Warning: As human beings, we deeply regret the events unfolding in Gaza and Israel, as well as the situation in Lebanon since September 2024. We are witnessing war, destruction, and tragic loss of life. However, our personal opinions hold little value for those who are suffering, or indeed for anyone. What may be more helpful is a cold, neutral analysis that explains how and why these events are occurring, and how they may continue to unfold.
We will not take a stance for or against either side, nor will we address calls for peace or negotiations. We will refrain from discussing or analysing past, present or future crimes. If you seek commentary on these matters, we apologize; what follows is not for you.
September 2024
September 2024 marks a pivotal turning point: what began as a conflict in Gaza on October 8, 2023, is now escalating into a broader war involving both Gaza and Lebanon. Increasingly, the focus of the fighting will shift from Hamas in Gaza to Hezbollah in Lebanon. Hamas is on the verge of being completely dismantled as a military force capable of waging war; while it may retain some ability for guerrilla tactics in the future, it will not be a significant military threat. By September 2024, due to his missteps, many began to view Netanyahu as Israel's greatest enemy—if he didn't exist, his adversaries would have to invent him. However, from this point onward, he appears to have reinvented himself, likely aided by outside influence or persuasion. He now recognizes that Iran is the true enemy of Israel. To achieve victory against Iran, it is essential to dismantle its allies: Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and other Shiite militias in the region. If Netanyahu continues the war until Hezbollah is defeated, he could emerge as one of the most significant politicians in Israeli history. This outcome seems plausible if he succeeds in undermining Iran by instigating the overthrow of its theocratic regime. We will explore these topics further below.
Israel's Worst Mistakes Before September 2024
First of all, Israel allowed Benjamin Netanyahu to remain in power for an extended period. In many of the world’s most successful democracies, leaders serve fixed terms—eight years in the United States and ten years in France. Countries that permit indefinite terms, like the UK and Germany, are currently facing challenges. Historically, this was also true for Napoleon Bonaparte; after 11 or 12 years in power, his decisions began to falter, ultimately costing him most of his previous gains. From the outset, Netanyahu demonstrated a lack of competent leadership, and this decline only worsened over the years. Despite his series of missteps, he showed no intention of stepping down, nor did Israeli society appear willing to remove him from the position of Prime Minister.
Second of all, was the refusal to join the Allies for Ukraine coalition. Israel’s refusal was perceived as a betrayal by the U.S. and E.U. countries, which had historically supported Israel against its adversaries. While there were no immediate political repercussions, relations deteriorated in unofficial channels, particularly within the "grey/black" realms of Western intelligence services. These services ceased collaboration with Israel, resulting in critical intelligence regarding Palestinian movements going unreported. The failure to anticipate the events of October 7, 2023, suggests a significant lack of awareness about this region. If intelligence was gathered, it seems it was not effectively communicated; information likely became compartmentalized and failed to reach those who needed it.
Lastly, favouring Hamas to weaken the Palestinian Authority was a significant mistake. It is important to understand that Palestinians reside in two distinct territories: the Gaza Strip, ruled by Hamas, and the West Bank, governed by the Palestinian Authority (formerly the PLO, led by Yasser Arafat, a historical figure and close ally of Romania’s Nicolae Ceaușescu). Under Netanyahu’s leadership, Israel chose to support Hamas in an effort to undermine the Palestinian Authority, which it viewed as its primary adversary, while considering Hamas to be the "right" Palestinian partner. In this context, Israel allowed cash and various materials to flow into Gaza (to Hamas) and even provided security for these shipments. This was a misguided choice, given Hamas's strong ties to Iran, which also regards Israel as its mortal enemy. Moreover, in the period leading up to October 7, 2023, Israeli intelligence and military efforts were largely focused on the West Bank, neglecting Gaza and allowing Hamas to operate with relative autonomy. This neglect culminated in the events of October 7, 2023.
The Massacre - Why?
Let’s be clear: October 7, 2023, should have been remembered as a significant military victory for Hamas. Its fighters evaded surveillance and breached the so-called "impenetrable wall" separating Gaza from Israel. They briefly captured a military base, destroyed substantial war material, including heavy tanks, and inflicted casualties on Israeli soldiers. However, history will remember the massacre and the abuse of civilians, along with the horrific scenes that unfolded. What should have been a celebration for Hamas quickly turned into a nightmare. But for whose benefit did Hamas act in this manner? Primarily for Putin's advantage; he sought a conflict to divert attention from the war he is waging against Ukraine. Putin hoped that Israel, horrified by the carnage and atrocities committed by Hamas, would be provoked into a ruthless response. What Israel ultimately did exceeded even Putin's wildest expectations. As a result, financial and military aid to Ukraine has diminished, while support for Israel has surged.
And how?
But how did Putin manage to convince Hamas to commit such atrocities? In reality, he didn't need to convince them, but rather to insinuate himself into their battle plan by 'hijacking' some of the troops involved (directly or, more likely, through Iran). Once the Hamas troops broke through the Israeli defenses, those who had been 'hijacked' no longer followed the plan of the Hamas leaders, but those of their 'sponsor', Putin. Here are our arguments: 1. Hamas has never acted in such a way before; 2. Hamas needed hostages, not the dead. A large number of hostages would have forced Israel to negotiate with them; the high death toll prompted Israel to pursue the organization's destruction. 3. A few months later, Hamas admitted that part of its attack plan had not been followed. Of course, this does not absolve them of responsibility; however, we must understand that there is another culprit, the one who instigated and ordered the massacre.
