Since Iran, Hezbollah, and by many accounts, Syria and Iraq are deciding how to respond to Israel’s assassination of Hamas negotiator Ismail Hamiyeh in Iran, its assassination of Hezbollah commander Faoud Shakr, and air strikes on Syria, and events will play out soon enough, we’ll limit ourselves to a high level overview and some updates.
As we’ll explain, the risk of nuclear war is real and all too high.
The US and EU are trying to persuade Iran to engage in yet another symbolic retaliation of the sort it engaged in last April after Israel struck Iran via hitting its consular compound in Damascus and killed seven military advisers. Even though the Western media pooh poohed Iran’s response, which was to send a very large wave of slow-moving drones and then launch precision missile strikes, the missiles not only got through but made impressively accurate hits on a supposedly super highly protected Israel airbase. In other words, in textbook conditions, with both sides agreeing on the target, Iran demonstrate its ability to surmount Israel (and US and French, who were supporting this operation) defenses, and at very low cost compared to the Western defense ($80 million to $100 million versus $1.35 billion for Israel and an additional ~$1 billion for the US).
Yet Israel continues to escalate. What is going on here?
Consider these not-mutually-exclusive possibilities.
Israel has lost its mind. Norman Finkelstein for some time has, with supporting detail, depicting Israel as having gone crazy. Notice below how the interviewer keeps trying to shut him up by persistently interrupting:
the genocidal Israeli regime has been assassinating people in Iran for decades now openly, thinking that doing so will have zero consequences. But those times are gone. There will be consequences for what Norman Finkelstein rightly called the Israeli lunatic state pic.twitter.com/I3RzkRPeIB
— ☀️👀 (@zei_squirrel) July 31, 2024
Israel believes the US can effectively protect Israel if it gets in serious trouble. Lloyd Austin saying that the US will defend Israel if attacked and the US being able to successfully defend Israel are two entirely different matters. Yet Israel confidence seems undiminished despite the US and Western failure in the test last April.
Recall Israel’s vulnerability is well known to the IDF even if the political leadership tells itself otherwise. Scott Ritter, who worked in Israel for many years and has contacts in the region, has repeatedly described how Israel lost both of its last two war games against a Hezbollah-like opponent. You are not suppose to lose your own war games. And every time they simulated Iran joining the fray, per Ritter, “Israel was wiped off the map.” And those war games included US support.
Israel believes the Axis of Resistance will not meaningfully escalate. Chatham House provides a version of this view:
Events in the Middle East during July point to a striking paradox: Israel and the Iran-led ‘axis of resistance’ are inching closer to a catastrophic regional war – yet the war remains unlikely, because neither side wants it. Is that mutual apprehension enough to prevent the worst from happening?
Even the most seasoned observer of the region can’t answer that question with confidence. But one thing everyone can agree on is that Israel’s alleged killing of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in Iran, and its assassination of Hezbollah commander Fuad Shukr in Lebanon do nothing to lower the temperature.
The big factor favoring Iran and Hezbollah continuing to exercise restraint is that both their economies are weak, Lebanon’s disastrously so and Iran’s only now reportedly being able to deliver some improvements in living standards.
A second factor, as Chatham House points out, is that neither Hamas nor Hezbollah were hurt much by these attacks. Both organizations have a lot of bench depth in their leadership ranks. And they no doubt also recognize that Israel reverting to assassinations is an admission of weakness, of being caught in a Gaza quagmire and unable to prevail in northern border area despite launching strikes at a far higher rate than Hezbollah.
A third factor is that Iran and Hezbollah have both been calculated and measured in their responses, so Israel and the US may tell themselves that after they cool off, they were revert to form. But that ignores the Nassim Nicholas Taleb warning, that the turkey has the most confidence the farmer is his friend the night before he is killed, because that is when he has the most observations of the farmer feeding him.
Iran and Hezbollah are signaling this time will be different, that they will escalate. But even so, how serious will the ratchet up be?
This Iranian commentator suggests that since Israel is already losing, Iran and the Axis of Resistance merely need to inflict more, but not radical, pain:
🇮🇷 Tehran's response to Haniyeh's killing will be harsher than the previous strike on Israel, Iranian analyst warns
Iran’s retaliation to Tel Aviv for killing Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran “will be more severe, more painful to the Israeli regime than what Tel Aviv… pic.twitter.com/qhfonTsyeW
— Sputnik (@SputnikInt) August 1, 2024
Some commentators have made much of Iran hoisting the red flag of revenge. However, the red flag by itself signifies retaliation, not necessarily escalation:
❗️🇮🇷⚔️🇮🇱 – A red flag was raised at the Jamkaran Mosque in Iran.
The last times this happened were on January 3, 2020, after the death of Qasem Soleimani, and on January 5, 2024, after the Kerman bombing.
Based on the nature of the various official statements, especially from… pic.twitter.com/jGpsZAbSi4
— 🔥🗞The Informant (@theinformant_x) July 31, 2024
Hezbollah is clear it will Do Something:
"It is now an open battle in all fronts.”
