In Dante’s Inferno, gamblers are placed in the seventh circle, among those who do violence to themselves and others. This categorization seems all too just today, when bodies are piling up in Iran and Israel following Benjamin Netanyahu’s dice-roll decision to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities. While an Iranian nuclear bomb would endanger Israel’s existence, it is unclear whether Iran was set on acquiring one in the near future; nor is it implausible that Israel’s aggression will expedite the outcome it means to avoid.
Clearly, Netanyahu initiated strikes on Friday in part to wreck any potential of a nuclear deal between Iran and the United States. For weeks, there has been a public rift between Netanyahu and President Trump regarding the question of how to exploit Iran’s weakened position. The Israeli government feared that Trump’s desire for an interim agreement would allow Iran to maintain its uranium enrichment facilities. In April, Trump reportedly waved off an Israeli plan to strike Iran’s nuclear program, even as more hawkish members of his administration counseled in favor. Last month, U.S. sources leaked intelligence that Israel was preparing a strike against Iran, likely intending to dissuade the Israeli government from this course. Yet Netanyahu’s skepticism about Iran’s goodwill, his trust in U.S. political support, and his gambler’s instinct for a high-stakes, high-reward haul impelled him down the present trajectory.
There is a clear risk of escalation to the point where either leadership may see total defeat as needed to forestall a retribution their own actions have made inevitable. Already, the Israeli leadership appears to be sliding into this mindset, having proposed to assassinate Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, until Trump vetoed the plan, according to CBS sources.
Netanyahu’s move has put the Trump administration in a conundrum. On the one hand, the U.S. will not abandon Israel when attacked by Iran, and Iran will continue to retaliate against Netanyahu’s campaign. On the other hand, Trump, who at his inauguration promised to be a “peacemaker and unifier,” still desires a diplomatic solution. On Saturday, he framed the hostilities as a “second chance” for Iran to come to the table. Given that it was Israel who torpedoed the talks by attacking Iran, the suggestion seems more than a little tone-deaf, but it speaks to the difficulty of the U.S. leadership wishing to simultaneously support Israel and de-escalate the conflict.
One might think that Russia would be in a similar position, given its strategic partnership with Iran. However, Moscow has been careful to position itself as a credible mediator, condemning the Israeli strikes but offering Iran little more than rhetorical support. Over two decades, Russia has built strong political and economic ties with Israel, including by preserving Israeli governments during operations in Syria. Netanyahu and Vladimir Putin are said to have a warm personal relationship. It is unsurprising that Putin would seek to mediate this conflict, as he reportedly offered to Trump on Saturday. The more surprising fact is that he is in an excellent position to achieve real progress.
Naturally, European leaders will oppose any scenario where Russia gains more influence on the world stage. On Sunday, after Trump floated the idea of Russia’s mediation, French President Emmanuel Macron rejected it outright. Yet, in this case, Europe may have little to say. Macron’s recent push for the recognition of Palestine will not have endeared him with the Israeli leadership. The overwhelming U.S. strategic interests in the Middle East, and Trump’s personal desire to be peacemaker in the region, may well make him resort to Russia’s aid.
Whatever the outcome, the Kremlin is already profiting from the chaos. Oil prices have jumped after Israel’s strikes, fueling the Russian war machine as it pushes into central Ukraine. Moreover, Netanyahu’s actions have given additional legitimacy to what we might call the gambling style of politics, of which Putin is an exemplary practitioner. If Hell is where gamblers reside, the world stage progressively resembles an infernal tableau.
