War knows no borders

The rising tension in Iraq following Hashd al-Shaabi attacks, the subsequent US-Saudi operations, and Iran's targeting of US bases in Jordan indicate that the conflict has entered a new phase on a regional scale. One of the key turning points in this escalation has been the attacks by Iran-aligned Hashd al-Shaabi elements against Saudi Arabia and the military response to them.

Following the attack by the pro-Iranian Hashd al-Shaabi in Iraq on specific targets in Saudi Arabia, Saudi Arabia announced that it was exercising its right to self-defense under Article 51 of the United Nations (UN) Charter. US President Donald Trump also stated that the operation was carried out in coordination with the Iraqi government. However, some circles in Iraq have interpreted this as the US using resistance forces as a pretext to pressure and blackmail the Iraqi government. 

These developments show that mutual attacks do not only have military consequences but also expand the geographical boundaries of the war. Iran's attack on Jordan has been one of the most striking examples of this expansion.

A New Dimension in Proxy War

Hashd al-Shaabi, or officially the Popular Mobilization Forces, was established in 2014 as a structure consisting mostly of Shiite volunteers after ISIS gained power in Iraq. The structure, which includes approximately 40 groups, was officially incorporated into the Iraqi security forces in 2016. It has been one of the important tools for Iran to expand its sphere of influence in Iraq.

The attack by Hashd al-Shaabi on Saudi Arabia should also be evaluated within this framework. It can be said that Iran is trying to exert pressure through proxy forces without entering into a direct conflict. In this direction, the strategy it has followed recently is based on increasing the military and economic costs of the US and its allies by spreading the war to different countries. 

Therefore, the issue is not just about which side used how many missiles or how many casualties were suffered. What is really important is how the war changes the balance of power. The struggle between the US and Iran is now turning into a multi-layered security crisis that directly affects the countries of the region.

One of the countries affected by this process is Jordan. Jordan, which has close relations with the US and holds an important position in the Palestinian issue, has begun to become one of the parties to the war, like some Gulf countries.

The tension between Iran and Jordan has a historical background. Its roots go back to the Iran-Iraq War. At that time, Jordan sided with Iraq and supported it, and the port of Aqaba became a vital outlet for Iraq's exports and imports. In addition, the fact that a large number of volunteers from Jordan went to the front to fight on the side of Iraq left a negative impression in Iran.

The overthrow of the Saddam Hussein regime in 2003 was a new turning point in Iran-Jordan relations. This development also significantly changed the regional balance of power. Iraq's balancing strategic position between the two countries disappeared. Thus, the gaining of power by political and military structures close to Iran in Iraq was perceived as a serious threat by Jordan.

Indeed, the concept of the "Shiite Crescent" was first voiced by King Abdullah of Jordan in 2004. King Abdullah drew attention to the large-scale change by stating that the sphere of influence starting from Iran and extending to Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon was surrounding Sunni Arab countries.

Jordan, which has largely relied on alliances with foreign powers for its security since its establishment, followed a security policy close to Britain until 1949 and to the US from the 1950s onwards. The weakening of state authority in Iraq and Syria and the increase in Iranian influence have further strengthened the Jordan-US cooperation.

With this attack, Jordanian territory has become one of the direct fronts of the conflict. The developments have brought the long-debated US military presence back to the agenda and increased discussions in Jordan about transparency regarding the scope of these facilities.

All these developments show not only the competition between Iran and the US but also that the security architecture in the Middle East is being reshaped. Arab states have long viewed Iran as a threat to themselves. In contrast, Israel evaluates not only Iran but also other Arab countries and different power centers in the region as security threats from time to time. This approach shows that Israel's regional security understanding is not limited to current threats but also includes actors that could affect the balance of power in the future. In this context, just as Egypt was targeted during the Nasser era in the past, the possibility that Turkey may face similar pressures for different reasons in the future should not be ignored. Therefore, a large-scale conflict that Arab states will enter with their neighbors, and which will also involve the US and Israel, poses a risk that could have dire consequences for both themselves and the region.