Iran-backed Hezbollah’s leader said the group’s battle against Israel has entered a new phase and vowed to respond following the killing of a top commander of the militant group in Beirut (translation via AP) https://t.co/erVyoGdMVV pic.twitter.com/6y2IjWKmSQ
— Bloomberg (@business) August 1, 2024
Arab News reports the British Foreign Secretary and Defense Secretary flying to Beirut to try to talk Hezbollah out of its resolve. Such a senior delegation is meant to impress, but I am not sure that will cut much ice.
And Israelis seem pretty worried:
🇮🇱ALERT BREAKING – People trying to flee Israel in a hurry, ahead of a major military escalation with Iran.. @lifepeptides
pic.twitter.com/sfIf0El6TU— Dr. Anastasia Maria Loupis (@DrLoupis) August 2, 2024
JUST IN
The Tel Aviv stock exchange is plummeting as Iran's retaliation is becoming certain
Let’s hope it’s permanent🤞🏼 pic.twitter.com/ofXvU6yypC
— ADAM (@AdameMedia) August 1, 2024
One consideration favoring a harsh Axis of Resistance response is active US duplicity. From The Cradle:
Senior White House Adviser Amos Hochstein led a “diplomatic disinformation campaign” and deceived Lebanese officials into thinking Israel would not attack Lebanon’s capital or its southern suburbs, Lebanese daily Al-Akhbar reported on 1 August.
Hochstein “informed officials in Beirut that the Israeli strike would be outside Beirut and the suburbs. He insisted on leaking this information under what he referred to as ‘the success of American diplomacy,’” according to the newspaper, calling the US official’s talks with the Lebanese state a “deception operation.”
The report adds Hochstein was trying to obtain a guarantee from Lebanese officials that Hezbollah would not respond to any potential Israeli attack in response to the strike on Majdal Shams last weekend, which Tel Aviv pinned on Hezbollah as a pretext for escalation.
Too many in Israel are itching to hit Hezbollah with a tactical nuke
Contrary to the idea above, that Israel is betting on the Axis of Resistance not moving much up the escalation ladder after the latest attacks is the idea that the Israel government is determined to gin up a wider conflict. From Middle East Eye:
In killing Ismail Haniyeh, the head of Hamas’ political bureau in Tehran, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has sent the clearest message yet to Iran and the resistance movements that he wants a regional war.
It’s not pretty to see commentators pumping for “do dumb shit and see what happens” moves like this:
Prediction: Israel 🇮🇱 is waiting for Islamic Republic's 🇮🇷 “retaliation” to give it an excuse to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities in response.
Israel's long range bombing of Yemen (2200km distance) proved that it can easily destroy Iran's facilities too (1600km distance). pic.twitter.com/1Uye0M35Kn
— Dr. Eli David (@DrEliDavid) July 31, 2024
By all accounts, Iran has more than enough in the way of conventional missiles very well bunkered (and some claim set to launch on a dead hand basis) to destroy Israel. A strike like the one described above looks primed to trigger an Israel-devastating salvo.
It seems worryingly possible that if Hezbollah or a coordinated Axis of Resistance response were deemed by Israel to be excessive, Israel could respond by striking Hezbollah with a tactical nuke. Since Hezbollah’s operations are all in deep underground tunnels, that would result in disproportionate civilian deaths above ground.
Colonel Macgregor discusses this scenario in a disconcertingly calm manner below, starting at 16:15. He points out that Israel will face its toughest opponent ever in a full-bore conflict with Hezbollah and he therefore thinks Israel is prepared to make a strike with tactical nuclear bombs. He states matter-of-factly that a tactical nuclear weapon could be as small as 5 kilotons. That would be about 1/3 of the blast power of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima.
Macgregor continues by observing that if Israel were to make a nuclear attack on Hezbollah, that Iran would enter with vehemence and has more than enough conventional weapons to overwhelm Israel defenses and inflict great damage on Israel. He anticipates that Israel would then launch a nuclear attack on Iran.
Macgregor also mentions briefly starting at 6:00 that due to the conflict, Israel’s population has largely left the northern and southern border areas, making it even more concentrated than usual. This creates an incentive for Israel to engage in a pre-emptive attack.
This scenario may seem a bit linear, when the possible outcomes are bushier. Nevertheless, it seems too likely that if Hezbollah and/or Iran engage in anything more that a proportional response (and per above it is Israel and the US that sit in judgement of where a response is excessive), Israel could use that at a pretext to launch a war in Lebanon, or simply skip “Go” and strike a part of Lebanon it contends to a prime target, as it it claims the strike would significantly damage the Hezbollah tunnel network. If that does happen, it seems far too likely that, as Macgregor anticipates, Iran launches no-holds-barred missile attacks and Israel retaliates with a major nuclear attack.
Now if Macgregor and yours truly can work out this risk, so can Iran.
So the next question is: what is Iran’s and the Axis of Resistance’s ability to destroy, in a massive, tightly time-compressed attack, to take out all or nearly all of Israel’s ability to launch a nuclear attack? Remember, nuclear bombs don’t get up and walk to their targets. They are sent by ground or submarine launched missiles or aircraft.
