Resit Kemal As / Editor-in-Chief, World of Global
The Middle East is once again on the operating table.
There are maps on the table, energy corridors, ethnic fault lines.
And two prominent names stand out as the surgeons: Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu.
Yet history has shown us time and again:
Any power that attempts to redesign the Middle East ends up transforming not the region first, but itself — often through weakening.
What is being marketed today as a “new Middle East order” is, in reality, the reflex of a declining global dominance.
Show of Strength or Strategic Panic?
Trump’s harsh rhetoric and Netanyahu’s security-centered policies may appear, at first glance, as aggressive self-confidence.
However, in geopolitics, excessive rigidity is often the product of defensive psychology.
Israel seeks to expand its security perimeter.
The United States is anxious to maintain control over energy routes and trade corridors.
But this is no longer the world of 2003. The unipolar structure of the Iraq invasion era has collapsed.
Actors such as Russia and China are both on the ground and at the negotiating table.
This new design attempt tries to solve a new-world equation with old-world instruments.
And the mathematics simply does not add up.
Those Who Draw Maps Awaken Fault Lines
When borders in the Middle East are drawn with a ruler, that ruler divides not only land but also memory.
Every military step taken today does not merely strike a target;
it also activates sectarian balances, ethnic sensitivities, and regional alliances.
If a regime falls, the question of what replaces it is often left unanswered.
We saw it in Libya. We saw it in Iraq. We saw it in Syria.
Every vacuum created was filled by radical structures.
Processes designed as “controlled chaos” turned into uncontrollable waves.
The Reflection of Domestic Politics on Foreign Policy
For Trump, a tough foreign policy is a message of strength to the domestic electorate.
For Netanyahu, security policy is a strategy of political survival.
Yet moves designed for domestic consumption often generate irreversible fractures abroad.
American society suffers from war fatigue.
Israeli society faces deepening security anxiety.
Prolonged crises do not strengthen leaders; they wear them down.
The New World Does Not Forgive Old Scenarios
Today, energy, technology, and logistics networks are deeply intertwined.
The global economy is fragile.
A large-scale conflict in the Middle East would shake not only the region but global markets as well.
Oil prices, trade routes, and financial systems would react in chain reactions.
Such risks erode the United States’ claim to global leadership.
They further narrow Israel’s security perception.
Wars launched to secure victory sometimes end in strategic isolation.
What Does Defeat Look Like?
Defeat does not occur only on the battlefield.
Sometimes loss of prestige, economic erosion, or diplomatic isolation constitute the heaviest defeats.
If the new Middle East design leads not to stability but to chaos,
history will record it as a “failed intervention.”
And history does not write with emotion.
It Is Not the Map That Changes, But the Mind
The Middle East is no longer the old Middle East.
Regional states are more conscious, societies more reactive, global balances more complex.
If the redesign initiative led by Trump and Netanyahu fails to account for local dynamics and global transformation, this process may erode their political legacy.
The greatest mistake in geopolitics is to assume that power is permanent.
Will those who attempt to rebuild the Middle East prevail,
or will this initiative mark the beginning of their political decline?
History tends to favor the latter.