By: Gayathri Pramod, Research Analyst, GSDN

The geopolitical landscape of the Global South has undergone a massive shift with the proactive intervention of Russia and China, marking drastic change and imperative challenges as well. Before going deep into the topic, it is essential to analyze the Global South and how China and Russia are actively holding their footprints across this region. The Global South, a term often used to describe regions in Latin America, Africa, and parts of Asia, has become a critical arena for geopolitical competition, with China and Russia exerting significant influence through infrastructure projects, strategic engagements, and military operations. These two powers, driven by their respective economic and political ambitions, have increasingly expanded their presence, reshaping the geopolitical landscape in ways that challenge Western hegemony and present both opportunities and challenges for the nations involved.

Geopolitical Intervention of China

China’s engagement with the Global South has been primarily economic, spearheaded by the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), a colossal infrastructure development strategy launched in 2013. The BRI, a testament to China’s strategic foresight, has seen China pour trillions of dollars into highways, railways, ports, and energy projects across Africa, Latin America, and Asia. The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is a flagship project, with billions invested in roads, power plants, and the deep-water Gwadar Port. Similarly, the Hambantota Port in Sri Lanka, initially developed with Chinese loans, became a symbol of China’s growing footprint when Sri Lanka was forced to lease it to China for 99 years due to debt repayment challenges. China has constructed significant highways, bridges, and energy facilities in Africa. The Addis Ababa-Djibouti Railway is a critical trade link facilitating Chinese imports and exports. China has also significantly invested in Nigerian oil and gas infrastructure, giving it leverage over one of Africa’s largest economies. Similar projects in Latin America, such as investments in Venezuela’s oil industry and Brazilian infrastructure, underscore China’s increasing dominance.

China’s debt diplomacy strategy has ensnared many nations, forcing them into asymmetric agreements. Due to unsustainable debt burdens, countries like Sri Lanka have ceded control over key assets, such as the Hambantota Port. China has established military and strategic nodes across the Global South through such manoeuvres, indirectly projecting its power beyond its traditional sphere of influence. China has constructed railways in Kenya, Nigeria, and Ethiopia in Africa, creating economic dependencies while offering much-needed infrastructure. Latin America has also witnessed Chinese investments in sectors ranging from lithium mining in Bolivia to ports in Brazil and Argentina. These projects have provided economic growth for host nations but also raised concerns over debt sustainability and sovereignty, as some countries find themselves in difficult financial situations due to their reliance on Chinese financing. Russia and China have actively promoted multilateral platforms challenging Western-centric global governance structures. The BRICS consortium, which is comprised of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, is a prominent example. This alliance aims to amplify the voice of emerging economies in international affairs and offers an alternative to traditional Western-dominated institutions. Recent BRICS summits have focused on financial cooperation, the expansion of membership, and the development of payment systems that bypass Western financial networks. For instance, the introduction of BRICS Pay facilitates transactions among member countries, reducing reliance on established Western systems like SWIFT.

The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) is another platform where Russia and China collaborate to engage with the Global South. Initially centred on security concerns in Central Asia, the SCO has expanded its scope to include economic and cultural cooperation, attracting interest from countries across Asia and the Middle East. This expansion reflects the organization’s evolving role in promoting a ‘multipolar world order ‘, a geopolitical concept that suggests power is distributed among several significant powers rather than being concentrated in a single superpower or a few major powers. Both nations have cultivated strategic partnerships in the Middle East to enhance their influence. China’s economic engagements, mainly through infrastructure investments, and Russia’s military interventions have positioned them as key regional players. Their coordinated efforts in conflict diplomacy and economic projects underscore a shared vision of reducing Western influence and promoting regional stability on their terms.