Israel has five nuclear subs and they are believed to carry 200 kiloton nuclear missiles. The innertubes also report that Israel has nuclear weapons buried deep enough to be able to make a second strike even in the face of a nuclear attack. So the Axis of Resistance looks unable to make a successful preemptive strike unless they were also able to interfere with targeting, and they don’t look able to do that. The only option along these lines that could work on the scale needed might be an electomagnetic pulse bomb. But there’s no evidence Iran has developed, let alone tested, one, and it would be too high stakes to try a maiden run now.
So it looks all too likely that Israel not only will use nuclear, but even worse may be trying to set up events to justify deploying them. As I often say, it would be better if I were wrong.
There may be method to the madness, mentioned by a recent Prof Mearsheimer interview. A wider war gives Israel the cover it needs to ethnically cleanse Gaza and the West Bank. I believe Mearsheimer is correct. Trading the cost, carnage, chaos and fallout for finally getting rid of their Palestinian population is probably a net win for the present Israeli leadership and electorate.
Witness the army indulging itself in a orgy of genocide in Gaza while the north of Israel has been left to the mercies of Hezbollah rockets. Scale this up to war with Iran levels and the logical conclusion is that the entire Israeli population is expendable as long as the Palestinians are killed or driven out.
I think you missed the end of the post, which launched early.
Israel will lose a conventional war, and badly. That is what its own war games have repeatedly shown, even with US assistance. It is losing now at only a moderate level of intensity even with US assistance.
Israel will lose a wider war with Hezbollah alone unless it uses nukes. When that happens, it pretty much assures the destruction of Israel. Iran will come in with force, Israel will attack Iran with nukes, Iran’s remaining and large conventional dead hand strikes will destroy what is left of Israel.
There are wild card scenarios, like Pakistan being primed to hit Israel with a nuclear attack the moment it makes any nuclear strike. But it’s still the end of Israel.
YS: Israel will lose a wider war with Hezbollah alone unless it uses nukes. When that happens, it pretty much assures the destruction of Israel. Iran will come in with force, Israel will attack Iran with nukes, Iran’s remaining and large conventional dead hand strikes will destroy what is left of Israel.
All correct as far as the probable chain of events. Nor is it clear that if Washington roused itself, it could stop Israel at this point. God help us.
Ironically, one last small hope is that one driver of what’s brought matters to the precipice has been Netanyahu’s drive to survive — that is, to evade prosecution as soon as he’s out of office — and his drive to survive may impel him now to turn aside. But it’s unclear that he has scope to any longer, whatever he may imagine–events and greater forces have momentum.
The BBC HARDtalk interviewer is using a questioning style that is very popular there. They arrange to interview a guest that dissents from the orthodox/BBC narrative and do this. Paxman was an early exemplar (perhaps the OG, idk). Mehdi Hasan is a well-known practitioner. While it looks a lot different from what Americans are used to, it doesn’t in itself mean all that much. The difference is that in American MSM TV news, Norm wouldn’t be invited. One method actively tells the audience what opinions to discount and the other omits them.
Paxman was the OG. He’s most famous for this more reasonable browbeating interview with Michael Howard https://youtu.be/pyqnu6ywhR4?si=oPgyl48WA3bjJDIx
Since then a load of BBC journos (especially Newsnight types) have been doing inferior imitations
if there was an adult in DC, the US would find a sympathetic Israeli army commander and discreetly announce support for an anti-Bibi coup.
Very “Guns of August” feel. sleepwalking into the abyss with a lame duck White House.
“if there was an adult in DC, the US would find a sympathetic Israeli army commander and discreetly announce support for an anti-Bibi coup.”
Honestly, the Biden admin tried to do this, already, with Bennie Gantz earlier this year. Team Dem rolled out a whole barrage of “Netanyahu must go” talking points, Chuck Schumer said he had to go. They tried to charm Bennie Gantz as a more reasonable alternative. The understanding from the Gantz visit was that he pretty much told US officials, “If I were in charge, I’d be doing the same thing” and from there, the whole idea fizzled out. Netanyahu launched a big rhetorical offensive saying, “I’m not going to let officials in DC boss me around, I’m going to do what it takes to defend Israel.” and his polls went up in Israel.
We can’t regime change Israel. We’ve probably already given it our best shot.
We could send our secret service to protect the Israeli leadership.
One has to wonder how many of those Russian emigres are FSB agents. I doubt we are the only people who have agents there, and a clean sweep of the Israeli war cabinet would benefit them every bit as much as it would us at this point.
the one positive is that the Iranian Establishment remembers the 80’s Iran-Iraq War. They are not itching even for a “modest” war. So the likeliest path is the incremental slow boil from Hezbollah
That’s been true the whole time. The players involved misunderstand each other. The problem is that Hezbollah and Iran have been showing restraint to avoid war, because they understand that war is bad and destructive. But, in classic bully-style, Israel sees ‘restraint’ as weakness: “These guys aren’t up for a real fight because they know we’d wreck them!”
