Global Reckoning and the Middle East in the Shadow of the Triangle of Fate

​Strategic thinking matures through a blend of practical realities on the ground and theoretical depth. To understand the Middle East’s bloody history and its never-ending geopolitical knot, following in the footsteps of Robert Fisk, who sought the truth amidst the shadow of bombs on the ground, examining Noam Chomsky’s monumental work ‘The Fateful Triangle’ (Fateful Triangle), which exposes the decision-making mechanisms of global hegemony, is an indispensable intellectual task for every researcher and strategist. The fact that a dear retired general friend of mine presented this work to me, drawing on his military vision and profound expertise, has been the greatest catalyst in fuelling my curiosity and desire to research the subject. Inspired by his valuable suggestion, I undertook this study, regarding it as a duty to examine the views and plans of the actors in question with great interest from a contemporary perspective. The theoretical framework in which Chomsky addresses the unjust power asymmetry established between the US, Israel and the Palestinians has reached a far more complex and dangerous dimension today, alongside the new actors in the multipolar world.

Today, Israel is taking the expansionist and dispossession policies that Chomsky unmasked years ago to their extreme, acting with the aim of completely depopulating Gaza and the West Bank or transforming them into controllable ghettos. Acting in accordance with its own security doctrine, the Israeli government is attempting to suppress regional threats shaped by Hezbollah, Hamas and Syria through military force, thereby implementing a modern regime of racial discrimination in full view of the international community. The greatest pillar underpinning this recklessness is the unconditional military and diplomatic shield provided by the US, which Chomsky (2018) identifies as the central factor in his book. This immunity granted by Washington continues to constitute the greatest obstacle to a lasting and just two-state solution in the region.

The Arab world, standing against this bloody status quo, is in a state of complete division and paralysis. The hypocritical stance of Arab regimes towards the Palestinian cause, which Chomsky highlighted in the past, has today turned into a concrete surrender through the ‘Abraham Accords’ and normalisation steps. Whilst Gulf capital and authoritarian Arab leaders push the Palestinian cause into the background in order to contain the Iranian threat and protect their own thrones, the powerful anger and solidarity with Palestine in the Arab streets cannot breach the regimes’ walls. In this climate of capitulation, the sole focal point demonstrating genuine asymmetric resistance in the region is Iran, which has built a “Resistance Axis” through proxy forces in Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq and Syria. With its goal of becoming a nuclear power and its capacity for asymmetric warfare, Iran today constitutes the most formidable and radical front against the absolute hegemony of the US and Israel in the region.

Turkey, however, is seeking a dynamic balance within this complex equation, driven by both its geographical proximity and historical ties. Unlike the period when Chomsky wrote his work, Ankara is now acting with a rationality that seeks to optimise its own interests within the energy equations of the Eastern Mediterranean and the regional security architecture. Whilst strong humanitarian and political support is given to the Palestinian cause at the rhetorical level, diplomatic formulas such as “guarantor status” are put forward in regional crises. However, Turkey’s structural realities—namely, its membership of the Western alliance (NATO) and deep integration into the global economic system on the one hand, and its desire to secure a share in the region’s energy corridors on the other—compel Ankara to adopt a pragmatic and multi-dimensional balance rather than sharp commitments. This situation often transforms Turkey’s policy into a delicate balancing act between regional ambitions and global dependencies.

​Viewed on a global scale, Chomsky’s criticism of Western intellectuals and the media regarding the “manufacture of consent” is embodied today in Europe’s hypocritical policy. Unable to shake off the historical guilt psychology of the Holocaust, continental Europe is experiencing an intellectual and moral bankruptcy by turning a blind eye to Israel’s human rights violations. In contrast, East Asia, where the centres of power and trade are shifting, is completely altering the equation. China is seeking stability in the Middle East to ensure the security of its ‘Belt and Road’ (Modern Silk Road) project, making a major diplomatic move by reconciling Saudi Arabia and Iran. By adopting a pro-Palestinian stance in the UN Security Council, China and Russia are positioning themselves as leaders of the Global South in opposition to the US-led unipolar world.

​Ultimately, the “Triangle of Destiny” depicted by Noam Chomsky decades ago has now transcended its boundaries to become a micro-front in a global showdown. When Robert Fisk’s (2018) stark on-the-ground realities are placed side by side with the imperial strategies laid bare by Chomsky, it becomes clear that the crisis in the Middle East is not merely a regional land dispute, but the very epicentre of an existential war between the collapsing Western hegemony and the rising multipolar world. As long as the strategic interests of the great powers are prioritised over international law, the fate of this triangular region will continue to be shaped by this dynamic and carry the risk of triggering a global conflagration.

References:

1. ​Chomsky, N. (2018). The Triangle of Destiny: The US, Israel and the Palestinians (Trans. B. S. Şener). Istanbul: İletişim Yayınları.

2. ​Fisk, R. (2018). The Great Civilisation War: The Conquest of the Middle East (Trans. M. Uyurkulak). Istanbul: İthaki Yayınları.