Russia’s Engagement in the Global South

Russia’s engagement with the Global South is multifaceted, with one of its most significant aspects being its energy sector. As a leading oil and natural gas exporter, Russia has strategically deepened its energy partnerships with countries in Asia, the Middle East, and Africa. In response to sanctions from the European Union and the United States, Russia has redirected much of its oil exports to India and China, offering discounted rates to secure long-term buyers. India, in particular, has emerged as a crucial partner, significantly increasing its imports of Russian crude oil despite Western pressure. The strengthening of energy ties with India reflects a broader strategy where Russia provides resources to nations prioritizing economic pragmatism over ideological alignments. Russia’s role as a key energy infrastructure provider in the developing world is further reinforced by its expansion in Africa’s energy sector, collaborating with countries like Algeria, Nigeria, and Egypt on oil exploration, natural gas development, and nuclear energy projects. The Russian state-owned nuclear energy corporation, Rosatom, has secured deals to construct nuclear power plants in Egypt and other African nations, further cementing Moscow’s role as a key energy provider in the Global South.

Beyond energy, Russia has cemented its presence in the Global South through arms sales and defence cooperation. As one of the world’s largest arms exporters, Russia has historically been a major supplier of military equipment to countries in Africa, Latin America, and Asia. Nations such as India, Vietnam, Algeria, and Egypt have long-standing military procurement relationships with Russia, relying on its aircraft, tanks, and missile systems. Even amid geopolitical turbulence, India continues to purchase Russian-made S-400 missile defence systems, highlighting the resilience of their defence partnership. In Africa, Russia has positioned itself as an alternative arms supplier for countries seeking to diversify their military procurement away from Western dominance. Moscow has signed defence agreements with multiple African nations, including Sudan, Angola, and Mozambique, offering everything from small arms to advanced fighter jets. These military engagements and the enduring partnerships they foster serve as tools for ensuring long-term stability and security in the Global South, underscoring Russia’s strategic use of military engagements.

Russia’s partnerships in the Middle East also underscore its growing influence in the Global South. Moscow has established itself as a key power broker in the region, mainly through its military intervention in Syria, where it played a decisive role in supporting President Bashar al-Assad’s government. This intervention secured Russia’s strategic interests and reinforced its credibility as a global power capable of shaping conflicts beyond its borders. Beyond Syria, Russia has cultivated strong relations with Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. Moscow and Tehran have deepened economic cooperation, particularly in the energy sector, as both countries face Western sanctions and seek alternative trade mechanisms. The collaboration extends to military cooperation, with reports of increased arms trade and intelligence sharing. Meanwhile, Russia has also worked to maintain a balancing act in its relationships with the Gulf States, engaging in diplomatic dialogues and energy cooperation through the OPEC+ framework and coordinating oil production policies with Saudi Arabia and other producers. This multifaceted approach in the Middle East underscores Russia’s ability to navigate complex regional dynamics while securing its strategic interests.

In the broader geopolitical landscape, Russia’s engagements with the Global South align with its vision of a multipolar world order, where power is distributed among multiple centres rather than dominated by Western institutions. Moscow actively promotes alternatives to Western-led financial and trade systems, collaborating with countries in the Global South to develop new mechanisms for economic exchange. For instance, Russia has worked with China, India, and other emerging economies to reduce dependence on the U.S. dollar in trade transactions. Initiatives such as the BRICS New Development Bank offer alternatives to the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, allowing developing countries to access financing without the policy constraints often imposed by Western financial institutions. Russia has also advocated for greater use of local currencies in international trade, particularly in its energy exports to Asian markets. By fostering economic frameworks independent of Western influence, Russia aims to strengthen its partnerships with the Global South while reducing its vulnerability to sanctions and economic isolation. Russia’s engagement with the Global South faces challenges and criticisms despite its successes. While energy and arms sales have strengthened ties, economic investment from Russia remains limited compared to China, whose financial resources and large-scale infrastructure projects have had a more transformative impact in developing countries. Additionally, Russia’s reliance on security cooperation through private military companies like Wagner raises concerns about long-term stability and governance issues in countries where these forces operate. Moreover, while Russia seeks to position itself as a champion of a multipolar world, its ability to provide economic alternatives to the Global South remains constrained by its economic difficulties, exacerbated by Western sanctions and the ongoing conflict in Ukraine.