Honestly, it looks like Israel has a similar flaw as the rest of the west where the elites shovel out lots of bullshit propaganda, and it ends up actually taking root among the population and, more importantly, among important officials and power brokers within the government.
By comparison, Russiagate genuinely took hold within parts of the ‘deep state’ of the US government. I think it’s entirely plausible that Israeli propaganda of “we’re the toughest in the region and no one around wants to tangle with us” has also taken hold of key parts of the Israeli government (not the IDF, of course, since it’s become clear that they seem to know better).
But, with such profound divisions in Israeli society, can the IDF continue to act as a restraining force? And yes, consider the insanity of the idea that IDF is a RESTRAINING force on a maniacal Israeli society, as Finkelstein correctly points out.
>>>> I think it’s entirely plausible that Israeli propaganda of “we’re the toughest in the region and no one around wants to tangle with us” has also taken hold of key parts of the Israeli government
One of my personal “iron laws of institutions” from observation…
an institution “distills” its personality to an extreme (via promotion, mentoring, self-selection, survivorship bias, etc.)…..so eventually it will either wind up being very civil, cordial or back-stabbing, ruthless.
Much like the sociology of Polynesian cultures….each island tended to find one “trait”/”high status commodity” and extreme-ize it. (bird feathers, shells, rocks, etc)
Craig Murray is usually more measured in his analysis than this:
https://consortiumnews.com/2024/08/02/craig-murray-the-israeli-nihilist-state/
Not a good sign, I think.
A tactical nuclear bomb is still a nuclear bomb. Once used, all bets are off and the rubicon is crossed. Battle lines are drawn and global alliances are crystallized.
What have China and Russia been saying? What are their red lines? I can’t get past the offerings of the media-fed spoonfuls of Kamala v Trump and jingoistic Olympic gruel on the few news-sites I regularly visit.
I hope that along with the negotiations with Russia that resulted in a prisoner swap, we discussed with Russia the possibility of the Israelis going nuclear. It is easy to imagine insane Israel doing that. We need to absolutely not have that blow up into a global nuclear war. Do we have such sane individuals in the US government?
Tactical Nuke will really mess up the Trump Kushner beachfront development plans.
I also wonder about Russia and China’s options. Russia? What immediately comes to mind is further development of Syrian and Iranian air defenses. Their better missiles are already installed in both areas, and I believe Russian pilots are flying in Syria. No idea about Iran.
Yves covered a lot of ground well, but I think if we add Sino-Russian forces, serving both as real defense assets and as trip wires, Israeli use of nukes becomes more complicated for them.
And what if Iran doesn’t take the military escalation bait and instead chooses to frighten oil markets? The Israelis would gain another layer or two of welthistorische Scheisse on their face if they use nukes and their opponents respond with relatively humane economic disruption that happens to tank Dem electoral prospects.
If Israel is expecting the US to go in and fight their battles for them, then they may be in for a rude shock. Both in the First Gulf War and the Invasion of Iraq, the US was able to assemble huge armies to go in and get the job done. But Scott Ritter has pointed out that the US military of the 90s no longer exists. Too much has changed and the US spent too long in the sand-boxes of Iraq and Afghanistan. They have not really been practicing combined arms operations and are slow to adapt to the new realities of war. The US Army is much smaller now, less disciplined and the US Marines are only specializing in the Pacific. So what could they send? It would take many months for them to assemble an army and stockpile supplies but where would they do so apart from Israel? And they would be under constant attack by the Resistance if they tried to do so. In any case, do they have the ammo any more to to fight a long campaign? Most of it has been sent to the Ukraine and Israel itself and they may only have enough ammo for a short campaign – maybe. Do American soldiers really want to die to save Netanyahu’s career? So at best there would be only limited US help so this time the Israelis are on their own.
Even if the US tried, it cannot ramp up in time to intervene. One thousand marines stationed off shore aren’t going to do $h!t, even if we could get them into the fight.
The question is…once Hezbollah and Iran make the decision that Israel has now gone full on, nuclear armed mad-man…can they hit all the airfields in Israel hard enough, fast enough to ground the Israeli Air Force for any length of time?!?!
It seems like the answer is….maybe, but not definitely. But, if they’re convinced that Israel is going to go nuclear eventually, then at least you’ve got a shot if you go for the “maybe” option. That’s where the real risk lies.
