While the attention of the West is seized by the epidemic, the political and military conflicts that consume so much of the Arab world aren’t slowing down. Moreover, argue Micky Aharonson and Aiman Mansour, the European response to the outbreak of COVID-19 has made the EU look incompetent, strengthening both Russian and Chinese efforts to expand their influence in the region:

China, which was the first and hardest-hit to date by the novel coronavirus, appears to have the leverage and vision which, by the end of the pandemic, may give it a more powerful role in the region than it has ever had before. Whereas the EU seems to have been a less reliable source of support for its member states, . . . China has delivered considerable humanitarian aid to Iran and Iraq, all 54 African countries, Italy, and Spain, and it continues to offer aid to additional countries. Therefore, China now constitutes a major center of gravity for medical and humanitarian aid, while Europe and the U.S. are retreating inwards.

This policy is a continuation of the one that China has been pursuing for years—preserving its relationship with Iran while at the same time taking steps to entrench its footprint in Iraq and expand its operations dealing with critical civilian infrastructure in the country.

The rumor spread by Chinese and Iranian officials (and unofficial Russian sources) that the coronavirus is an American biological weapon could lead to greater willingness on the part of publics in the Middle East to take violent action against the U.S. presence in the region. Growing public outrage on the Middle Eastern street about the way the virus has been dealt with, along with increasing economic challenges, is liable to threaten pro-Western regimes such as Saudi Arabia.

Nor has Iranian expansionism been stymied by the severe humanitarian crisis COVID-19 has caused there:

In Iraq . . . the coronavirus has not stopped the conflict within the state and the increasingly violent demonstrations against the U.S. from continuing to spread. [In fact], the protests in the Shiite street against U.S. military activity in the country have increased. The violent incidents this month, in which two American soldiers and a British soldier were killed, can be defined as the first attack by a new resistance group to the U.S. presence in Iraq, . . . most likely backed by Iran.

For some time, opponents of U.S support for Israel have been urging the White House to end the war in Gaza, or simply calling for a ceasefire. Douglas Feith and Lewis Libby consider what such a result would actually entail:

Ending the war immediately would allow Hamas to survive and retain military and governing power. Leaving it in the area containing the Sinai-Gaza smuggling routes would ensure that Hamas can rearm. This is why Hamas leaders now plead for a ceasefire. A ceasefire will provide some relief for Gazans today, but a prolonged ceasefire will preserve Hamas’s bloody oppression of Gaza and make future wars with Israel inevitable.

For most Gazans, even when there is no hot war, Hamas’s dictatorship is a nightmarish tyranny. Hamas rule features the torture and murder of regime opponents, official corruption, extremist indoctrination of children, and misery for the population in general. Hamas diverts foreign aid and other resources from proper uses; instead of improving life for the mass of the people, it uses the funds to fight against Palestinians and Israelis.

Moreover, a Hamas-affiliated website warned Gazans last month against cooperating with Israel in securing and delivering the truckloads of aid flowing into the Strip. It promised to deal with those who do with “an iron fist.” In other words, if Hamas remains in power, it will begin torturing, imprisoning, or murdering those it deems collaborators the moment the war ends. Thereafter, Hamas will begin planning its next attack on Israel:

Hamas’s goals are to overshadow the Palestinian Authority, win control of the West Bank, and establish Hamas leadership over the Palestinian revolution. Hamas’s ultimate aim is to spark a regional war to obliterate Israel and, as Hamas leaders steadfastly maintain, fulfill a Quranic vision of killing all Jews.

Hamas planned for corpses of Palestinian babies and mothers to serve as the mainspring of its October 7 war plan. Hamas calculated it could survive a war against a superior Israeli force and energize enemies of Israel around the world. The key to both aims was arranging for grievous Palestinian civilian losses. . . . That element of Hamas’s war plan is working impressively.