Former US envoy Dennis Ross, who now works at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, one of the most important faces of the Israeli lobby in Washington, along with his colleague at the institute that emerged from AIPAC in 1985, David Makovsky, wrote an article in the magazine Foreign Affairs that was published Wednesday, in which they called on Israel to declare a unilateral ceasefire in Gaza as “an opportunity to turn the tables on Hamas and Iran – and promote normalization with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.”

The writers say that until last month, the war between Iran and Israel was largely taking place in the shadows, but “the Iranians decided to bring it out of the shadows, and attacked Israeli territory openly and directly, from Iranian territory, for the first time in the history of the Islamic Republic... and some observers say The April 13 Iranian drone and missile attack on Israel was a symbolic gesture, but nevertheless, given the amount of drones and missiles fired at Israel and their payloads, it is clear that Iran intended to inflict severe damage on Israel.

The authors claim that “Israeli defenses were almost flawless, but they were unable to completely repel the Iranian attack on their own” and “just as the Iranian attack was unprecedented, so was the direct military intervention by the United States and a number of its allies, including some Arab countries.” Also unprecedented, US Central Command, with the participation of the United Kingdom and Jordan, intercepted at least a third of the drones and cruise missiles that Iran fired at Israel, and Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates also shared intelligence that helped Israel defend itself. Their willingness to play this role was also remarkable, given the lack of popularity enjoyed by the war that Israel is waging with Hamas in Gaza among the Arab masses.”

Five days later, when Israel responded to the Iranian attack, according to the article: “Israel took Washington's calls for restraint into account and fired three missiles at a radar facility directing the S-300 missile defense battery in Isfahan, the site of Iran's uranium conversion plant. This was a limited response.” "Extremely, it is a response designed to avoid casualties while demonstrating Israel's ability to penetrate Iran's defenses and strike any target it seeks to strike."

It seems that Israel has realized that the best way to deal with the threat posed by Iran and its proxies is to work with the (United States) coalition. This is also unprecedented.

The authors say: “The idea of Americans, Europeans and Arabs coming together to help intercept the drones and cruise missiles launched by Iran against Israel seemed, in the recent past, like a fantasy – and undesirable for Israel. Israel’s spirit in the field of defense has always been: ‘We defend. “On our own behalf.” This was both a source of pride and a principle – that no one other than Israelis would have to bear arms on Israel’s behalf.

“But now that Israel is facing not only Iran, but several Iranian proxy groups, the cost of confronting all of these fronts alone has simply become too high. This development, in addition to the willingness demonstrated by Arab countries in April to join Israel in confronting the threat, indicates Formed by Iran and its agents, the window has opened to create a regional alliance that follows a common strategy to confront Iran and its agents.” .

But to benefit from this openness, Israel, the United States, and the Arab countries – especially Saudi Arabia – must recognize the unique nature of this moment and seize it, according to the article. “A US-brokered breakthrough in the normalization agreement between Israel and Saudi Arabia would do much to To strengthen this emerging alliance, if the Saudis, whose king is considered the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, succeed in achieving peace with Israel, this will likely lead to a shift in Israel’s relationship with other Sunni-majority countries inside and outside the Middle East.

It is noteworthy that the administration of US President Joe Biden has been working hard to conclude a normalization agreement between Saudi Arabia and Israel, “but the Biden administration believes that the fighting in Gaza must stop temporarily before negotiations on normalization can move forward.”

It is noteworthy that there is some hope that negotiations in Egypt regarding the detainees deal between Israel and Hamas will finally be achieved and lead to a ceasefire for at least six weeks.

The authors believe that a unilateral ceasefire would be controversial in Israel, because it separates a cessation of fighting in Gaza from the release of hostages, and because it might appear to be ceding something to Hamas for nothing. “But a unilateral ceasefire for four to Six weeks would actually provide Israel with many strategic benefits with few physical drawbacks. In fact, if their negotiations with Hamas fail again, Israeli leaders will need to adopt a different approach if they hope to release the hostages while some of them remain. Alive.

Ross and Makovsky believe, “The fact that Israel listened to the Biden administration when formulating its response to the Iranian attack shows that it is open to American persuasion. In fact, a new reality may be forming in Israel, a reality that may change the way it deals with defense, deterrence, and the region,” and the precedent of the Israeli need is US (direct) engagement against the Iranian attack, which was necessary, must also “create a commitment on the part of Israel, since when others participate in defending Israel, they gain the right to ask Israel to take their interests and concerns into account.” After the attack "Biden made it clear to Israeli leaders that they do not need to retaliate because their successful defense in itself constitutes a major success and therefore an embarrassing failure for Iran."

The writers remind their readers that the “deterrence force” that Israel has relied on historically began to erode since the year 2000, when Israel withdrew from southern Lebanon, and reached a “critical” stage on October 7, 2023, and April 13, 2024, which creates a different reality.

The authors believe that in light of “these new realities, Israel should make a virtue of necessity. If it is unable to enter Rafah for several weeks, a ceasefire means that it gives up little but gains a number of advantages. Fire for four to six weeks should allow international organizations to alleviate conditions in Gaza and address the world's concerns about famine there, and enable them to put in place better mechanisms to ensure that adequate humanitarian aid not only enters Gaza, but is also actually distributed to those who need it most. ... A (unilateral) ceasefire would refocus the world's attention on Hamas' intransigence and the plight of the Israeli hostages and would help change the skeptical narrative that has controlled Israel at the international level and reduce the pressure on it to end the war unconditionally ".

The writers believe that “it is certain that the two extreme right-wing Israeli ministers Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben Gvir will oppose any unilateral ceasefire, regardless of its duration. But their war aims are not the same as those of Netanyahu or the Israeli public. They want to reoccupy Gaza, and it is certain that they They will oppose any breakthrough with Saudi Arabia that requires concessions to achieve the national aspirations of the Palestinians.”

The authors say, “Simply put, a unilateral Israeli ceasefire for four to six weeks would create a strategic opportunity - especially if it created an opportunity to normalize relations with Saudi Arabia and transform the implicit regional alliance that emerged after Iran’s attack on Israel into a more tangible reality.” For the Biden administration, the role played by Arab countries in helping to defend Israel against the Iranian attack is a tangible new development that needs to be followed up quickly, and the American political calendar makes progress on Israeli-Saudi normalization an urgent matter The Senate's decision on direct US contributions to the deal - which includes a bilateral defense treaty between the US and Saudi Arabia and a civilian nuclear partnership between the two countries - will become more difficult as the US presidential election approaches.