The Destruction of Gaza
In 2005, Israel withdrew from Gaza, transferring power to Fatah (formerly the PLO), which also controls the Palestinian Authority. In 2007, Hamas seized power by force and maintained control until recently, when Gaza came back under Israeli occupation. During Hamas's rule, there were no political parties, elections, or democratic processes. Hamas dictated all aspects of political, economic, and social life, ensuring that nothing moved without their knowledge and consent. NGO's, charities, mutual aid associations, and international organizations operated in Gaza, all under the control and supervision of Hamas in various forms. Consequently, to eliminate Hamas, Israel saw no alternative but to target Gaza itself. However, international law and Western values called for a "surgical" approach—primarily focusing on Hamas while considering any collateral damage secondary. Instead, Netanyahu's Israel adopted a "Russian" model, resulting in the widespread destruction of nearly everything in Gaza. This catastrophic choice from a humanitarian perspective could lead to trials before the International Court of Justice, where Israel may be accused of committing 'genocide'.
The International Court of Justice and Israel's 'Genocide'
In late 2023, South Africa filed a complaint against Israel, asking the Court to: 1. Compel Israel to stop the war in Gaza; and 2. Declare Israel guilty of genocide in Gaza. On January 26, 2024, a panel of 17 judges issued a preliminary ruling. The Court acknowledged that Israel was brutally attacked on October 7, 2023, and affirmed its right to seek the destruction of Hamas. Thus, the request to force Israel to end the war was denied. However, the Court mandated that Israel limit its military actions to Hamas alone. It noted that, at the time of the ruling, Israel was conducting military operations against both the organization and the civilian population. Consequently, the Court warned that Israel’s actions against civilians could be classified as genocide. It urged Israel to implement specific measures to protect civilians, including ensuring access to water, food, and medical care, to avoid a guilty verdict at the conclusion of the trial. Despite these directives, Netanyahu, the Israeli leader, disregarded the Court's orders and continued his military campaign in Gaza as before. It is likely that this trial will conclude with a judgment condemning Israel; however, it may be many years before that happens. It is also possible that, in the meantime, the world will undergo such significant changes that the verdict will lose its real impact. The war that Israel initiated against Hezbollah in September 2024 is pushing the world in that direction.
The Attack on Hezbollah
Why did Israel decide to attack Hezbollah in September 2024? This decision was influenced by a combination of internal and external factors.
Domestic Factors: 1. A Hezbollah attack on July 27 resulted in the deaths of 12 children, violating an unwritten agreement between the two sides that allowed for limited, non-lethal exchanges. 2. Netanyahu perceived that the war was nearing its conclusion with Hamas's destruction. An end to the conflict could also mean he would have to confront his own mistakes.
Foreign Factors: Iran had breached an unofficial "red line" by supplying missiles to Russia for use against Ukraine. Ukraine's allies, particularly the Biden-Harris administration, were hesitant to take direct action that could escalate into open conflict with Iran. Instead, they approved and even encouraged Israel to strike a significant blow against Iran's interests by targeting Hezbollah, its most important and powerful ally in the Middle East. The destruction of Hezbollah would deal a major—and potentially fatal—blow to Iran's ambitions of becoming a significant player on the regional political stage. Netanyahu thus seized the opportunity to continue his military campaign, now focusing on Hezbollah. It is likely that he was also 'encouraged' to recognize that eliminating Hezbollah would yield enormous benefits for Israel and align with its interests. As a result, the conflict in Gaza has evolved into a war encompassing both Gaza and Lebanon, one in which Israel is receiving support, whether official or unofficial, from those who are able to assist.
"You Can" or "You Can't"
Let’s be clear: words and documents are meaningless if they are not accompanied by real consequences on the ground—on the battlefield. We hear and will continue to hear countless "WORDS": statements, resolutions, calls for negotiations, ceasefires, and peace initiatives. There are meetings of various international bodies, led by the UN Security Council, along with campaigns supporting one side or the other, actions to save or assist civilians undertaken by political leaders and celebrities of all backgrounds, and calls to halt arms supplies to Israel and/or Hezbollah, among many other similar efforts. All of this will have as much impact on the ground as performing CPR on someone who has been dead for two days. Therefore, there are those who "can": countries with both the will and the means to directly influence developments on the ground. They can do this by providing weapons, ammunition, and essential intelligence, sending troops, and imposing sanctions while ensuring their enforcement (even if not perfectly effective). These include the West (the USA, the UK, the European Union, and its member states) as well as the neighboring Muslim countries. In contrast with many experts and analysts, we believe that all other nations "can't": they lack both the will and the means to help, particularly Iran.
Why?
