The evolving geopolitical landscape in the Middle East, particularly the weakening of the Assad regime and Russia’s declining influence in Syria, presents a potential opportunity for closer ties between Israel and Ukraine. Previously, Israel’s cautious stance toward Ukraine was largely dictated by Russia’s significant presence in Syria, which necessitated a delicate balancing act to avoid conflict while carrying out airstrikes against Iranian-backed targets. However, with Russia’s grip on Syria loosening, some argue that this constraint has diminished, paving the way for increased Israeli support for Ukraine. Proponents of this view, including influential Israeli figures like Yuli Edelstein, chair of the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, contend that Israel’s strategic interests now align more closely with Ukraine, given the strengthening Russo-Iranian alliance and the increasing importance of Iranian weaponry to Russia’s war effort.
The core argument for increased Israeli support hinges on several key factors. Firstly, the diminished Russian presence in Syria affords Israel greater operational freedom, reducing the risk of direct confrontation with Russian forces. Secondly, the growing military cooperation between Russia and Iran, highlighted by the transfer of Iranian drones and missiles, poses a direct threat to Israel’s security. This shared threat creates a common ground between Israel and Ukraine, both of whom are targets of Iranian-supplied weapons. Thirdly, the war in Ukraine has provided a real-world testing ground for Iranian weaponry, offering valuable insights into their capabilities and vulnerabilities. This presents an opportunity for Israel and Ukraine to collaborate on defense technologies and strategies to counter the Iranian threat, which has already materialized in drone incursions into Israeli airspace.
Ukrainian officials, including Ambassador to Israel Yevhen Korniychuk, have been vocal in their calls for closer military cooperation with Israel. They emphasize the need for Israel to go beyond humanitarian aid and provide advanced defensive technologies, particularly in air defense systems. Ukraine sees Israel’s expertise in this area as crucial for countering the growing threat of Iranian drones, a challenge both countries face. This perspective highlights the potential for mutually beneficial collaboration, where Israel’s technological prowess can complement Ukraine’s battlefield experience in combating Iranian-supplied weapons. The argument is further reinforced by the assertion that Russia, as a supporter of Iran and its proxies Hezbollah and Hamas, cannot be considered a neutral actor by Israel.
While proponents advocate for closer military ties, acknowledging the shared threat and the potential for mutually beneficial collaboration, counterarguments emphasize the importance of maintaining a cautious approach. Some analysts, like Rebekah Koffler, argue that despite the changing dynamics in Syria, Russia still holds significant leverage in the Middle East. Therefore, maintaining a stable relationship with Russia remains crucial for Israel’s regional security interests, including managing the Iranian threat and navigating complex relationships with other regional players like Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Turkey. This perspective suggests that the benefits of aligning more closely with Ukraine may not outweigh the potential risks of alienating Russia. Moreover, it is argued that Ukraine, unlike Russia, offers limited strategic advantages to Israel.
Despite these differing perspectives on the strategic implications, there is a growing consensus that the changing geopolitical landscape provides Israel with more flexibility in its relations with Ukraine. The diminished Russian presence in Syria removes a significant constraint, allowing Israel to consider a broader range of options without the same level of concern about provoking a direct confrontation with Russia. Daniel Vajdich, a Republican foreign policy expert, suggests that this creates an opportunity for increased support for Ukraine, particularly in the area of air defense. He also points to the potential influence of future US administrations on this dynamic, noting that a potential Trump administration may exert less pressure on Israel compared to the Biden administration, giving Israel greater autonomy in its foreign policy decisions.
In conclusion, the shifting power balance in the Middle East, specifically the weakening of the Assad regime and Russia’s reduced influence in Syria, has sparked a debate within Israel regarding its relationship with Ukraine. While some advocate for closer military ties, emphasizing the shared threat from Iran and the potential for mutually beneficial collaboration in defense technologies, others caution against jeopardizing Israel’s delicate balance with Russia, which remains a significant player in the region. The debate reflects the complex strategic calculus facing Israel as it navigates a rapidly evolving geopolitical landscape. Ultimately, Israel’s decision will be shaped by its assessment of the risks and opportunities presented by the changing dynamics in the region and the interplay of various strategic considerations. The Ukrainian perspective, however, remains consistent, hoping for greater Israeli support in light of the diminished Russian presence in Syria, which they perceive as invalidating Israel’s previous justifications for caution.