This was an excellent and informative post, which laid out some frightening scenarios. Now, I don’t normally do predictions, but I have to say that it appears to me that the current strategy being employed by the axis of resistance is WORKING. Under the current paradigm, the axis of resistance is winning the conflict, and Israel and the US are losing the conflict. This is, sadly, separate from the genocide being inflicted upon the Palestinian people. The US and Israel are desperately trying to get the axis of resistance to alter the current conflict paradigm (the existence of actions calculated to alter the current paradigm are evidence that Israel actually does understand the current strategic situation, and such actions attempting to force a change are indicators of rationality, not lunacy, IMO). All evidence, that is visible to me at least, shows that the resistance leaders are shrewd and intelligent strategic planners. So, in light of the evidence I see, I cannot envision the leaders of the axis of resistance giving over to emotion and lashing out, thus changing the paradigm of the conflict away from a strategic situation that favors the resistance, even as much as they must truly desire to righteously give the Israeli leadership the retribution they so deserve. I think the retaliation will be very carefully calibrated, and that the current slow, measured destruction of the Israeli Zionist project will continue on it’s course, and that retribution will arrive along with final strategic victory (I am continually amazed at the non-western world’s consistent ability to take the long view, and plan for the more distant future). Regardless, I guess we will see in time as events unfold.
I will add that I have noticed a pattern among the actors- they seem to have adopted a strategy of operational zones in the conflict sphere, which is incredible, given the number of sovereign actors that consistently communicate among themselves to achieve consensus, and also stay within their zone of responsibility (I can only conclude that this is very seriously coordinated). Allied forces in Gaza are destroying Israel’s conventional military forces- they are the meat grinder in this conflict. The resistance forces in the west bank are performing pinning operations. Hezbollah are also performing pinning operations. These pinning operations are basically metering the flow of Israeli military forces into Gaza, ensuring that the flow of Israeli military into Gaza cannot overwhelm the work of the Gazan resistance (I hypothesize that the resistance has accepted the total destruction of all Gazan infrastructure as a given-as Israel has form, and with that acceptance, they are gambling that they can confine the bulk of the destruction to Gaza, and that once the conflict ends, the surviving population of Gaza will then be able to utilize the remaining infrastructure in greater Palestine/Israel, as it is a given that the bulk of the settlers will decamp from the colony-I really do think that the axis of resistance is going for broke). Hezbollah is also systematically destroying Israeli ISR and air defense, while shaping the future battlefield in northern Palestine (and I very seriously believe there will eventually be a ground conflict in northern Palestine-even if the Israel manages to survive, it will lose all territory it captured from Lebanon and Syria, but likely parts of historic Palestine also). Ansar Allah is the escalator for the Axis of Resistance. They are constantly and consistently underestimated, so almost all of their actions are blindsiding the the US/Israel, and all of their escalations have been of a horizontal nature. The Iraqi resistance is working to pin US forces, as well as serve as a strategic deterrent to the US, preventing US ground assets in the theater from involvement. I do not think they will force a US exit until after the conflict in Palestine is resolved (pushing the US ground forces out of Iraq actually alters the current strategic paradigm- US assets are effectively surrounded and forced to huddle within the perimeter of their fortifications and are not a real threat to the surrounding areas in Iraq, as much as they are a visual slap in the face of Iraqi sovereignty). Iran is the chief supplier of economic and materiel support for the resistance, serves as a strategic deterrent to Israel, and also very importantly provides high-level ISR (satellite) intelligence to the rest of the resistance axis. These all seem to have become very well defined roles, and I find that very interesting. I sincerely hope they axis of resistance continues with what appears to be a very effective strategy, while not being too rigid tactically to take advantage of any situation that may bring about a change in their favor.
I think you’ve summarized the broader strategy of the ‘axis of resistance’ quite adroitly, in as much as they’re able to adopt a cohesive strategy among a loose group of players with divergent interests and widely divergent capabilities.
“So, in light of the evidence I see, I cannot envision the leaders of the axis of resistance giving over to emotion and lashing out”
I don’t think this is the risk.The risk is that:
1) Israeli leadership DOES NOT THINK it’s in a vice-grip (or pretends it’s not) as you’ve described (even if the IDF leadership does). They think they’re able to intimidate all the players involved through military means. A big part of the usefulness of putting your opponent in a vice-grip is that the opponent recognizes the situation the same way, and then, rationally, looks to de-escalate.
2) Israeli leadership DOES THINK it’s in a vice-grip, and it’s looking for a way out…possibly through escalation. But, if you can still escalate at will, as Israeli leadership seems to think they can do…that’s possibly a sign you are NOT ACTUALLY in a vice-grip.
To summarize, with a crude analogy…if I get you into one of those Jiu-Jitsu-style arm-bars and threaten to break your arm, you’re supposed to ‘tap’, right?
But, Israel doesn’t see it that way. Israel says, “I’ve got this grenade in my other hand, if you break my arm, I will blow the both of us to bits”.
And, to take it further, I’m going to start punching you in the nuts and you cannot do anything about it, because you know if you break my arm, I’m going to pull the pin on this grenade and kill us both. So, you’re just going to sit there and deal with getting punched in the nuts! Your arm-bar doesn’t impress me much.
The Axis of Resistance is probably saying, “we can break his arm, why doesn’t he just submit!??!!”. The next question immediately becomes…”Can we get that grenade away from him!?!?!?”
Whadaya think? Are you feeling lucky, punk??!?!
To be clear, “get that grenade away from him” means to wreck Israeli airfields beyond use so that they can’t put planes in the air to launch a nuclear strike.
The Axis of Resistance MIGHT be able to do this…or might not?!?!?!
