Israelis fear unwinding of political stability

The recent wave of political protest that has swept Arab countries such as Tunisia and Egypt is also stirring concern in the one regional power that looks completely immune to popular unrest: Israel.

For Israeli leaders, the threat posed by rioting youngsters in Tunis and Cairo is less direct, but it is menacing all the same. Their fear is that popular unrest in the Arab world will ultimately endanger the single most important regional commodity from Israel’s point of view: political stability.

“This is a reason for concern, primarily because of the potential for an epidemic,” says Oded Eran, the director of Israel’s Institute for National Security ­Studies.

Regime change in Tunisia itself, he says, is of only marginal concern. But Mr Eran adds: “We cannot afford dramatic change in Egypt or Jordan.”

For Israel, the importance of relations with Amman and Cairo cannot be overstated.

The two countries share a direct border with Israel, and are the only Arab states to have signed peace deals with the Jewish state. Israel co-operates closely with the Jordanian and Egyptian security forces to bolster its control of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. And while many Israelis remain reluctant to travel across the border, the ability to visit the Sinai and Jordan’s Red Sea resorts helps alleviate a deeply felt sense of isolation.

For the time being, Israeli experts say it is far from clear that the toppling of Tunisia’s autocratic ruler, Zein al-Abidine Ben Ali, this month will not trigger a domino effect.

“A lot depends on the loyalty of the security forces, and in both Egypt and Jordan the regime’s grip on the security forces is much stronger,” says Mr Eran, a former Israeli ambassador to Amman.

Israeli officials admit that it appears peculiar for them not to welcome the chance of a democratic opening in the Arab world.

However, as one official with extensive knowledge of the region puts it: “When tsarist Russia went through a revolution, there was a democratic moment, and we all know how that ended.

“In Tehran in 1979, there was a democratic moment, and we all know how that ended.”

The official added: “A democratic opening is great – but will it last? And will it ultimately not unleash non-democratic and violent forces? That is our concern.”

Eyal Zisser, senior research fellow at Tel Aviv’s Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies, points to a another historical analogy. “This is not like eastern Europe in the late 1980s,” he says. “This is not a region where stable dictatorships can be replaced with stable democracies. Here the alternative means chaos, anarchy and ­radicalism.”

The worries underline the degree to which Israeli policymakers have become attached to the regional status quo. Israelis are under no illusion that they are treated with, at best, grudging acceptance by their ­neighbours.

However, they also know that the current crop of Arab leader is deeply reluctant to upset the regional balance of power. Most importantly, none of Israel’s neighbours has dared to challenge it on the battlefield since the 1973 Yom Kippur war.

But the lack of Israeli enthusiasm for democratic change in the Arab world also reflects a specific experience: the 2006 elections in the Palestinian territories, which ended in a triumph for the Islamist Hamas movement at the expense of the pro-western Fatah party.

Indeed, one of the worst nightmares for Israeli strategists is a replay of that outcome in Egypt.

“Try to imagine the results of an election in Egypt with the Muslim Brotherhood allowed to run freely. The consequences for Israel would be very negative,” says Mr Eran, adding that he doubts the Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty would survive such a scenario.

As the riots and unrest intensify, Israelis look to their neighbours guided by one principle above all. As Mr Zisser says: “Instability is bad news.”