Russia’s engagement with the Global South is a crucial pillar of its foreign policy. It is driven by the need to counter Western influence, secure economic opportunities, and promote an alternative global order. Through energy diplomacy, arms sales, security cooperation, and multilateral initiatives, Moscow has deepened its ties with developing nations across Asia, Africa, and Latin America. These engagements reflect a pragmatic approach where Russia leverages its strengths in natural resources, military expertise, and historical ties to expand its influence. However, the long-term sustainability of these partnerships will depend on Russia’s ability to offer economic incentives and maintain political stability at home and abroad. As the geopolitical landscape evolves, Russia’s role in the Global South will remain a defining factor in the broader struggle for global influence in the 21st century. Military cooperation, energy partnerships, and political alliances characterize Russia’s approach to the Global South. In the Middle East, Russia has established itself as a key player by supporting regimes such as Bashar al-Assad’s in Syria, thereby securing a strategic foothold in the region. This involvement projects military power and opens avenues for arms sales and energy agreements.

Geopolitical & Security Challenges

The increasing influence of China and Russia in the Global South has raised serious geopolitical and security alarms, prompting a revaluation of international relations and power dynamics. As these two nations expand their reach, they employ a multifaceted strategy that includes economic investments, military partnerships, and political alliances, all of which have profound implications for the sovereignty and stability of numerous nations. One of the most concerning aspects of this influence is militarising crucial areas, particularly in strategically important regions, for global trade and security. The establishment of military bases, the provision of arms, and the training of local forces by Russia and China are not merely acts of support; they are calculated moves to extend their geopolitical reach. This militarization often increases tensions and conflicts, undermining peace and stability in regions grappling with internal challenges.

Moreover, the economic dependencies fostered by debt diplomacy are creating a precarious situation for many countries in the Global South. China has invested heavily in infrastructure projects across Africa, Asia, and Latin America through its Belt and Road Initiative. While these investments can spur economic growth, they often come with strings attached, leading to significant debt burdens that can compromise national sovereignty. Countries that cannot repay these loans may be forced to cede control over critical infrastructure, such as ports and railways, to Chinese interests, deepening their economic fragility and limiting their autonomy. In Africa, for instance, China’s grip on essential infrastructure has led to a situation where many nations are caught in a cycle of debt and dependency. This economic vulnerability is compounded by the fact that local governments may prioritize foreign investors’ interests over their citizens’ needs, leading to social unrest and dissatisfaction. Additionally, Russia’s military engagement in various African nations, often under the guise of providing security assistance, has exacerbated internal strife and instability. The presence of Russian mercenaries and military advisors can escalate conflicts, making it difficult for governments to maintain control and governance.

The South China Sea is a critical flashpoint in this geopolitical landscape, with China asserting its dominance over vital maritime routes essential for global trade. The development of artificial islands, complete with military installations and an expanding naval presence, poses significant threats to regional security and the stability of global trade networks. The aggressive posture of China in this area has led to heightened tensions with neighbouring countries and the United States, which views the freedom of navigation in these waters as a vital national interest. Moreover, the increasing alignment of global southern Nations with China and Russia has led to Geopolitical polarization, with countries forced to navigate complex relationships with both Eastern and Western powers.

The US Response and Strategy against the Chinese & Russian Influence

In response to China’s growing economic power, the United States has launched several strategic initiatives to counter Chinese influence and provide viable alternatives to its investments. One of the most notable initiatives is the Build Back Better World (B3W) program, which seeks to mobilize private sector investment in infrastructure projects across developing nations. This initiative emphasizes principles of transparency, sustainability, and inclusivity, aiming to create a framework that contrasts sharply with China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which has been criticized for fostering debt dependency and lack of local engagement. Complementing B3W, the Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Investment (PGII) has been established to enhance global infrastructure development further. This initiative focuses on delivering high-quality, sustainable infrastructure projects that meet the needs of developing countries while promoting economic growth and resilience. By prioritizing ethical investment practices and local community involvement, the U.S. aims to build trust and strengthen its economic ties with nations that Chinese financial offers may otherwise sway. In addition to these economic initiatives, the U.S. has significantly bolstered its diplomatic relationships with nations in the Global South. This includes enhancing trade agreements, fostering economic collaboration, and engaging in multilateral dialogues to counteract the influence of both Beijing and Moscow. By promoting democratic values and human rights, the U.S. seeks to position itself as a reliable partner for countries navigating the complexities of foreign investment and geopolitical pressures.

