Is Israel once again making a huge mistake?
With the latest ceasefire, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in particular has disappointed his voters.
According to several surveys in the media and on various Telegram channels, the vast majority of the right-wing population in Israel opposes the ceasefire in Lebanon. An Israeli media commentator put it succinctly: “Israel has bloodied Hezbollah and is now calling an ambulance to take them to a luxury rehabilitation center.” No one in the country is willing to offer this kind of care and rescue to the Shiite terror militia in Lebanon. Many here believe that Israel and Benjamin Netanyahu are once again making a tactical mistake to satisfy their American allies. A ceasefire on the eve of delivering a knockout blow is foolish, but it appears that Israel was forced into this decision.
Even Christian politicians in Lebanon are dissatisfied, repeatedly emphasizing in recent weeks that Hezbollah must be dismantled. These same Lebanese politicians openly advocate for peace with their southern neighbor, Israel. However, the reason for this situation is clear: Massive American pressure. The sad reality is that Lebanon was on the verge of a strategic political shift, but the US missed the opportunity for selfish reasons. It is true that significant strategic successes were achieved on the northern front, but one must not forget the difference between actual security and the perception of security.
Cabinet approves ceasefire agreement with Hezbollah
On Tuesday evening, after weeks of negotiations, the Israeli Security Cabinet approved the ceasefire agreement with Lebanon’s Hezbollah. The meeting took place at the Defense Ministry in Tel Aviv. Ten ministers voted in favor, while National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir voted against. The agreement came into effect at 4 a.m.
A statement from the Prime Minister’s Office read: “The Security Cabinet has approved the US-proposed ceasefire in Lebanon by a majority of ten to one. Israel appreciates the role of the US in the negotiation process and reserves the right to respond to any threat to its security.”
Shortly after, Netanyahu’s office released another statement, announcing that the prime minister had spoken with US President Joe Biden and thanked him for American support in reaching the ceasefire agreement. Netanyahu emphasized that “Israel retains full freedom of action in enforcing the agreement.”
Ben-Gvir voiced his opposition on X, stating: “The Cabinet’s decision is a grave mistake. A ceasefire at this time will not bring the people of the north back to their homes, will not deter Hezbollah, and will miss a historic opportunity to deliver a decisive blow to them and bring them to their knees.”
I agree with Ben-Gvir, which is not typically the case.
In an address to the Israeli public, Netanyahu stated that the duration of the ceasefire would depend on developments in Lebanon. He reiterated that Israel would respond immediately should Hezbollah violate the agreement: “In full coordination with the US, we retain our military freedom of action. If Hezbollah breaches the agreement, rearms, rebuilds terrorist infrastructure near the border, or fires rockets, we will strike.”
The return of the Lebanese Army to the south? This is nothing but self-deception. The Lebanese Army is under the control of a government in which Hezbollah is a central component. It is the same army that stood by idly as Hezbollah armed itself and built a massive rocket arsenal threatening Israeli civilians.
An international monitoring mechanism? This is too reminiscent of past agreements—impressive on paper but toothless and often failing within months.
Israel’s threats not taken seriously: “Should Hezbollah break the agreements, the land of the cedars will burn.” History shows that all of Israel’s threats have fallen flat. Just as after the Second Lebanon War (2006), after the Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon (2000), after the withdrawal from Gaza (2005), and now, nothing will change.
To soothe tensions, particularly with his voters, Netanyahu gave a statement last night explaining the reasons for the ceasefire with the Shiite terror militia. He stressed that the Israeli army would resume attacks should the agreement be violated. Netanyahu primarily justified his decision by citing significant delays in the delivery of weapons and equipment. “These delays will soon be resolved, and Israel will equip itself with advanced weapons that protect soldiers’ lives and provide additional firepower to accomplish missions,” he said.
Another critical point was the separation of conflict fronts and the isolation of Hamas. “Since the second day of the war, Hamas has relied on Hezbollah fighting alongside them. If Hezbollah is out of the game, Hamas is left to fight alone,” Netanyahu said. The increased pressure on Hamas, he added, would contribute to the sacred mission of liberating the hostages.
Netanyahu highlighted the damage already inflicted on Hezbollah: “On October 8, Hezbollah attacked us. A year later, they are no longer the same organization. We have set them back decades. We eliminated [Hassan] Nasrallah, the heart of their leadership. We killed their top commanders, destroyed most of their rockets and missiles, eliminated thousands of their fighters, and obliterated the underground infrastructure they built over years at our border. Strategic targets throughout Lebanon were hit, and dozens of terror highrises in Dahieh were destroyed. The ground in Beirut is shaking.”
Netanyahu underscored these points to reassure his right-wing voters, who are dissatisfied with the ceasefire. He and his government must insist on:
- A demilitarized security zone (No Man’s Land) in southern Lebanon: Several kilometers north of Israel’s border, devoid of civilian presence. This would make it clear that this is the price for Hezbollah’s aggressions. The zone would be enforced by the Israeli Air Force to prevent villages from being used as hiding spots for Hezbollah fighters—because such villages would no longer exist.
- Hezbollah’s withdrawal north of the Litani River and beyond anti-tank missile range: A wider security corridor must be established to prevent a lasting threat to Israel.
- Full freedom of action for Israel: Israel must retain the right to combat any threat anytime and anywhere, especially if international monitoring mechanisms fail to prevent arms smuggling. Ultimately, Israel must be able to rely on itself.
- International sanctions against Hezbollah, including its political arm: The goal is to dry up the organization’s financial sources. This is a necessary step to free Lebanon from Iran’s grip and return the country to being the “Switzerland of the Middle East” rather than the “Hellmouth of the Middle East” created by Hezbollah and Iran.
Disappointment in the north
In a discussion with representatives of northern communities, which was marked by disputes and heated arguments, Netanyahu stated that there was currently no plan to allow residents of the north to return to their homes, as the agreement is limited to 60 days. “I went home very pessimistic,” said one community leader who participated in the meeting with Netanyahu.
The community leaders harshly criticized the ceasefire deal, and the atmosphere was tense. Netanyahu, for his part, remained calm, despite the sharp and unpleasant remarks. Moshe Davidovitz, chairman of the Mateh Asher Regional Council in the north and head of the Frontline Forum, accused Netanyahu:
“We feel like we’re in a theater of the absurd, and the dice have already been cast. You never intended to involve us. Fortunately, your director-general and ministers in your government told you that we represent the residents of the Galilee. You didn’t consult us; you had no intention of explaining to us what is really going on. Our residents have been abandoned. Our residents cannot return safely to their homes, as you promised in the media. What kind of ‘security’ are you talking about?”
No comments:
Post a Comment