Is
War Between Israel And Hezbollah Imminent?
15
October, 2017
The
US has raised the level of tension with Iran without taking any
concrete steps to pull out of the Iranian nuclear deal.The
reason why Trump is expected to limit himself to verbal abuse and
continue threatening hostile measures against Tehran without
executing them is fundamentally to avoid a breach between the US and
the EU. The Nuclear deal is not bilateral, so the withdrawal of the
US theoretically cannot scupper it. Nevertheless Iran is likely to
consider the deal totally void if the US pulls out, with all that
that implies. So the US continues its aggressive verbal campaigns
against Iran, confusing the Europeans, who rightly fail to predict
what decisions this US President is capable of adopting in the medium
to long term.
However,
the target is not only Iran but also its main ally and military arm
in the Middle East: the Lebanese Hezbollah. The
US posted bounties on two Hezbollah members of the military council
(the highest military authority within the organisation), Haj Fuad
Shukr and Haj Talal Hamiyeh, allocating “$12 million to whomsoever
is able to offer information” that brings these two to justice. The
US bounty purposely showed old photos of the two men to avoid
revealing the intelligence sources which have provided the most
recent ones. The main question remains: which country is going to
take advantage of such an offer, and how?
Iran
is not longer interested in what Donald Trump will do in relation to
the nuclear deal. The
Iranian leadership has created hundreds of commercial companies
during the embargo,
mainly in Oman, Dubai, and Abu Dhabi, to counter over 30 years of US
sanctions and embargo. Moreover, Iran used gold and oil in exchange
of goods and technology and managed to hold on for many years,
accepting to buy at a higher price in the open market.
Today
the nuclear deal has opened the thirsty Iranian market and connected
it to the European markets. The EU is unwilling to lose that now –
especially with the financial crisis the old continent has been going
through since 2008 – all because Trump, the US President (alone
among all the signatories) considers unilaterally that the “spirit
of the nuclear deal has been violated”. The US would like to see
the Iranian missile program halted and the supply of weapons to
Hezbollah cease: this would also please Saudi Arabia and Israel.
However these issues are considered by all the countries who signed
(including Iran but excepting the US) as unrelated to, and excluded
from, the nuclear deal.
Saudi
Arabian officials visited recently Washington, offering
unlimited financial assistance as long as the US helps to destroy
Hezbollah and limit Iran’s influence in the Middle East. In
fact, Hezbollah is considered responsible for spoiling the game of
the international and regional countries who were supporting a regime
change in Syria. Therefore, many would like to see Hezbollah, the
strong arm of Iran, cut off completely because this would transform
Iran into a giant without arms.
Moreover,
during the Saudi Arabian King Salman’s visit to Moscow, the
monarchy told the Russian President Vladimir Putin that all groups
operating in Syria, such as the “Islamic State” (ISIS), al-Qaeda
and Hezbollah are considered terrorist and should be eliminated.
Putin, despite the King’s generous financial offer of contributions
to invest in Russian
products was
very clear: any country or group fighting in Syria following the
request of the legitimate government is not a terrorist group. The
“head of Hezbollah” was not on the table in the Russian capital.
As
for as the US rewards are concerned, the Hezbollah leaders of the
first, second and third ranks of the organization are moving freely
between Beirut, Damascus, Tehran and Baghdad according to the
requirements of the “war on terror” the organization is involved
in against ISIS and al-Qaeda in Syria and Iraq.
No
authority – neither the Lebanese authorities nor the US authorities
– would dare to arrest any of Hezbollah’s leaders without
suffering direct consequences that would backfire against their
solders or interests in the Middle East. Abduction (or capture) is
expected to be treated similarly and rejected without hesitation.
The
most recent “incident” occurred in Iraq when Washington expressed
its desire – when Baghdad asked all US forces to pull out from Iraq
under President Barack Obama – to take the Lebanese Hezbollah
commander, Ali Moussa Daqduq, to ??America. Hezbollah then sent a
clear message to the US administration – through Iraqi leaders –
that taking Daqdouq away from Iraq meant that every US soldier and
officer in the Middle East, mainly in Iraq, would be held hostage.