In order to address the military advancements of China, the U.S. has fortified its security partnerships through alliances such as AUKUS—a trilateral security pact with Australia and the United Kingdom—and the Quad, which includes India, Japan, and Australia. These alliances are designed to enhance collective security in the Indo-Pacific region, ensuring that member nations can effectively respond to potential threats posed by China’s assertive military posture. Moreover, the U.S. has increased defence collaboration with ASEAN countries, recognizing the strategic importance of Southeast Asia in countering Chinese influence. This includes joint military exercises, intelligence sharing, and capacity-building initiatives to enhance regional partners’ defence capabilities. In Africa, the U.S. has ramped up its counterterrorism efforts and military training programs to limit the security foothold of both Russia and China. By supporting African nations in their fight against terrorism and instability, the U.S. aims to foster a more secure environment less susceptible to external influence. In Latin America, Washington has augmented military assistance to crucial allies and has employed economic sanctions and diplomatic strategies to mitigate Russian and Chinese influence. The revival of the Monroe Doctrine as a guiding principle underscores the U.S. dedication to thwarting external interference in the region. The expanding presence of China and Russia in the Global South has transformed global power dynamics, posing challenges to Western influence and altering regional security landscapes. While their economic and military engagements may provide avenues for development, they also introduce considerable geopolitical risks, such as debt dependency, political turmoil, and security challenges. The U.S. response signifies a determined effort to uphold strategic leadership, yet the long-term consequences of this geopolitical rivalry remain unpredictable. The trajectory of the Global South will likely hinge on how these significant powers manage their interactions of cooperation, conflict, and competition in the coming decades.

Conclusion

The consequences of China and Russia’s growing influence in the Global South are profound. While their investments and engagements provide infrastructure, military support, and economic growth, they raise concerns about sovereignty, governance, and financial stability. The debt-trap diplomacy associated with Chinese loans has led some countries to reconsider their participation in the BRI. At the same time, Russia’s military involvement in fragile states has sometimes fuelled conflicts rather than resolved them. Moreover, the increasing alignment of some Global South nations with China and Russia has led to geopolitical polarization, forcing countries to navigate complex relationships with Eastern and Western powers. China and Russia have established a formidable presence in the Global South through strategic infrastructure projects, military engagements, and diplomatic influence. Their growing role challenges the traditional dominance of Western powers and offers alternative development pathways for many nations. However, this influence comes with risks and complexities that each country must carefully navigate. As geopolitical rivalries intensify, the Global South finds itself at a crossroads, weighing the benefits and potential pitfalls of deepening ties with these emerging global players.

By: Pragathi Kowndinya, Research Analyst, GSDN

An Enigma over the Middle East Ceasefires

Middle East, a pivotal player in the geopolitical architecture of the 21^st century. A region engulfed by the Mediterranean Sea in the north and Arabian Peninsula in the south acts as a key corridor to connect Asia, Africa and Europe. The Middle Eastern sphere also encompasses Bab al-Mandab Strait and Red Sea, Gulf of Aden, Caspian Sea, Strait of Hormuz and Persian Gulf that are strategic maritime zones to sustain world trade and transit. The soaring richness of the region in crucial and strategically vital oil and other natural resources is prerequisite to nourish the spiking energy demands of the world states. A secure and stable Middle East also helps to nurture the larger regional security of Asia and beyond. Yet, this geographically, geopolitically and strategically imperative region of the Middle East is engrossed in existential conflicts for decades. One such embroiling friction is the Israel-Palestine conflict that is causing regional repercussions and pushing the entire expanse of the Middle East into geopolitical fragility and humanitarian catastrophe.

