When peace is viewed as ‘surrender’, there is little one can accomplish. Without an effective carrot-and-stick strategy for all players — especially Israel, Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah — the international community's interventions would be ineffective

Violence in the Middle East is rapidly increasing with each passing day, with the killing of Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah in an Israeli strike on September 27 sparking fears of a wider war. The escalation manifests through five different but closely connected fronts that Israel is currently fighting: The Gaza Strip, pockets of the West Bank, Hezbollah in the north, Houthi forces in Yemen along the Red Sea and the Islamic Republic. Using technological advancements, Israel has reached the heart of its adversaries. From the assassination of Ismail Haniyeh in a highly secured compound in Tehran in July, not far from the official residence of the Iranian President, to remotely detonating pagers used by Hezbollah, Israel has marshalled technology to “reach” its adversaries. Former US President Ronald Reagan had once said: “You can run but can’t hide”. This has been Israel’s operational strategy against its adversaries.

Since the October 7 attack by Hamas, Israel has extended its counter-offensive. Beginning with its full-scale land offensive on October 27, it has expanded its intensity and reach. Both to prevent the barrage of rockets and to deter future attacks, it is pursuing a policy that enjoys little international public support. Several countries that were sympathetic to and had spoke in favour of Israel in the wake of the October 7attack, gradually diluted their support and have been demanding — without success — a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip. The mounting casualties in the Strip, which crossed 41,000 earlier this month, only exacerbated the situation. While the international focus has been on the untold suffering of women, children and the elderly, the casualty figures also include hundreds of fighters and auxiliaries. Even the UN agencies have come under scrutiny for the alleged direct involvement of several of their personnel in the October 7 violence.

For Iran, Hezbollah has been a cheap, effective and cost-effective option against Israel. Its missile and rocket attacks periodically made northern Israel unsafe and unstable and caused disruption of the daily lives of thousands of Israelis along the Israel-Lebanon border and the mixed city of Haifa. On April 14, Hezbollah joined Iran when the latter launched a wave of drones, cruise missiles and ballistic missiles against Israel. Since the assassination of former Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran on July 31, there have been widespread speculations of Iranian retaliation. The temptations of a Gaza ceasefire seemed to restrain Tehran.

For long, especially since the civil war era (1975-1990), Lebanon has been derided as a “failing state” that cannot be governed. Hezbollah is a major player in this unfortunate saga. The militant group was formed in the early 1980s with the political and economic backing of the Islamic Republic and enjoyed legitimacy, resisting the Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon. In May 2000, when Israel ended its 18-year occupation, the Shia militia was hailed as a successful model for the Palestinian resistance. At the same time, the unilateral Israeli withdrawal, recognised and admitted by the United Nations, did not end Hezbollah’s claims to be a force of resistance. Not many asked what it was supposed to “resist”. The tag was too attractive and powerful to relinquish. Its ability to withstand the Israeli offensive response during the Second Lebanon War of 2006 further enhanced its credentials.

Besides a massive aerial offensive, Israel has targeted scores of leaders and commanders of the militant groups. When the opportunities arose, it targeted Nasrallah. The sudden explosion of communication devices used by Hezbollah caused scores of deaths and injuries to women, children and bystanders and resulted in Lebanese and UN officials denouncing Israel for its “war crimes”. At the same time, one cannot underestimate and ignore the military object of this mass action: The Pre-Android pagers were used exclusively by Hezbollah fighters to avoid digital surveillance by Israel. The deaths and injuries to scores of civilians also highlight the embedded nature of Hezbollah in Lebanese society. The eye injuries suffered by the Iranian ambassador in Beirut — Mojtaba Amani — amplified the highly targeted nature of the pager attack. Why was the ambassador or his aide using pagers targeted by Israel?

Even before the Lebanese violence, the ongoing Israel-Gaza conflict has crossed several unpleasant, painful and avoidable milestones: The longest war Israel had fought since 1948 and the largest single-event casualty faced by the Palestinians. Both the US and Arab interlocutors — Egypt and Qatar — were unable to bridge the gap. Even domestic pressures within Israel against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have been insufficient to change the course of events. Having bowed out of the electoral battle, President Joe Biden has no incentive to bring about an early end to the bloodshed.

Unfortunately, no leader, country or group of powers can nudge, influence and accomplish a ceasefire. Even countries that are at the forefront of anti-Israeli rhetoric are aware of the role of Hezbollah in bringing down the Lebanese state and its social cohesion. While the Iranian leadership has avoided the temptations of avenging Haniyeh’s assassination, Hezbollah is an easier option for the clergy to keep the tension boiling. Continuing tensions along the Gaza and Lebanon borders also provide a breather to Netanyahu to forestall any leadership challenge both within and outside the Likud.

Scores of people in the region and beyond want a ceasefire, temporary suspension of hostilities and resumption of dialogue; but warring leaders see the situation differently. When peace is viewed as “surrender”, there is little one can accomplish. Without an effective carrot-and-stick strategy for all players — especially Israel, Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah — there is little the international community can do. Restraint is the biggest feature missing among the key players in the Middle East; hence, violence in Gaza, Lebanon and Israel, unfortunately, is likely to continue. especially in the wake of Nasrallah’s killing.

Note:  This article was originally published in The New Indian Express on 29 September 2024 and has been reproduced with the permission of the author. Web Link

As part of its editorial policy, the MEI@ND standardizes spelling and date formats to make the text uniformly accessible and stylistically consistent. The views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views/positions of the MEI@ND. Editor, MEI@ND: P R Kumaraswamy