Mubashir Nadeem
Israel’s preemptive and decapitation strikes against Hezbollah have so far been highly effective. The campaign began with cyber-attacks that disrupted communications among thousands of Hezbollah personnel by disabling their pagers and walkie-talkies. The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) then targeted and killed many of Hezbollah’s top leaders, including 64-year-old Hassan Nasrallah, who had led the organization since 1992 and was responsible for numerous deaths, including Americans from the 1983 Marine Barracks bombing in Beirut.
Airstrikes also destroyed a significant number of Hezbollah’s rockets and weapons. It remains uncertain whether ground attacks will follow. However, Israel must remember its previous incursions into Lebanon in 1982 and 2006, which did not end well for the IDF.
The key question now is whether Israel can transform this tactical success into a broader strategic and geopolitical victory. History shows that initial battlefield dominance does not always lead to long-term success. For example, despite winning many battles in Vietnam, America ultimately lost the war.
Similarly, the initial assaults in Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003 quickly routed the enemy, but years later, the Taliban still control Afghanistan, and the US is preparing to withdraw all its forces from Iraq. Israel now faces the “what next?” question regarding Lebanon and Hezbollah, as well as Hamas and Gaza.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s popularity has surged due to Israel’s actions against Hezbollah.
Israel has been losing the public relations battle over Hamas and Gaza primarily because not all Palestinians are Hamas, and vice versa. Many Palestinians have become casualties and victims of war, which has rallied humanitarian support against Israel. Hezbollah, unlike Hamas, does not operate within Israeli territory.
Hezbollah, known for its formidable military capabilities as a non-governmental organization, is widely opposed by the majority of the civilized world due to its terrorist activities. Israel, unencumbered by humanitarian concerns, has utilized 2000-pound Mk-84 US-manufactured bombs to target Hezbollah’s underground bunkers with minimal collateral damage. However, similar precision strikes on Hamas’s underground tunnels have created an impression of extensive collateral damage.
Israel’s Strategic Options
Grand Strategy: Israel might be aiming for a decisive victory by crippling Hezbollah’s leadership and military capacity, potentially forcing Hezbollah to negotiate and withdraw north of the Litani River. This would prevent Hezbollah from targeting Israeli settlements with short-range missiles, thereby neutralizing the northern threat and allowing Israel to consolidate its position.
Gaza and Hamas: Resolving the situation in Gaza could involve deploying an Arab or international peacekeeping force to control Gaza and limit Hamas’s influence. Creative solutions are essential to end the violence, especially now that Hezbollah has been weakened. New opportunities for peace might emerge.
Challenges
However, this strategy might be overly ambitious. Other nations may be reluctant to engage in peacekeeping or bear the costs of rebuilding Gaza. Hezbollah might not be as weakened as it appears, and Hamas may still pose a significant threat, capable of resurgence and rejuvenation.
Domestically in Israel, right-wing extremists may demand further military action to disarm Hezbollah and Hamas, which would escalate the role of the IDF, turning this into an endless war. The argument would be to complete the job. Yet, destroying both terrorist organizations would require the destruction of much of Gaza and southern Lebanon.
Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu’s popularity has dramatically risen over Israel’s actions towards Hezbollah.
Netanyahu will use that popularity to cement his prime ministership after the criticism he took over Hamas. How that will affect a grand strategy is still being determined. One would have thought that a significant settlement that embraces all these parties would benefit Netanyahu’s advantage.
Whether the influence of the US, UN and other actors will have any impact remains to be seen. But the US should consider how a grand bargain might be put in place to achieve peace or reduce violence and retrieve those prisoners Hamas may still be holding. The opportunities are real.
Will Israel capitalize on this tactical win and turn it into a strategic advantage? To achieve this, it needs to address the question of “what comes next.”