The current conundrum in the conflict

The latest Israel-Hamas conflict broke out on 7^th October, 2023 with Hamas launching coordinated attacks on Israel that killed more than 1,200 civilians. The 15 months war transcended as one of the world’s deadliest conflicts in the current era that has killed more than 45,000 people in the narrow Gaza strip, millions of people being internally displaced and the region implicated as uninhabitable. After witnessing such a devastating political and humanitarian crisis, both sides have reached a ‘temporary ceasefire’ deal. The truce reached after intense negotiations mediated by the USA, Qatar and Egypt, came into effect on 19^th January, 2025, but is described as a ‘fragile ceasefire’.

The ceasefire entails 3 phases. In the maiden phase Israel and Hamas should exchange the hostages and prisoners and also facilitate the movement of humanitarian aid for the distressed population of Gaza. In the second phase, the remaining hostages will be exchanged including the detained male Israeli soldiers. The Israeli armed forces stationed in Gaza will also be removed and the temporary ceasefire will be evolved into a permanent truce. In the third and ultimate phase of the agreement, remains of the killed hostages will be swapped and the process of reconstruction and development of the devastated Gaza will commence.

The first phase of the ceasefire is currently operationalized. Hamas and Israel have concluded the sixth round of hostages and prisoner exchange respectively and more than 10,000 trucks of humanitarian aid have reached the shattered lanes of the Gaza strip. Israeli forces have departed from the Netzarim Corridor, a military zone carved to separate northern and southern Gaza and millions of displaced Palestinians are returning to the northern part of the of Gaza. Despite these positive developments as per the norms of the ceasefire agreement, there exists a lot of loopholes and apprehension about the success of the ceasefire in the long run.

Both the warring parties have indulged in suspicion and blame game. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu exclaimed that the ‘gates of hell would be open’ if Hamas didn’t release the remaining hostages and it would resume the military operations in Gaza. On the other hand, Hamas militancy has cited that Israel has violated the obligations in the agreement, has interrupted the entry of humanitarian trucks into the region and is also continuing bombardments on the Palestinian province. The USA, an ardent ally of Israel continues its unhindered support to the Jewish state with the supply of arms, ammunition and other assistance inspite of being a key stakeholder in the ceasefire negotiating table. In this background, the strength and durability of the ceasefire are under severe attrition and the future of the truce is said to be bizarre. Will the temporary truce between Israel and Hamas strike a permanent triumph? Will the warring parties reach an ultimate understanding? Whether lasting peace, security and stability be reached in West Asia and beyond? Let us decipher!

Analyzing from historical experiences

The Israel-Palestine conflict is not a new phenomenon in the geopolitical spectrum. Both the regions have been at loggerheads since 1948 when the region was fragmented into a Jewish state of Israel and an Arab state of Palestine as per the Balfour Declaration passed by the British, who were an imperial power in the region. This partition ignited the first Arab-Israeli War in 1948. The war ended with the Israeli victory over the region, wherein they captured 50% of more land than what was predetermined during the partition.

Again in 1967, the Six-Day war broke out when Israel captured the Golan Heights from Syria and East Jerusalem from Jordan and Gaza strip from Egypt. These series of unsolvable contentions led to the signing of Camp David Accords in 1978 brokered by the USA. The framework gave an impetus to Israel and its neighbours to negotiate a solution to the ‘Palestinian problem’ and establish a lasting peace and security in the region. 5 decades since the signing of the accords, the solution for the Palestinian problem has reached a stalemate and the conflict is ever spiralling.

With the formation of Hamas in 1987, the conflict multiplied with greater intensity. The demand for a sovereign Palestinian state reached a boiling point during 1987 that resulted in the First Intifada (Palestinian Uprising) between the militants and the Israeli Army. The intifada ended in 1993 with the signing of Oslo Accords, which gave a framework for peace negotiations between Israel and Palestine. Despite these efforts, Israel continued to annex and build infrastructure in the occupied Palestinian territory and even Hamas indulged in recurring militancy activities. Thus, before the peace process could materialize the second intifada was revolutionized in 2000 and continued upto 2005.

