Strategic Crossroads

Escalation is allowing the United States to gradually realize that Iran’s imperialist threat requires it to eliminate Tehran’s nuclear program and overthrow its murderous regime.

If this were not a matter of life and death, we could laugh at former members of the security establishment who are quickly moving from defeatism to militancy (albeit limited in scope).

Blind to Israel’s vital interests that require psycho-political understanding, these security experts recently shouted on television that the war in Gaza must stop and that Israel must leave Hamas standing. They have demanded an imaginary and senseless deal that would have buried dozens of hostages alive in Gaza to stop the fighting in Lebanon through an equally imaginary resolution before escalating a war against Iran. They ignore the fact that this war has already broken out. Their proposals were a dangerous capitulation to Iran and its two murderous branches on Israel’s borders along with dangerous demoralization.

The current escalation with Iran benefits Israel’s vital security interests. Escalation makes it impossible to break Iran’s proxy strategy and forces Iran to pay the price of confrontation with us, just as in Egypt, until it was compelled to sign a peace agreement.

Former senior military officers are unable to draw broad conclusions from their mistakes because the Iran-Israel war that broke out last year is inconsistent with the consensus about that conflict. It is an unusual historical event requiring an analysis beyond what those within such circles have known and accepted until now, an analysis that is not impeded by consensus.

The Iran-Israel war requires us to look past the twisted logic that guided Israel’s military and political leadership in its rounds with Iran’s strangling branches for almost two decades between the failed war in Lebanon in 2006 and Operation Defensive Shield in 2021. This is the same twisted logic, the same “strategic restraint,” that was thrust upon us before in the panic about terrorism from Oslo and beyond.

When one asks about the strategic horizon with regard to what is happening in Lebanon, do we mean Ehud Barak’s escape strategy? Or do we mean the “strategy” of resolution by Ehud Olmert and Tzipi Livni? Or is this Yair Lapid’s oil agreement?

“Strategic horizon” is nothing more than a flowery phrase to cover up abandoning Lebanon to Iran by means of Syria and the Shiite community in Lebanon. The strategic principle that should guide us is zero tolerance for the creation of terrorist armies on our borders or within our country, in the Gaza Strip, or the mountains of Judea and Samaria, or in Lebanon.

In Lebanon, the principle of zero tolerance requires occupying all of southern Lebanon beyond the Litani River, and clearing military terrorist infrastructure, this after the evacuation of the population, currently underway. The return of the population will be permitted only after we completely bomb Hezbollah’s army and its commanders throughout Lebanon, and only on the basis of an international agreement to disarm these forces. Israel will not move from southern Lebanon, which has been emptied of its inhabitants (temporarily), and will entrench itself on the Awali river until Hezbollah is in fact disarmed.

Exchanging blows with Iran springs from applying the principle of zero tolerance. The war in Israel and its projection of power and threat via the nuclear initiative are the foundations of the Iranian regime. Without Hezbollah and its ilk, the regime’s antisemitic rhetoric is meaningless.

Hezbollah’s missile corps also serves the Iranian regime in defending the nuclear initiative. The elimination of Hezbollah is, therefore, not only a strategic blow, but it also destabilizes the regime. Therefore, one should expect attacks from Iran as long as we are pounding Hezbollah. However, we can smash Hamas and Hezbollah in the near term, but crucially dealing with Iran is a long-term process and much more difficult. This requires complex political-military maneuvering with the United States, which is still clinging to a failed reconciliation with Iran, similar to Israel’s failure to “contain” Hamas and Hezbollah.

Therefore, despite the dangers, the current escalation with Iran benefits Israel’s vital strategic interests. Escalation allows us to break Iran’s proxy strategy and forces it to pay the price of confrontation with us, as happened to Egypt. Escalation allows the United States to gradually recognize that Iran’s imperialist threat requires us to eliminate its nuclear program and to overthrow its murderous regime. The moves to achieve this objective are an important part of Benjamin Netanyahu’s current calculations in responding to Iran, as he is expected to do.