Iran and Hezbollah: Israel’s Unending Cycle of War

Less than a week after the memorandum of understanding between Tehran and Washington concluded the stuttering, three-month US-Israel war on Iran – for now – Israel’s perspective emerged sharply. A recent poll revealed 92% of Israelis believe the US has relinquished their victory over a long-standing adversary, with nearly half insisting attacks on Lebanon and Iran-backed Hezbollah should persist despite Washington’s entreaties. This tension underscores the deep rift between Israel and its principal ally.

Since the October 7, 2023, Hamas-led assault on Israel—which killed 1,139 people—Israel has waged continuous regional conflicts. These include a genocide in Gaza resulting in over 73,000 Palestinian deaths and widespread destruction, repeated strikes against Iran (twice), and operations against Hezbollah in Lebanon, Syrian incursions, and sporadic attacks on Yemen’s Houthis, all aligned with Tehran. Despite this protracted engagement, the pauses since October 7 are transient, as Netanyahu’s government maintains a war-footed state.

Within Israel’s divided parliament, support for these wars unites political factions, even as strategies diverge. This consensus is rooted in a societal narrative linking the October 7 attack to historical Jewish trauma. Israeli sociologist Daniel Bar-Tal of Tel Aviv University noted that the assault was framed not merely as a standalone catastrophe but as the latest chapter in a prolonged story of persecution. This narrative embeds “the justification of national goals, glorification of the Jewish nation, and a collective sense of victimhood,” alongside the delegitimization of Palestinians, which collectively underpin public backing for endless conflict.

Gains and losses

Despite three years of relentless war, Israelis perceive minimal security gains. Hamas retains significant control in Gaza, and Iran’s regime—Netanyahu had predicted would collapse within days of the war’s start—remains defiant. “There is no particular achievement that will stop this eternal war,” stated Shaiel Ben-Ephraim, an Israeli analyst. He identified two drivers: immediate security dynamics and a profound shift in Israeli consciousness post-October 7. The former reflects tactical imperatives; the latter stems from trauma redefining perceptions of threat.

As elections approach, Netanyahu faces mounting challenges—the October 7 attack’s aftermath, corruption trials, and stalled military objectives. Rivals like Gadi Eisenkot and Yair Lapid offer no compelling alternatives to Netanyahu’s war-centric doctrine. “This is the result of October 7, when all these measures failed,” Ben-Ephraim added, explaining the resolve to eradicate perceived threats entirely, including Iran and Türkiye. “The desire now is not just to destroy Gaza and southern Lebanon but to eliminate Iran and any other potential future threat.”

Even if Israel achieves tactical gains in Lebanon, Ben-Ephraim warns that the cycle of preemptive strikes ensures perpetual conflict. Elections loom large, with Netanyahu’s survival hinging on war narratives deflecting accountability. His rivals—Eisenkot, a former Defense Minister, and Lapid, whose Hezbollah war enthusiasm ironically clashes with U.S. diplomacy—lack viable peace platforms. In this environment, the only altering force would be a strategic reversal for Israel: a scenario deemed unlikely without regional upheaval.

Source link