In 2006, the Second Lebanon War broke out between Israel and Hezbollah (an Iran backed organisation operating from Lebanon which strongly refutes Israeli occupation in the Gaza strip, West Bank and advocates for Palestinian liberation). With the growing grip of Hamas and other non-state actors over the region there were a series of armed conflicts with Israel in 2008, 2012, 2014 and a large-scale military strife even in 2021 as well. These historical conflicts illustrate the magnitude of the hostility between the warring parties and how peculiar & perishable the agreements are! Historical evidence reflects the fact that even amidst high voltage negotiations and mediations, finding a lasting solution to the Palestinian question is a herculean task.

A tenuous truce and treacherous camps

In the latest phase of conflict that broke out in 2023 October, the world has witnessed a massive scale of destruction and humanitarian havoc along with sharp political antagonism among the regional and global geopolitical actors. Though a ceasefire is achieved after transforming the tiny Gaza strip into a living graveyard, the stable future of the truce is still an enigma. The political ambitions of the warring nations, the stingy attitude of the stakeholders is making the truce and humanitarian causes to be stuck in a geopolitical jigsaw.

The Israeli Prime Minister reiterates that his nation has the right to resume the war if the norms of the ceasefire are violated by the other side. It says resumption of war is inevitable if Hamas doesn’t release all the hostages. On the other end, Hamas asserts that it is committed to the agreement, however it is Israel who is violating the ceasefire. For example, Israel recently condemned the Hamas action as ‘cruel and malicious violation’ of the agreement as Hamas gave the body of a non-identified deceased person instead of the body of an Israeli woman and Israel pledged to take revenge for the misdeeds of the Hamas. Such repeated accusations and mutual suspicion, spikes doubt about the sustainability of the ceasefire and fails the aspirations towards a long-term stability and solution for the ‘Palestinian problem’, beyond mere hostage exchanges.

The USA impetus in the Middle East

The USA, a time-tested ally of Israel, is driving the geopolitical circumstances of the Middle East with its hegemonic policies. Reports claim that the US has spent more than US$ 18 billion on military aid to Israel since October 7, 2023. The US has supplied artillery shells, military aircrafts, anti-missile systems, fighter jets, warships and about 40,000 additional and nearly 900 kgs of bombs to Israel, thus fuelling the war ambitions of the latter. Infact, Israel is the biggest recipient of the USA’s military aid. The USA, being the permanent member of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) has used its veto power to provide diplomatic cover to Israel. Since the war broke out in 2023, the USA has vetoed numerous resolutions that demanded for a ceasefire in Gaza. Infact, since 1970, the USA has used its veto power more than 40 times against the UN resolutions on Israel.

The USA also has had a considerable military presence in the Middle East since decades. However, it has drastically increased since 2024. The USA is conducting anti-piracy operations in the Red Sea against the militants and also coordinated operations against Hezbollah in Lebanon, Houthis in Yemen in the name of counter-terrorism. This heightened presence of the USA and unhindered support to Israel has irked the regional actors that has further fuelled animosity among the actors and has created an atmosphere of tension and uneasiness.

The Trump 2.0 administration though advocated for a ceasefire, the supply of arms and ammunition to Israel hasn’t been discontinued. Also, the latest proposal by the USA for the redevelopment of Gaza has created a global outcry. The plan of the USA is to completely take over the region and evacuate the Gaza population to neighbouring states and indulge in the reconstruction process. This has created an outrage in the Middle East and the states have exhibited a strong displeasure to the US plan. Trump has also warned that the ‘hell would break loose’ if Hamas failed to release all the hostages.

These actions by the USA have not just created a rift between Israel and other regional actors but also are a factor to further ripe the conflicts in the Middle Eastern Canvas. The American factor, thus, is a determinant that impacts the future of the ceasefire. The USA’s long standing animosity & contentions with Iran, its unwavering aid to Israel, the US’s actions on foreign soil in the name of counter-terrorism, humanity and development, its hegemonic attitude and jumping into decisions unilaterally without taking the consensus of all the regional stakeholders can lead to a situation of security dilemma in the region. As an impact the sustainability of the ceasefire is at stake. The state and non-state actors will be on the brink of escalating the war again, with long-term solutions to the historical problem being vague and faint.

