-state
framework reached a stalemate, Israel’s Jewish identity produced an "one-state reality” which
eroded the prospect for the Palestinians to exercise their right to self-determination.

RCAST Open Laboratory for Emergence Strategies
Research Center for Advanced Science and Technology, the University of Tokyo
4-6-1 Komaba, Meguro-ku, Tokyo 153-8904 JAPANhttps://roles.rcast.u-tokyo.ac.jp/en
office@me.rcast.u-tokyo.ac.jp

ROLES Insights Number 2023-5 October , 2023

The series of normalization of diplomatic relations between Israel and several Arab states—chiefamong them the Abraham Accord signed between Israel and the United Arab Emirates—furtherundermined the two-state solution. A peace settlement between Israel and Saudi Arabia wasparticularly regarded as a game-changer in further accelerating this new momentum for
rapprochement. As Israel’s diplomatic isolation in the Middle East recedes, it further diminishedIsrael’s incentive to reengage with the peace process based on a two-state framework thatrecognizes a certain degree of self-determination for the Palestinian people. Indeed, the Palestinianside also has their faults. The split between Fatah and Hamas within the Palestinian Authority in2007 which eventually led to Hamas’ takeover Gaza became a hurdle for the Palestinians tonegotiate under an unified voice which is a contributing factor behind the consolidation of the onestate reality.
The strategic importance of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for Middle Eastern politics graduallydiminished since the 1980s after Israel signed Peace Treaties with Egypt and Jordan. As the conflictturned into a bilateral matter, it allowed the stagnated progress of the Israeli-Palestinian peace
process—namely the two-State solution—to solidify into a tacitly accepted status-quo. The Hamas
attack may go far as challenging this status quo by bringing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict back tothe forefront of Middle Eastern politics.
3. Hamas’ Political Objective: Disruption through Escalation?

Hamas’ political objectives in this brutal yet sophisticated operation remains unclear. As many
commentators point out, derailing the Israeli-Saudi peace deal negotiation was certainly one of theirimportant objectives. However, it is not difficult to predict the scale of Israel’s response to such anattack that will incur heavy casualties on the people of Gaza as we have already been witnessing
through retaliatory air strikes. It is still puzzling why Hamas conducted this attack despite the factthat it would certainly backfire with a fierce and massive retaliation from the IDF that could evenlead to a total self-destruction.
States often initiate war when they see a closing window of opportunity. Resonating with
political scientist Michael Beckley’s peak power thesis, states in such a position would initiate a
RCAST Open Laboratory for Emergence Strategies
Research Center for Advanced Science and Technology, the University of Tokyo
4-6-1 Komaba, Meguro-ku, Tokyo 153-8904 JAPANhttps://roles.rcast.u-tokyo.ac.jp/en
office@me.rcast.u-tokyo.ac.jp

ROLES Insights Number 2023-5 October , 2023

war to derail or transform the unfavorable status-quo by taking any measures necessary. The
aforementioned geopolitical trends in the region suggest that Hamas perceived this closing windowof opportunity, prompting them to take drastic measures that had considered to be unimaginable. It
is premature to determine what Hamas sought to gain from this terrorist attack. Yet, while it may
sound grandiose, Hamas’ end goal could be the annihilation of the Jewish state which is, in fact,
articulated in their founding charters by inducing a strong retaliatory response from Israel that could
escalate into a regional war. On the other hand, the fact that Hamas took dozens of Israeli hostages
also suggests that they may be seeking a quick and decisive victory through some sort of anegotiation at an early stage of the war.
Regardless of Hamas’ precise political objectives, it is natural to conclude that they sought a
decisive attack that significantly changes the status-quo, mostly likely through an escalation of theIsraeli-Palestinian conflict. Confining the scope of the Israeli-Hamas War would be a challenging
yet vital aspect of this war which will be conducted under unprecedented circumstances.

4. Exposing the “Shadow-War?”: Escalation Control in the Middle East

As counterterrorism experts Bruce Hoffman and Jacob Ware underscore, the worst-case outcomeof the October 7 attack is a full-scale region-wide war with broad and enduring consequences to thepeace and security of the Middle East. Such a conflict will also have serious ramifications for theUnited States and allies by diverting their attentions back to the Middle East from great powercompetition in Europe and the western Pacific. The potential involvement of Iran in orchestrating
this attack, as the Wall Street Journal reported, suggests the challenges of limiting the scope of
Israel’s responses to the October 7 attacks.
Israel and Iran has long been engaged in a so-called “shadow war” where the two states covertlyengage militarily with the opponent while being short of an overt and direct military combat. As
political scientist Austin Carson illuminates, major powers often covertly intervene into conflicts
and even collude with the opponent’s preference to keep the conflict convert as a means to control
escalation. So far, there has been careful efforts by all parties to limit the scope of the conflict by