Netanyahu is a criminal but I don’t think he’s stupid. And for that reason, I don’t think he wants a wider regional war because, as mentioned, it will likely lose.
Netanyahu et al., want to seize the opportunity and use the war in Gaza and threats of a larger war as distraction and cover to rapidly cleanse the West Bank, and soon greater Israel, of non-Jews.
According to Al Jazeera on July 19, 2024, “In 2024, Israel has illegally claimed 23.75 sq km (9.15 sq miles) of (West Bank) Palestinian land, exceeding the total land seized over the past 20 years combined.”
“As Israel carries out a devastating war on Gaza, settlers are exploiting the lack of global attention on the occupied West Bank to expel Palestinians from their land there.” “That makes 2024 the peak year for Israeli land seizures over the past three decades.”
Furthermore, “Palestinian farmers are often unarmed and have no means of defending themselves.” Yet, “Shortly after October 7, Ben-Gvir played a significant role in encouraging these attacks by distributing thousands of semiautomatic rifles and other weapons to settlers and far-right Israelis.”
https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2024/7/19/how-israeli-settlements-are-taking-over-the-west-bank-as-gaza-war-rages
On the other hand, Netanyahu et al. are bound the fact that the who raison d’être of Israel is a safe space for Jews. And they have selected the path of absolute dominance to achieve that. Ethnic cleansing of Gaza or West Bank is meaningless, if the Axis of Resistance can hurt Israel at will.
That’s the long game by the Axis of Resistance, to prove, beyond doubt, that the Zionist project has come to it’s conclusion, and that it can go silently into the night, or it can disappear in the flames that burn most of the West Asia. Axis would prefer the first option, but are preparing for the second one if it must be endured. The first strike was a show of force (we can hurt you), this one will be use of force (we will hurt you). There’s not that many steps left after this: basically “we can destroy you” and “we will destroy you”.
The way I read the tea leaves at the moment is that we’ve arrived to a point in history, when Israel has to decide whether it rejects Zionism and retains the things that Israel is without racism, segregation and a police state, or whether it’s “relegated to the pages of history” as the most bloody chapter in the Zionist annals.
Israel gets 80% of its drinking water from five desalination plants that are protected by anachronistic anti air defense systems. Iran, Hezbollah and the Houthis have already shown the ability to get past Israeli AA. I just don’t understand what Israel is thinking? Have they seen too many Marvel movies and now they think they’re invincible? It wouldn’t take more than a few hundred drones and missiles to take down Israel’s water supply – thus rendering the entire country uninhabitable in three days.
Do they look like they are acting rationally? I think the “Israel has gone nuts” idea is strong. High on propaganda, hate and bloodlust.
There’s also a certain strategic logic in APPEARING to be crazy, even if you’re not actually crazy, to get a strategic edge.
I think there’s also an element of faking it until you make it. You can only pretend to be crazy for so long until it actually becomes reality and then, you’re just genuinely crazy. Does anyone involved actually understand where that line is?
Taking out infrastructure is not as easy as people think. Desalination plants are very large, very extensive, and don’t have a ‘keystone’ element that would cause an entire plant to become unusable on a single strike. To destroy one permanently would take multiple very large and very accurate warheads. Its unclear if Hezbollah has that capacity.
As for other forms of infrastructure, electricity is obviously vulnerable, but its still a multilayered form of infrastructure that needs lots of precise strikes to cause permanent damage – power stations are very, very big and heavily engineered and unlikely to be taken out with a single warhead. While they probably have not gone ‘all out’, Russia has taken a long time and has had to devote thousands of missiles to bring the Ukrainian network to the brink of collapse, and Israel has a far better air defence than Ukraine, and Russia has far more and better precision guided weapons than Hezbollah/Iran.
They also have to consider that a deliberate strike on infrastructure will generate a response from Israel. Lebanon and Syria’s infrastructure would almost certainly be more vulnerable to Israeli strikes than vice versa, and Iran has to consider the extreme vulnerability of its gas pipeline supply network. 80% of Irans electricity is generated from natural gas, mostly transported from the Gulf area to the north. That makes it highly vulnerable.
Yeah, I think you’ve got this, PK.
No water for Israel is a strategic RESPONSE to a nuclear attack, not an escalation step before it. Not least because it’s a staged process as you describe.
I think there’s another element here which is that it is now apparent that israel, and by extension the US, are not interested in peace. Prof Hudson, Dr Stein and Danny Haiphong were speaking about this the other day. The corollary of that is the end goal of ethnic cleansing or even a full blown holocaust of Gaza. The axis of resistance have already stated that the defeat of hamas or the liquidation of the Palestinian cause is a red line so the space for negotiation is rapidly diminishing, if at all existent.
Western talk of the ‘need’ for a ceasefire is all performative at this point and echoes the ‘need’ for a two state solution. Both are used as deflections whilst keeping these ‘needs’ forever allusive and out of reach.
