On 27 September, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu stood at the United Nations and recounted a prophecy thousands of years old. “Moses,” he said, “told us [the people of Israel] our actions would determine whether we bequeath to future generations a blessing or a curse.” The ancient words ring eerily true today. Having destroyed the military and intelligence apparatus of Hamas and Hezbollah and scattered their leadership, and on the verge of yet another strike against Iran, Netanyahu has arrived at a moment he has long dreamed of: a chance, in his mind, to change the power balance in the Middle East. But will he instead push the region further into the abyss?
After a year of tit-for-tat attacks which started with Hezbollah launching rockets into Israel on October 8, 2023, and with over 60,000 Israeli residents displaced from their homes in the north, Netanyahu has turned his attention to Lebanon. Through the assassination of Hassan Nasrallah and Hezbollah’s other senior leaders combined with an ongoing ground assault, Israel has left the group at a seemingly irrecoverable tactical disadvantage. The cost to Lebanon, however, has been tragically steep, with over a quarter of the population now displaced and over 2000 Lebanese killed. The UN resident coordinator and humanitarian coordinator for Lebanon, Imran Riza, has said that health facilities, mosques, historical markets, residential complexes and now government buildings “are being reduced to rubble”, and underscored that civilians and civilian infrastructure should not be a target. However, rather than turn the Lebanese against Hezbollah as Netanyahu wished, the punishing bombardment of Lebanese cities appears to have strengthened their unity in opposition to Israeli aggression.
In Gaza, the situation in the north continues to rapidly deteriorate. Its residents are once again at risk of famine after a surge in violence as Israel pursues Hamas’s fighters. Amid a widespread outcry over a 19-year old Palestinian man, Shaban al-Dalu, being burned alive in a hospital courtyard in Deir-al-Balah after an Israeli strike set a tent on fire, the Biden administration issued a letter to Netanyahu and Israel’s defence minister, Yoav Gallant, with a long list of requests to improve the humanitarian situation in Gaza, admit more international aid and mitigate civilian harm. According to the letter, which reads as an indictment of Israel’s year-long assault on the Gaza Strip, Israel has 30 days to comply with the requests or risk jeopardising US assistance. But that deadline notably falls well past the US election on November 5, raising questions over whether it is an attempt to sway Arab, Muslim and anti-war voters rather than put real pressure on Netanyahu.
Today, Israel is poised once again to respond to the latest Iranian attack against it. The last several weeks have seen intense deliberations within the Israeli political and military establishments on what type and level of response would be necessary to not only address the current threat from Iran but to ensure that the Islamic Republic is deterred from future attacks on Israel. Former Israeli prime minister Naftali Bennet has called this moment “a one-time window of opportunity”, publicly calling for an Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities and arguing that as a result of Hamas and Hezbollah’s weakness Israel can act against Iran without fearing a “terrible and intolerable” reaction.
There are prominent voices outside Israel which have echoed Bennet’s assessment. In the United States, the hawkish Republican senator Lindsey Graham has said that Iran’s latest missile attack on Israel deserves an “overwhelming response”, calling on the Biden administration to coordinate with Israel an attack on Iran’s oil refineries. Yet the Biden administration remains cautious, fearing an all-out regional war that could send oil prices skyrocketing mere weeks before a historically consequential US election. For its part, the Biden team has been urging Netanyahu to avoid nuclear targets and oil refineries. And Netanyahu appears to have listened, telling Biden that Israel will not strike either of those targets but rather contain its response to military targets inside Iran.
An attack on military targets could be accepted by Iran as an acceptable and limited counterstrike, offering relief to people across a region that has been on edge for over a year now. And, in an apparent attempt to avoid an escalation, Gallant stated that although Israel’s response would be “precise, painful and surprising”, he also said Israel was “not interested in opening additional fronts or conflicts.” The recent US announcement that it was deploying its anti-ballistic THAAD battery system to Israel along with 100 US military personnel, which US defence secretary Lloyd Austin said underscores the US commitment to the defence of Israel, has no doubt significantly contributed to the softening of Netanyahu and Gallant’s positions vis-à-vis Iran.
While Israel can change course at the eleventh hour and decide to go after more sensitive Iranian targets, it appears for now, the all-out war many have feared may be averted. This does not mean, however, that Israel is closer to achieving its objectives of long-term security, nor is it yet safe for residents of the north to return to their homes. Attempting to destroy Hezbollah and Hamas militarily and, by extension weaken or deter Iran, has come at far too high a price for civilians in the region, and animosity towards Israel is at an all-time high.
Having weakened its adversaries militarily and beheaded the leadership structures of Hamas and Hezbollah, Netanyahu must now swiftly pivot towards a diplomatic off-ramp that sees all parties lay down their arms and move towards a ceasefire. Should he continue to favour destructive force over diplomacy, Netanyahu will be remembered as the man who, in the words of Moses, bequeathed future generations a curse.
[See also: Sinwar’s death won’t save Gaza]
Content from our partners
Related
