In the ever-evolving dynamics of geopolitics, a pressing question arises: is the partnership between Israel and the United States as an aerial imperial force in the Middle East nearing its end? This notion, posited by Juan Cole, suggests that Israel functions as a US airbase, intricately woven into regional power dynamics. However, signs indicate that this model may be more fragile than previously thought.
Both Israel and the US exhibit a prominent inclination towards power projection through manned aircraft, often showcasing a perceived technological edge. Yet, this superiority falters under scrutiny. I recall hearing from commentators, perhaps Larry Wilkerson, that Israel was touted as owning the world’s most effective air defense system. However, Iran managed to breach this defense and conduct precision strikes, shattering that illusion.
In the past, conflicts have primarily involved opponents armed with AK-47s and rudimentary weaponry. Consequently, the recent challenges posed by groups like the Houthis, who utilize a modest arsenal, have revealed vulnerabilities for both the US and Israel. The mountainous terrains provide shelter and have enabled these groups to utilize decoys, complicating Western military strategies.
While traditional military thought often emphasizes ground presence for territorial security, air campaigns can result in the creation of unstable states. However, this strategy raises questions, particularly when these unstable states are geographically close. A significant factor contributing to the contentious immigrant surge entering the US can be traced back to our regime change endeavors in Central America.
By Juan Cole. Originally published at TomDispatch
The nomination of former British Prime Minister Tony Blair by Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu to oversee post-war Gaza—despite his previous actions leading to countless Iraqi casualties—evokes memories of colonial viceroys. This appointment, made without consulting Palestinians, illustrates a resurgence of Western imperialism in the Middle East. In juxtaposition to Palestine, which has faced classic settler colonialism, the contemporary situation embodies a neo-imperialism, with Israel serving as a staunch ally for the US, using air power to suppress regional adversaries.
Swarming
The eclectic mix of individuals shaping policy in Washington today has led to the establishment of Israel as a vast airbase, supported by allies like Germany, Great Britain, and France. This base is the launch pad for a continuous barrage of missiles, drones, and airstrikes against neighboring countries.
Gaza has endured unrelenting bombardment for the past two years, with the first month post-Hamas’s October 7, 2023, attack bearing a questionable justification of “self-defense.” The West Bank has similarly suffered air assaults, while Lebanese territories have faced bombardments during periods marked by supposed ceasefires. Even Syrian territories, despite no immediate threat from Israel, have been struck repeatedly, illustrating the reckless nature of such military campaigns. Yemen, which retaliated against Israel for its actions in Gaza, has also witnessed extensive Israeli strikes, coupled with attacks on Iranian targets.
While some Israeli airstrikes have been in response to provocations, many have targeted civilian areas or engaged in conflict without any immediate threat. Notably, even Qatar fell victim to an Israeli strike despite its attempts to mediate negotiations on the return of kidnapped Israeli hostages.
In essence, we are witnessing a form of air-power colonialism, as Israel employs aircraft predominantly for offensive operations rather than defensive measures.
Routine missions have seen Israeli jets conduct targeted attacks in Yemen, where high-profile officials and journalists have been eliminated. Such actions suggest a chilling capability of the Israeli military to shape governance in the region through fear and violence, while simultaneously manipulating public perception by targeting journalists reporting from contested zones. Instead of fostering a hegemony that commands respect and loyalty, Israel’s approach has instead fostered resentment and rebellion in the region.
Negative Imperialism
The extensive air assaults against Iranian nuclear facilities earlier this year coincided with diplomatic negotiations, raising serious ethical concerns given Iran’s rights under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Allegations of Iran pursuing militaristic intents lack credible evidence, yet the strikes faced widespread condemnation as violations of international law—highlighting the disregard for diplomatic channels in favor of military solutions.
These actions targeted Iran’s capacity to engage in scientific endeavors akin to those enjoyed by various other nations, including nuclear-armed states. The consequences of sanctions and military aggression have led Tehran to view the 2015 nuclear agreement as untenable, especially after the imposition of maximum-pressure sanctions that continue to this day.
This approach to imperialism recalls historical efforts to stifle progress within already vulnerable states. The opposition to Iran developing infrastructure has parallels with past engagements in the region, emphasizing a strategy of “negative imperialism.” By discouraging developments that foster autonomy, external powers maintain an influential foothold.
Although the region has vastly changed since the fall of European colonialism, the desire to impose a modern form of dominance persists among certain factions in the West. This inclination has resulted in strategies reminiscent of previous imperial endeavors, yet today’s societies are more rooted in literacy, connectivity through technology, and organizational capabilities than their historical counterparts.
The rise of social movements and the eventual overthrow of colonial regimes post-World War II demonstrate a clear rejection of the ideologies that once justified imperialism. Instead of learning from history, some policymakers appear intent on reigniting similar conflicts that general society has long rejected.
Attempts to recolonize the Middle East have faced unprecedented challenges due to the resilience and awareness of the people in the affected regions. The heavy-handed tactics employed by Israel, akin to those used in colonial times, carry the risk of igniting a backlash, as illustrated by rising anti-colonial sentiments.
“We Destroyed the Villages by Air Patrols”
The historical precedence of air power employed as a means of control over local populations seeped its way into military strategy well over a century ago. The aerial bombardment’s origins can be traced back to early 20th-century conflicts, wherein tactics aimed to instill fear among local populations have evolved into today’s strategies.
British military tactics in Palestine included extensive aerial bombardment to suppress dissent and manage local populations. Such historical comparisons highlight the continued use of similar strategies today, with air power utilized not just for military engagements but as an instrument of control over civilian populations.
The imperial strategy of utilizing air power symbolizes a refusal to acknowledge civilians as legitimate members of the landscapes targeted for control. As seen in historical instances, these tactics ultimately backfired, leading to calls for independence and eventual uprisings against colonial rule.
While the attempts to control the narrative through aerial superiority can provide temporary advantages, the underlying resistance among affected populations suggests a significant level of discontent boiling beneath the surface. The legacies of oppressive tactics linger, leaving current regimes in precarious positions as the global populace demands accountability for their actions.
In conclusion, the ongoing saga of aerial imperialism in the Middle East is fraught with complexities and historical echoes that challenge its efficacy. The dynamics reveal not only the outdated frameworks upon which such strategies are built but also the rising tide of resistance against generated oppression. The continuous application of air power as a tool for control draws skepticism and condemnation, signifying that the old methods of colonialism may not hold firm in the face of evolving global consciousness.
Copyright 2025 Juan Cole