The Israeli government does not want “a war” with Iran, which would lead to the destruction of Israel. It wants the destruction of Iran as a “threat”, and it wants the United States to do that job for it, while protecting Israel as much as possible, and has been manoeuvring to that effect. It presumably believes that, in the event of an Israeli attack on Iran, the United States could be counted to join in with enthusiasm.
I don’t find McGregor convincing on nuclear weapons. He talks, as do many commentators, as though there would be a war between Israel and “Hezbollah.” But for a start, the South Litani Sector, from which the majority of the Hezbollah attacks have been launched, is a multi-ethnic region, like most of Lebanon. Hezbollah is strong among the Shia community there (as it is strong in other parts of Lebanon where there are sizeable Shia communities) but there are also significant Sunni, Druze and Christian communities of different flavours. Most ordinary Hezbollah fighters live at home and keep their weapons with them. I really don’t see how you could use nuclear weapons in such a context without causing massive loss of life among Lebanese civilians of all confessions. And don’t forget, there are ten thousand UN troops from nearly fifty countries there, as well as two Brigades of the Lebanese Army. In effect, therefore, this would be a nuclear attack on a soverign state, putting at risk military and civilian staff from some of the major countries of the world (there are even a handful of Americans.) In any event, whilst Hezbollah has tunnel networks and underground storage sites, trying to destroy them with nuclear weapons would mean a ground-burst which would spread radioactive fallout over the entire area, and make much of it uninhabitable. Then, of course, the IDF, which is not trained or equipped to fight in a nuclear environment, would not actually be able to move in.
I’ve always assumed that in the unlikely event of Israel using nukes on Hezbollah, they would aim for the north, maybe Baalbek. For the reasons you outline, there is nothing vulnerable in the southern area – although I doubt the Israeli’s would be too bothered about killing lots of Druze or Christians if it was convenient for them. For that matter, they’ve not hesitated to kill UN soldiers in the past either directly or via proxies.
But I doubt if that calculation applies to a direct strike on either Iran or Syria. Obviously, they would much prefer for the US to be stupid enough to do their dirty work there, but given recent behaviour, I really wonder if a direct warning strike is out of the question. Especially as the US elections adds a wild card into everyones calculations.
A general point in Israel – there are plenty of explanations for why Israel is doing what its doing, but one thing that I think hasn’t been explored is that there is no ‘Israeli leadership’ anymore. What we may be seeing are competing elements within the military establishment representing the various shades (all far-right) doing their own thing. It is curious that they don’t seem to have ‘claimed’ the Tehran strike. its conceivable as some have speculated that it was carried out by someone else, but its also possible I think that it was carried out by one or more Israeli agencies without consultation. Of course, they may be playing the whole ‘don’t mess with the crazy guy’ game to try to freak out the Iranians, its anyones guess.
We tend to assume that even ‘crazy’ or ‘extremist’ regimes follow a certain internal logic. But if the Israeli establishment is itself splintering, then applying rational analysis to their actions may be futile. Or they make be like mid-19th Century Paraguay, a country seemingly determined to declare war on all its bigger nations without any particular regard to common sense (some might also see parallels to Japans ‘f** it, lets just declare war on everyone’ decision in 1941. Douglas Adams fans might be thinking of the denizens of the Planet Krikket, who decided the rest of the Universe just has to go.
But the one thing that can be said with certainty is that the Israeli security establishment see the coming conflict as one they cannot lose (if ‘losing’ is defined as losing territory – its possible they could ‘lose’ just by having major losses inflicted on them). And in their logic, this means the nuclear option is a rational and necessary one to an existential threat.
Not a lot is known about Israeli nuclear capacity, but it seems certain that they have not just numbers of warheads, but a range of tactical and strategic warheads, ranging from ‘suitcase bombs’ (Seymour Hersh has written that they developed these as far back as the 1970’s) to possible neutron bombs and possibly even earth penetration warheads. So they can escalate in a manner far beyond the capacity of anyone else in the region.
They also have a full nuclear triad. For certain they have ballistic missiles that are very deeply buried in the Nagrev desert that can hit anyone in the wider region. They almost certainly have nuclear warheads on cruise missiles in their small submarine fleet – and they may well have a submarine in the Red Sea (allegedly they’ve used the Suez Canal in the past). They also have a range of aerial bombs and stand-off missiles that can probably be used by their F-35’s and F-15s. They also are claimed to have buried nuclear mines in the Golan Heights as a last resort in case it means they get driven out of those lands, and its also likely that they have artillery tactical nukes.
All this is to say that there is zero chance of a first strike taking out any but a small proportion of their potential nuclear response. They can hit Iran with a massive attack. or go for an escalatory series of tactical strikes. When it comes to nukes, Israel holds all the cards. The only question is the ‘what happens next’ after they let loose the first round of attacks.
I would discount any Pakistan bomb being used. Its not clear if their warheads are particularly light or sophisticated, so delivery would be hard (its not a simple task to just fit one onto an Iranian missile). And Pakistan is within range of the Jericho III missile (a possible 5,000 km range – Lahore is 4000 km from Tel Aviv). So it would know it would be on the receiving end of any retaliatory strike. Plus, there is no evidence that Pakistan has that type of close relationship with either Iran or Hezbollah/Hamas. They have their own disputes (not least over Baluchistan). They would also almost certainly have to ask permission from KSA and the Gulf States, and its hard to see any of them wanting to get dragged into a nuclear dispute on Irans side.
