Let Israel Finish the Job

For almost a year, Israel has been actively at war against terrorists on several fronts. And despite international pressure, adversary propaganda, and the sheer difficulty of the fight, Israel is gradually winning.

The recent series of moves against Hezbollah terrorists in Lebanon was breathtaking in its planning and execution. Israel covertly provided exploding beepers and other communications devices to Hezbollah, then conducted two waves of pinpoint strikes. The terrorists, bereft of communications and no doubt wary of technology, began to congregate to plan their response. Then Israel launched a series of airstrikes, taking out whole layers of Hezbollah leadership, culminating in eliminating top terrorist Hassan Nasrallah.

This twelve-day campaign was a masterpiece of intelligence, planning, timing, and above all, the will to undertake it. How many of these chess moves were planned in advance and how much was the result of exploiting opportunities has yet to be revealed, but Israel has again shown the world its genius for the dramatic and the unexpected.

Hezbollah probably expected Israel to make war the way it did in 2006, or against the PLO in 1982, with conventional IDF forces moving in Lebanon into the teeth of Hezbollah’s in-depth defenses. Certainly, this was the war Hezbollah had prepared for. Instead, Israel turned the tables using methods that Hezbollah could not predict and had no defense against.

Israel faced predictable criticism that its use of exploding beepers against Hezbollah constituted a war crime because some non-terrorists unfortunately were killed. But the laws of war do not require that in every instance there be no civilian casualties, only that countries take strong measures to limit such deaths. Israel’s remarkable covert operation was carefully targeted, and the innocents who were accidentally killed or wounded by the detonation of the pagers were not placed in harm’s way by Israel but by the terrorists themselves. It is worth remembering that Hezbollah commits indiscriminate attacks and targets civilians as a matter of policy and strategy. It and its ilk are criminal organizations by their very nature.

Now, Hezbollah is in disarray while Israel continues to destroy the group’s stockpiled weapons before they can be used. This part of the war, too, is being fought with unprecedented precision, extreme effectiveness, and low civilian and Israeli casualties.

President Biden acknowledged that killing Nasrallah brought a “measure of justice” for victims of Hezbollah terrorism. Indeed, Israel also took out Ibrahim Aqil, who the United States wanted for the 1983 Marine Beirut barracks bombing and other attacks. This was justice delayed but ultimately not denied.

Yet the President also said that his aim was “to de-escalate the ongoing conflicts in both Gaza and Lebanon through diplomatic means.” Vice President Harris likewise has claimed that “diplomacy remains the best path forward to protect civilians and achieve lasting stability in the region.” In fact, if the administration had had its way, Israel’s offensive against Hezbollah would never have been launched in the first place.

The White House has a deep aversion to escalation in any of the world’s conflicts. In Ukraine, advanced weapons were slow in coming and arrived with conditions which have only grudgingly been lifted. In Gaza, the United States forced a pause before Israel conducted operations in Rafah, which probably worked to the benefit of Hamas. After the U.S. and coalition partners successfully intercepted Iran’s missile attack on Israel in April, the White House told Israel not to respond but to “take the win” – advice Israel wisely ignored. In Yemen, the U.S. has employed limited force against Houthi terrorists who have continued to disrupt global shipping and have launched direct attacks on Israel. This weekend’s retaliatory strike by Israel hit Houthi-controlled power plants, oil facilities, port infrastructure and command posts that the U.S. would not target. This, in turn, may begin to achieve the type of deterrence that limited American strikes could not.

The White House should understand that escalation can provide a more certain way to peace than diplomacy. The inability of American negotiators to craft a ceasefire deal in any of the abovementioned conflicts shows the limits of the diplomatic instrument when it is divorced from a credible threat of force. Peace emerges from that kind of diplomacy only when both sides desire it. Simply calling for a ceasefire will not make it happen. As such, Israel’s escalating operations against Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis, and by extension their patron, Iran, represent the most durable path to peace.

About the Author:

James S. Robbins is a Senior Fellow for National Security Affairs at the American Foreign Policy Council and Dean of Academics at the Institute of World Politics.