Israel’s defense doctrine, adopted after the October 7, 2023, “Al-Aqsa Flood” attack, encompasses everything that could pave the way for overt cooperation with Saudi Arabia against the Iran-backed Yemeni Houthis, who target the Kingdom almost daily. However, Riyadh rejects such cooperation, making it conditional on Israel accepting a path toward establishing an independent Palestinian state and considering this a prerequisite for diplomatic relations with Israel.
In any case, Saudi and Israeli strategies appear entirely contradictory. Saudi Arabia views economic cooperation and regional stability as the cornerstones of its policies, rather than perpetual war, preemptive strikes, and occupation, which collectively form the Israeli defense doctrine. About two weeks ago, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu offered Saudi Arabia assistance in Yemen, hoping to open the door to close security cooperation with the Kingdom and pave the way for Saudi recognition of Israel. Yet, even if the war Israel has been waging for three years had not closed the door to overt cooperation with Saudi Arabia, the post-October 7 doctrine, as articulated by Netanyahu and Reserve General Tamir Hayman, has done so.
Netanyahu outlined the doctrine by saying that “the liberation and disengagement war imposed high principles on the traditional national defense doctrine, including the priority of prevention and attack over containment and defense.” He added that it includes carrying out preventive strikes to dissipate and eliminate threats, strengthening the internal front to confront new threats, asserting Israel’s position as a regional power, achieving maximum independence in munitions, ensuring superiority in the most advanced technologies, and intensifying the fight against anti-Semitic mass movements.
Hayman described the Palestinian issue as an “Arab conspiracy to destroy Israel,” stressing that war, settlements, and preemptive strikes are necessary and very important for national security. He said that viewing peace as impossible assumes the destabilization of Arab states, which he described as “a group of tribes and ethnic groups.” He also considered Jewish identity to take precedence over democracy.
In his first press briefing since the October 7 attack, Netanyahu stated: “We changed the Middle East because we changed ourselves.” Netanyahu’s and Hayman’s strategic statements are likely to reinforce anti-Israel sentiment in Saudi Arabia, the Gulf, and the wider Islamic world, given the repercussions of the wars in Iran, Gaza, and Lebanon, as well as Israel’s penetration into parts of Syria. This makes military cooperation in attacks on Arab countries such as Yemen impossible and would complicate the announced Saudi-Israeli cooperation.
Although Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman rules autocratically, he maintains a tight grip on public sentiment in his country, particularly when he is on the defensive because of his strategic calculations regarding Yemen and the Houthis’ supporters there.
A year ago, bin Salman called for leading the Arab and Islamic worlds and playing a central role in the G20. However, his Kingdom has since backtracked and faces threats to its stability. This is what Karen Elliott House stated in her books about Saudi Arabia: “It is still premature to remove Bin Salman from leading the Kingdom. His ailing father could pass away, given that he is ninety years old today, putting his Kingdom under threat, although he controls the Kingdom despite subjecting and repressing his religious and royal enemies. He still controls the Saudi military and security forces.”
“Even if bin Salman were to agree to cooperate with Israel in the war against the Houthis,” says a prominent non-Arab Asian researcher, he “fears Netanyahu announcing it if he finds it serves his personal interests, especially winning today’s legislative elections.” Additionally, bin Salman might not trust US President Donald Trump to keep the aforementioned cooperation secret. Trump has pressured bin Salman several times to recognize Israel, making it a precondition for selling nuclear technology to the Kingdom. Moreover, Saudi Arabia does not want to be seen cozying up to Israel, while Israeli leaders consider cutting their country’s ties with America, strange and unlikely as it may sound.
Netanyahu previously said that Israel would become the combined “Athens and Sparta” of the ancient world, self-sufficient. Some American writers believe that the United States may grow weak and perhaps abandon the Jewish state, a major ally outside the NATO alliance. Netanyahu acknowledged to the Israeli media the possibility of separating from America, despite urging that everything be done to maintain full engagement with it.
“Israel should make other alliances,” he said, “and this is what I am working on now with several countries in the region and beyond. India is not a small country, and there are other countries too. There is a remarkable change in Latin America, and a significant change may soon occur in Brazil.”
The same non-Arab Asian researcher said: “Israel knows after the October 7 war where it stands with the United States, and even Saudi Arabia and the Gulf and Islamic perceptions of the Jewish state. Perhaps with the exception of the UAE, Bahrain, and Morocco, Arabs and Muslims see Israel as a threat like Iran, or more than a potential security partner with it.”
In private discussions, many in the Gulf may see Netanyahu losing today’s parliamentary elections, despite recent endorsements from Trump, who described him as a “great warrior.” Many members of the Israeli opposition agree with Netanyahu’s security doctrine, his rejection of a Palestinian state, and his hostile approach to Iran and defensive settlements. However, they believe that any other prime minister would be better at dealing with his hardline coalition and nationalist partners.
Saudi Arabia cannot tolerate a strategic military threat from the Houthis on its southern border. The Houthis must be punished before anyone talks to them, as they have been at war for two decades and remain a significant enemy. But every team has a weak point.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by the writers are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Annahar.