Great post. The main question is will Israel use nuclear weapons or not? I suggest that if they do it will have to do so before the next administration takes office. At the moment Washington is being ruled by committee since Biden is clearly not able to take any leadership role (and hasn’t for some time). Will US elites agree to “let” Israel use nuclear weapons? The answer is yes, I’m certain they will agree. Will the US back up Israel with its own assault on Iran? That I don’t know. The US has a history of nor following through in war. I wonder if anyone knows what the Zionist lobby in the US that controls US policy in the region is thinking and pushing–that would be the decisive factor.
This gets into the asymmetrical war thinking that maybe John Misherimer has mentioned.
Let’s say Russia does a formal military alliance with Iran. And then puts nukes there. Or just provides them the parts they need to build one.
If Iran sets off an underground test that changes everything. I think it puts Israel on hold, but maybe they are crazy enough to do a preemptive strike?
I thought things were scary before, wow.
Question for anyone.
Since Netanyahu was just in DC. Do you think he was given the all clear we have your back? Or was he told to back off and he’s taking the position that the US will not stop military support no matter what they say?
And how would this wider war impact the Harris campaign?
Now this looks like a situation where russian missile defense systems might be helpful for Iran, no?
It’s truly fascinating watching our species go ballistic (pun intended), even when the full effects of our dismissal of planetary boundaries have not even begun to show.
It’s always darkest before dawn. Until it isn’t.
Armageddon. Darn, Yves Smith, if this article isn’t tightly argued.
Yet I would like to open up some geographic / population issues that may factor into how the war is prosecuted.
–First, Israel is a small place. So is Lebanon. For a long time, this favored the Israelis, who could drop some bombs on Syria or Beirut and be home for dinner.
–This small theater of war means that the use of nuclear weapons is thoroughly dangerous. One is talking about enormous numbers of civilian deaths. One is talking about poisoning land for a long time. The avarice on the faces of people like Smotrich and Netanyahu indicates to me that they don’t want to mess up real-estate deals too much. There’s beach-front property in Gaza! There’s farmland up to the Litani! So: Watch for hesitancy because of lack of room to maneuver.
–Iran cannot be conquered by Israel or the U S of A. The geography precludes invasion. Talk to the ancient Romans about the Parthian wars. Iran’s interest is in making sure that its big urban centers like Tehran, Mashhad, Shiraz, and Esfahan don’t come under attack. The military there undoubtedly knows that Israel would like to bomb the nuclear facilities.
–Syria doesn’t have much to lose. There is a very disturbing article in this month’s Harper’s Magazine by Pauls Toutunghi about the wreckage that is Syria under U.S. sanctions.
–Nor does Iraq have much to lose by getting rid of the remaining U.S. bases.
–Which means that for Hezbollah, Hamas, and even Syria and Iraq, this is a war of liberation.
–You have written that the Iranians and Hezbollah don’t waste weapons by bombing civilians, which would lead to losing their base.
–I am inclined to think that the retaliation from Iran and Hezbollah will be economic (ports, infrastructure) and military (bases, supply depots).
–If I were in the Middle East, I’d advocate that Hezbollah teach the U.S. and the U.K. a lesson by destroying both of the U.K. bases on Cyprus, which have extraterritoriality and are colonialist enterprises. But maybe I’m a tad excitable today.
We have to keep in mind that U.S. politics and U.S. foreign policy are highly melodramatic, and highly unreliable. But there is a reason why the U.S. is cozying up to Poland, Drama Queen of Europe. It’s all drama-queenery all the time.
Now to stop bombs from falling…
If I recall correctly, the prevailing/default winds for most of Israel is from the NE to the SW/from N to S.
tactical nuke Lebanon, and the (currently empty) northern settlements, Tel Aviv, Haifa, all of Israel etc receive the blowback.
Before getting into all the nuclear arms game theory I’m curious as to why there is no consideration given to Iran simply closing off access to the Persian Gulf as a measure of retaliation. This non-nuclear option would immediately put a severe squeeze on the US and Europe—Israel’s two main supporters.
Perhaps facing an economic recession before an election might help focus the minds of US and European elites into finally putting real pressure on the Israeli lunatics.
All the assassinations should show people the options Israel had to take out specific Hamas militants, but they chose wholesale genocide and more land grabs.
There should be much more concern for the security of every country around Isreal. Israel is now showing they are the greatest threat to security.
Like the USA, the country has the mentality of exceptionalism that would rather blow up everything than not get all they want. Exceptionalism is infantile.
In my early 20’s I was walking around the archaeological site at Megiddo. I kept asking myself, how armageddon could begin here? Then the MacGregor quote from the article “Israel’s population has largely left the northern and southern border areas, making it even more concentrated than usual”. Now I can see it!