After the Intense Escalation Between Hezbollah and Israel: Is Peace Now Out of Reach?

The United States has failed to dissuade Hezbollah from retaliating for the assassination of its commander, Fouad Shukr, who was killed in an Israeli airstrike at the end of July.

In an article published by The Guardian, journalist Simon Tisdall writes that “the sudden and alarming escalation in fighting between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon over the weekend is what the United States, France, and Britain have been desperately working to prevent since Israel assassinated Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran nearly a month ago.”

He adds that the renewed violence, which appears to have subsided quickly but could reignite at any moment, represents a serious potential setback for international peace efforts. It is particularly a blow to U.S. President Joe Biden, whose hopes for achieving a broader settlement in the Middle East before leaving office are now in dire straits.

The fighting is also likely to negatively impact the indirect ceasefire talks and prisoner release negotiations between Israel and Hamas in Cairo, which are taking place against the backdrop of ongoing violence in Gaza. Hezbollah is closely allied with Hamas, and both organizations are, to some extent, supported and managed by the Iranian government, according to the article.

Israeli airstrikes in Gaza over recent days have reportedly resulted in dozens of deaths. The fear now, as in the past, is that all these bitter conflicts could merge into a massive regional conflagration, drawing in other Iranian proxies in Yemen, Syria, and Iraq. This could, in turn, force the United States and its allies, who have bolstered their military presence in recent weeks, to respond militarily. The ultimate nightmare scenario is that Iran itself might face off against Israel directly (or vice versa). In Israel, there was a hint of this possibility in April when Tehran launched an unprecedented barrage of missiles and drones at Israel, most of which were intercepted.

After the assassination of Haniyeh on July 31, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei declared that Iran was obliged to punish Israel, seemingly threatening a full-scale war. However, this larger threat has not materialized so far. What Israel refers to as “preemptive action” against Hezbollah may have been partly motivated by fears of this promised Iranian retaliation.

There are also suspicions that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu deliberately seized the opportunity to escalate the border confrontation with Hezbollah, which had been simmering since October 7. Opponents and critics accuse Netanyahu of deliberately obstructing the Gaza agreement in his unrealistic pursuit of “total victory”—and of deliberately fueling a broader conflict to aid his political survival.

Netanyahu’s nihilistic strategy has deepened social and political divisions within Israel, angered the families of hostages in Gaza, and unsettled Israel’s allies. It has also sparked outrage among the country’s security and military leaders. Relations between Netanyahu’s government and its main protector and arms supplier, the United States, have reached an all-time low, according to the article.

But what is Netanyahu’s plan? Does he even have one? His ruling majority in the Knesset and his position as Prime Minister depend on the support of a handful of ultra-religious and Jewish nationalist ministers and lawmakers. And since he might face jail time on corruption charges once out of power, opponents say Netanyahu has no interest in peace on any front.

In fact, it is claimed that he and Yahya Sinwar, the Hamas leader in Gaza, share a common interest in keeping the flames of war, hatred, and division burning—and spreading. Because if they fail, both of them will pay a personal price.

Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert expressed all of this in an unusually scathing attack on Netanyahu and the “terrorist criminals”—his description of two far-right ministers, Itamar Ben Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich—published in Haaretz as the latest fighting in Lebanon erupted. Olmert wrote that Netanyahu is “a narcissistic, immoral fraudster of weak character” who is leading the State of Israel to ruin. He added, “Netanyahu does not want the hostages to return, and in the absence of an agreement to release all the hostages, there is no real chance of stopping the latest military action in Gaza.”

He continued, “This will last for several more days. Meanwhile, the violent conflict in the north will continue… Hezbollah is launching long-range missiles, and Israel is responding on an unprecedented scale, leading to an escalation into a full-blown war.” Olmert warned that the ongoing confrontation on multiple fronts “is the only option that serves Netanyahu’s priorities, and apparently also Yahya Sinwar’s needs. Both hope that Iran will eventually enter into a direct confrontation with Israel”—which would force the United States, Britain, and France to intervene.

The former Prime Minister called for an immediate halt to the war, urging Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi, Shin Bet head Ronen Bar, and Mossad chief David Barnea—who have publicly criticized Netanyahu—to resign. The goal, presumably, would be to bring down Netanyahu: a laudable, long-overdue goal.

All is not lost, however. At least for now, the explosion everyone fears has not occurred. The recent fighting between Israel and Hezbollah, though dramatic, has been limited in scope. Both sides seem to have largely avoided targeting civilian areas. The reported casualties are minor. Hezbollah claims the “first phase” of its attack is over. The adversaries are walking a very fine line. But it could all be much worse.

When Netanyahu tries to use this confrontation, as he certainly will, to prove to Americans and the West that Israel is under immediate mortal threat—or if he escalates again—his allies should think twice before jumping in. The greatest threat to Israel’s existence and the Gaza ceasefire is not external but comes from within, according to the article.