RCAST Open Laboratory for Emergence Strategies
Research Center for Advanced Science and Technology, the University of Tokyo
4-6-1 Komaba, Meguro-ku, Tokyo 153-8904 JAPANhttps://roles.rcast.u-tokyo.ac.jp/en
office@me.rcast.u-tokyo.ac.jp

ROLES Insights Number 2023-5 October , 2023

denying acknowledgment of Iran’s direct role in the October 7 attacks. A spokesman for Iran’s
mission to the United Nations denied Iran’s direct involvement in the attack and instead, highlighted
the autonomous nature of the Hamas-led attack. The Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali
Khamenei also repudiated Tehran’s role in the assault while praising those who planned andexecuted the cross-border attack. On the other hand, in an interview with CNN, U.S. Secretary ofState Antony Blinken emphasized that there was no tangible evidence that Tehran played a directrole in this deadly assault. Nevertheless, given the inherent challenges of urban warfare, a potential
ground invasion of Gaza by the IDF could be a deadly and protracted operation that would lead toseveral opportunities for miscalculation.
The immediate concern for many observers is the possibility of the opening of a second front inIsrael’s northern border if Hezbollah decides to intervene which is one of the possible avenues forthe war to expand into a region-wide conflagration. A renowned writer on Lebanese politics,Michael Young, however, argues that all parties including Hezbollah have a shared interest in
averting an unpredictable escalation of the conflict into a region-wide war. Hezbollah will
especially need to take Lebanese domestic politics into account if they were to enter the war as abelligerent power. Lebanon’s domestic economic woes that has already made Hezbollah unpopularmeans that dragging the country into another war with Israel would impose a heavy political cost on
the Shiite militant group. There are reasons for Hezbollah to exercise restraint for now. However, if
Israel’s ground operation in Gaza turns into a protracted bloody war, Hezbollah may decide to enter
the war which will be a consequential juncture in defining the direction of the overall war. Thetrajectory of the Israel-Hamas war will be an inflection point whether the “shadow-war” turns into abroader regional conflict that could significantly transform the balance of power in the Middle East.
5. Conclusion: The Possible Path Ahead
In parallel with the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the October 7 attack is an attempt to reverse
the geopolitical conditions that have been consolidated in the past three decades after the end of theCold War. The one state reality as well as the growing momentum for rapprochement between Israel
and several Arab states, including Saudi Arabia had produced an unacceptable status quo for Hamas

RCAST Open Laboratory for Emergence Strategies
Research Center for Advanced Science and Technology, the University of Tokyo
4-6-1 Komaba, Meguro-ku, Tokyo 153-8904 JAPANhttps://roles.rcast.u-tokyo.ac.jp/en
office@me.rcast.u-tokyo.ac.jp

ROLES Insights Number 2023-5 October , 2023

(and for their allies). If the desired endgame for Hamas is to reverse these growing geopoliticaltrends, it is unsurprising if the escalation into a border regional conflict is one of their immediategoals.
This unprecedented terrorist attack carries the same weight as 9/11 for Israel. A massive
retaliatory response is seemingly a natural course of action. Nevertheless, Israeli leaders will needto carefully measure their political endgame in their war against Hamas to find the culminating
point of victory. For example, the total destruction of Hamas will not necessarily be helpful for
Israel in achieving a political victory that brings about long-term peace and stability due to themassive power vacuum that will be left in the Gaza Strip. In addition, while regional actors are
cautiously engaged in escalation control, the sheer scale of the tragic events on October 7 suggeststhat a prolonged war could present several opportunities for unexpected misperceptions andmiscalculations that could easily spin out of control. A broader escalation of this war is what Hamas
might be seeking so as to severely undermine Israel’s security, including opening a second front if
Hezbollah decides to intervene as a result of a protracted war in Gaza.
The magnitude of the October 7 attack also suggest that it will likely have a dire impact on theBiden administration’s strategy to divert Washington’s attention from the Middle East, especially if
the war escalates into a regional war. In other words, the trajectory of the Israeli-Hamas War isconsequential not only for the region but also for U.S. allies elsewhere such as Japan who are at thegeopolitical frontline of great power rivalry. The war is at an early and unpredictable stage.
Nevertheless, the trajectory of this war—especially whether the relevant actors are able to skillfullyengage in escalation control to confine the scope of the war—will undoubtedly have a considerable
impact on international relations in an age of great power competition.
***********************************************
Dr. Takuya Matsuda is a Project Researcher at the Research Center for Advanced Science and Technology,
the University of Tokyo. He holds a Ph.D. from the War Studies Department at King’s College London. He
can be followed on Twitter @takuyamatsuda1.

RCAST Open Laboratory for Emergence Strategies
Research Center for Advanced Science and Technology, the University of Tokyo
4-6-1 Komaba, Meguro-ku, Tokyo 153-8904 JAPANhttps://roles.rcast.u-tokyo.ac.jp/en
office@me.rcast.u-tokyo.ac.jp