First, Russia itself needs help from Iran with bombs, missiles and drones to wage war against Ukraine. China? It is sinking deeper and deeper into an economic crisis with no way out. Nor will he have the courage to really help Iran at the risk of upsetting the Persian Gulf countries that supply it with gas and oil. The same for the other countries in the Global South (Brazil, India, African countries). All these countries will support Iran very strongly with 'WORDS'. And that's it. Nothing that has the slightest impact on the field, on the battlefields.
The Surrounding Muslim Countries
All of these countries stand to gain from the wars waged by Israel.
Egypt: The Sinai Peninsula borders Gaza and has previously experienced terrorist movements supported by Hamas. This situation justified Egypt’s blockade of Gaza, which has remained in place even as Israel has targeted Hamas. The destruction of Hamas therefore alleviates a significant security concern for Egypt, greatly reducing the risks in the Sinai.
Turkey: Turkey has interests in Syria and supported various insurgent forces during the civil conflict that began in 2011. However, Bashar al-Assad's regime was bolstered by the intervention of Russia and Hezbollah from 2013 to 2017. With Russia preoccupied by its war in Ukraine and unable to provide effective support, the elimination of Hezbollah by Israel would create an opportunity for Turkey’s Erdogan to intervene freely in Syria. A suitable pretext for such intervention would likely be found when the time arises.
Saudi Arabia: The kingdom has previously faced conflicts with the Houthis in Yemen. It is likely that Saudi Arabia is already negotiating with Israel to make the Houthis the target of the next war, once Hezbollah is eliminated. Given that the Houthis continually launch attacks against Israel, the pretext for intervention against them has already been established.
Jordan: Jordan is home to a large Palestinian diaspora, which, in principle, is well integrated and does not cause significant issues. However, these individuals are viewed as a security threat as long as external forces, such as Iran and its allies, have the potential to incite violence against the state.
The Gulf States: Any instability in Iran—whether from a direct Israeli attack or the destruction of its allies (Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis)—would weaken the theocratic regime. Should this lead to its downfall, it would be even more favorable for the Gulf states. The more Iran is in crisis, the more likely these countries are to reclaim their share of the oil market. For now, the Muslim countries remain silent and inactive. It is possible that over time, they may initiate a campaign supported by "words," especially as the Israeli army advances deeper into Lebanon. However, they are unlikely to take any effective action to hinder or prevent Israel's war against Hezbollah.
The West
Officially or unofficially, the West, led by the U.S., will continue to do what it has always done: support Israel. While there will be countless statements and expressions of concern, nothing will effectively stop Israel in its campaign to destroy Hezbollah. This will mirror the situation in Gaza, where Israel has been targeting Hamas; this time, however, it will be Lebanon that bears the consequences. The intensity of support for Israel may vary, but the underlying commitment remains the same.
Difference
To be clear, there is a significant distinction between the U.S. on one hand and the E.U. and Great Britain on the other. The Americans fully support Israel with bombs, missiles, and critical intelligence to identify and strike high-value targets. This aid will continue regardless of the outcome of this year's presidential election. If Trump wins, it’s likely that nothing will change. However, he may have the ability to impose alternative solutions or options on Netanyahu and Israel, but that would require someone to convince him to do so—a highly unlikely scenario. On the other hand, if Kamala Harris were to win, Netanyahu would likely celebrate with a bottle of the finest French champagne. Despite his political experience, Biden has struggled to influence him. Harris, being a novice in foreign policy, would likely defer to Netanyahu’s requests, even thanking him for asking for assistance. Meanwhile, the E.U. and the United Kingdom are too preoccupied with supporting Ukraine to offer Israel more than the "minimum necessary" aid. However, they will continue to support Israel for numerous historical and political reasons, along with a more recent consideration: Hezbollah is Iran's primary ally in the Middle East. Israel's destruction of Hezbollah would serve as a punishment for Iran's provision of weapons to Russia for its war in Ukraine.
The Unknowns of the War Against Hezbollah
Let’s be clear: Netanyahu and Israel will continue this war until Hezbollah is dismantled as a fighting force. In addition to the factors already mentioned, several specific elements could influence the duration and evolution of this conflict:
The Lebanese Army: What will the Lebanese Army do when Israeli troops advance deep into Lebanese territory to confront Hezbollah? We do not have reliable information about its strength, composition, or loyalty, as public information is often untrustworthy due to Hezbollah's significant infiltration of public institutions in Lebanon.
Other Communities in Lebanon: Beyond the Shiite community from which Hezbollah originates, there are other groups in Lebanon, including Christians and Druze. Between 1975 and 1990, Lebanon experienced a civil war in which each community formed militias that fought against one another. The pressing questions now are: will these militias be reactivated or newly created? If so, how will they position themselves in relation to the two warring parties?
Hezbollah's Leadership: The leadership of Hezbollah has been largely targeted and diminished. Israel continues to hunt down and eliminate remaining leaders and their potential successors. What impact will this have on Hezbollah's combat units? Will the weakening of their leadership enable Israel to achieve a quicker victory in this conflict?
It is clear that Israel, under Netanyahu's leadership and supported openly or covertly by its capable allies, possesses overwhelming technical, material, and financial superiority. The key to prolonging or shortening this war lies with the factors mentioned above.
Comments