This
prompted Washington to turn a blind eye and
leave the Iraqis to decide the fate of the Hezbollah officer who had
participated in the killing of five American soldiers and officers in
an impressively planned operation in Karbala. In January 2007 Daqdouq
– along with Moqtada al-Sadr’s resistance group AsaebAhl al-Haq –
used bulletproof black cars belonging to an Iraqi minister that the
same US had given him as a donation. The fact that Daqdouq was on
board facilitated the entry of the convoy into the government
building without raising the suspicions of the American forces
stationed inside the building.
Hezbollah
is aware there are many American soldiers and officers who travel
freely within Lebanon, mainly operating with the Lebanese
Army.
Therefore,
the organization is reassured that the United States is conscious of
Hezbollah’s capability for responding by reciprocity and will not
leave their men prisoners without an action or reaction. Hezbollah
thereby considers its own leaders safe from kidnapping, though not
from assassination attempts.
Thus,
the US ”bounties” on the two Hezbollah commanders aim to please
the US’s Middle Eastern allies (mainly Israel and Saudi Arabia)
saying “we are all in one boat against Hezbollah’s presence and
operational capabilities”. Indeed, it shows how Washington is
serious about taking political – rather than operational –
measures to limit Hezbollah and Iran in the Middle East. Both are
considered enemies of the US and its close Israeli and Saudi Arabia
associates.
Tel
Aviv – like Washington – is limiting itself to adopting a
threatening rhetoric,
talking about “a nearby war” against Hezbollah but without taking
the narrative further or adopting any belligerent steps besides the
rumbling of its drums.
In
the unlikely event of war between Israel and Hezbollah, there is no
doubt that Israel has the destructive military capability to bring
back Lebanon to the “Stone Age,” as it claims. However, this is a
situation that the Lebanese have already experience of since the
civil war in1975 and the two (1982 and 2006) Israeli wars. In these
wars, Israel launched attacks and destroyed the Lebanese
infrastructure, killing thousands of civilians and hundreds of
Hezbollah militants.
However,
there is also no doubt that Hezbollah would give Israel a taste of a
similar “Stone Age” scenario, with its tens of thousands of
rockets and missiles, among them some of the very highest accuracy.
The Israeli population however is not accustomed to such a harsh
possible scenario: Hezbollah missiles will hit the infrastructure
(bridges, concentration locations, markets, water, electricity,
chemical plants and more), harbours, airports, military barracks and
institutions, and civilian homes.
It
is true that Israeli political and military leaders are not naïve
and will never exchange their own security against economic and
financial support (which was offered by Saudi Arabia to destroy
Hezbollah), no matter how substantial the offer. Israel won’t
exchange a public diplomatic relationship with Saudi Arabia and most
of the Gulf countries to give up its own safety and the well-being of
its people. Israeli commanders are fully aware of the unique military
experience which Hezbollah developed in Syria and Iraq, and how
Hezbollah is using new underground caches for its long-range accurate
missiles on the Lebanese-Israeli borders.
Nevertheless,
Israel and the US are capable of carrying out security and
intelligence attacks to strike Hezbollah leaders, as both countries
have done in the past with the late Hezbollah Secretary General Sayed
Abbas al-Moussawi, with Sayed Hasan Nasrallah’s vice Imad
Mughnniyeh and against other minor positions within the leadership
such as Hussein al-Lakis, Samir Qantar, Jihad Mughnniyeh, and others.
The
“account” is still open between Hezbollah and Israel. The
Lebanese organization has certainly tried similar intelligence
strikes against Israel. However, several attempts have failed due to
poor planning and a US-Israeli intelligence breach of Hezbollah
security by an officer involved in the external operations unit.
But the balance of terror between Hezbollah and Israel remains: Hezbollah feels more at ease in Syria today and is able to dedicate more resources to the fight against Israel and its allies in the region.
Thus,
American pressure remains within the limits of the inability of
anyone to take it further: there is no country or entity that wants
to confront a rival like Hezbollah, trained in the art of war and
politics and an essential player in the Middle Eastern and
international arenas.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.