Regional responses and success of ceasefire

The regional players of West Asia have a diversified approach to the crisis. From Iran to Saudi Arabia to Israel every actor is pulling the Middle Eastern geopolitical jigsaw in diverging directions. For example, the US-Israel alliance’s antagonism towards Iran has led to many regional ramifications and proxy wars since the break out of Israel-Hamas conflict in 2023. The popular ‘Octopus doctrine’ illustrates how Iran, similar to the head of an Octopus, is navigating its various legs i.e. the non-state actors such as Hezbollah, Hamas, Houthis etc. This axis of Iran and the US-Israel alliance are always at odds. In the pretext of the latest Israel-Hamas conflict, Israel attacked the Iranian embassy in Damascus in April, 2024, which was a clear violation of Iranian sovereignty. In retaliation Iran launched direct attacks on Israel by firing more than 300 drones and ballistic missiles. This brought the Middle East to the brink of a full-scale regional war.

Thus, the further intrusion of the US in Middle East politics and arriving at unilateral decisions without considering all stakeholders of the region will linger the hostile scenario and weaken the strength of the ceasefire. For example, Iran-backed Houthis rebels in Yemen claimed to launch an attack on Israel if the US and Israel materialize their plan to redevelop Gaza by evacuating the population. The Saudi Arabia, UAE and other GCC nations also have expressed their distress against Israel’s unmindful and unrestrained attacks on Gaza. They have championed the cause of Palestinian statehood and have reiterated that restoration of bilateral relations is not possible until a solution is found for the Palestinian problem. Lately, in order to express their non-compliance against the US’s plan on Gaza, Saudi Arabia hosted a conclave with the six GCC states along with Egypt and Jordan. Riyadh, along with advocating for regional peace and stability, firmly upheld that the ‘two-state’ solution is the ultimate remedy for the Palestinian crisis and not the owning or annexation of the region by the USA.

This polarized political landscape of the Middle East can pour down the prospects of the ceasefire. The US-Israel nexus, The Iran and other militant group’s axis, supply of military aid and ammunition to the warring blocs, fragmented opinions of other regional actors can derail the threshold to reach a consolidated and sustainable decision on the Palestinian cause. The ceasefire is yet in its first phase and thus far has witnessed many violations leading to accusations and warning of re-escalation of war from both the parties. Will the ceasefire, thus, act as a stepping stone to draft a long-term solution beyond mere exchange of hostages is a grave concern.

The current era, characterized by a ‘realist’ way of geopolitics, stands as a synonym for expansionist attributes, security dilemma and discredit for international law and norms by the member states. Amidst these upheavals, geopolitical actors should be prudent of the consequences of the geopolitical rivalry because, as neo-realist scholar Kenneth Waltz says, “Asking who won a war is like asking who won the San Francisco earthquake. That in war there is no victory but only varying degrees of defeat”. Realizing this, the stakeholders of the Middle East ceasefire, thus, have to work in tandem to accomplish the goal of hostage exchanges and should address the humanitarian causes.

Successfully executing these initial goals, should spur the momentum further to recede from the occupied territories and respect each other’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. The US shouldn’t indulge in the geopolitics of West Asia as the region is completely extraneous and not proximal to the American geography. Though, the US has to protect its trade, defence and other interests in the region that cannot be at the cost of the Middle East’s sovereignty. Simultaneously the US, Iran or any other state shouldn’t pool arms and ammunition to Israel or any other non-state actors. That will automatically decelerate the thrust of the waging parties. All stakeholders should work at the negotiating table to reach a lasting solution for the ‘Palestinian problem’.    

Such a progressive action can definitely yield regional peace and security in the long run. But, beyond hostage exchanges does a ceasefire really have the ability to sustain these idealistic goals for a prolonged duration, when the geopolitical game is actually waged on realist principles! Considering the historical experiences and the hostile atmosphere still hanging on the Middle Eastern latitude, the answer is an ‘enigma’!