The ground operation in Lebanon, which began last Tuesday, is proceeding as planned. Israel was aware in advance that dozens, and even hundreds, of Radwan Force terrorists and local armed Hezbollah operatives, remained in the villages near the Israeli border, even after most of the predominantly Shiite population fled north, alongside most of the Radwan Force unit.
Hezbollah was prepared for the Israeli entry, especially since we essentially notified them the operation would be limited to the area close to the border in advance. The local command was able to prepare for the Israeli operation.
3 View gallery
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Iran's supreme leader Ali Khamenei
(Photo: Alon Spiegel, AP)
This is what happens when we try to coordinate our moves with the U.S. administration in advance. Within a few hours, all the information leaks to the American media and Hezbollah receives operational intelligence on a silver platter, allowing them to position their forces.
Hezbollah's goal is destruction, not defense
Hezbollah is a terrorist army, not preparing to defend territory but rather for the survival of the organization and its infrastructure while inflicting casualties and perhaps even attempting abductions.
If Hezbollah were truly defending Lebanon, they would have prepared larger forces to prevent the IDF from entering the villages. But as a terrorist army, much like the Islamic State (ISIS) in Mosul and Hamas in Gaza, their goal is to survive and cause maximum casualties and pain to the attacking army.
Hezbollah is aware of the IDF's sensitivity to casualties and abduction, which is why causing suffering is their explicit war objective. This is why Hezbollah's terrorist army isn’t carrying out maneuvers such as counterattacks or attempts to flank and surprise Israeli forces.
In contrast, the IDF is constantly on the move, both in attack and defense, aiming to defeat and neutralize the enemy as was done in the Gaza operation. Small groups of Hezbollah soldiers are trying to hinder our forces through static ambushes and using anti-tank missiles and explosives to prevent us from exposing the assault infrastructure they prepared for the "Conquest of the Galilee" operation.
As with any ground operation by any modern army in the world, the IDF pays an "entry fee" for fighting in a new geographic area and against an enemy it doesn’t yet fully know in practical terms.
This explains the casualties — nine killed and dozens injured — in the first 24 hours of the operation. It results from the terrain, which in Lebanon is different and mountainous and from Hezbollah's ambush tactics on the outskirts of the villages which are different from those our soldiers encountered in Gaza.
Hezbollah's underground infrastructure in South Lebanon
Unfortunately, there's always a need to "pay the price” until combat methods are fully adjusted down to the smallest details, including fire coverage and maneuvering in an area where the topography, geology, dense vegetation and structures on the outskirts of the villages present new challenges.
It can be assumed that the IDF quickly learned from its experiences and that the fighting is now being conducted with much more preparation and preemptive fire before the forces enter, including the use of the Israeli Air Force before investigating a Radwan Force weapons and combat tunnels. As in Gaza, it can be assumed that the most intense battles in Lebanon are taking place in the first days and enemy complexes the IDF attacks.
This was the case in Gaza and it's the same in Lebanon. But after IDF soldiers "break" the enemy's resistance, the enemy usually retreats and resorts to long-distance attacks via remotely triggered explosives, booby traps, anti-tank missiles, sniper fire and short-range mortar fire.
That's what's happening now. It seems that Hezbollah in southern Lebanon has not yet been fully broken, but the IDF is managing to advance, minimize casualties and, most importantly, achieve all of its objectives.
This is seen in the massive amount of weaponry that the forces are uncovering, which, if the Radwan Force had the opportunity to use, would have resulted in a catastrophe many times worse than what Hamas did on October 7.
The IDF's considerations against Iran
Meanwhile, the IDF is preparing for retaliatory strikes in response to the Iranian missile attack. Israel had been in direct conflict with Iran for several months now, effectively fighting another campaign in the ongoing war with our main enemy, which is located more than 1,500 km (932 miles) away.
Someone once said that Israel doesn’t have a border with Iran, but Iran has a direct border with Israel, referring to Hezbollah, which threatens the country from Lebanon and Syria on Iran's behalf.
CNN's coverage of Iran's attack on Israel
Now, as Hezbollah's ability to harm Israel is rapidly eroding, Jerusalem has been effectively facing Iran directly since April. Therefore, the main consideration Israel must take into account is to what extent the retaliatory strikes against the Iranian missile attack serve the long-term objectives of this conflict.
Any strike against Iran on its territory requires a tremendous amount of resources, planning and American support and thus the targets mustn’t be merely tactical or local, even if they temporarily restore Israel's deterrence.
At the current stage of the conflict with Iran, the focus should be on Israel’s overarching objective. In my assessment, Israel's long-term goal is the collapse of the fanatical Shiite Ayatollah regime in Iran. Israel doesn’t have the ability to achieve this directly.
Iran isn’t Hezbollah, a relatively small terrorist organization with limited capabilities located right on our doorstep in Lebanon, where Israel can reach them within minutes by air and ground.
Iran is an enemy of a completely different caliber, and only the Iranian people — over 80 million strong — can topple the Ayatollah regime and replace it with a more reasonable government that isn’t committed to spreading the Islamic Revolution and destroying Israel.
How does this relate to the response to the Iranian missile attack? Instead of thinking about a retaliatory and deterrent response, Israel needs to see its response to the Iranian missile attack as part of a long-term campaign aimed at bringing down the Iranian regime.
Ultimately, Israel’s strikes on Iran should focus on weakening the regime’s power bases rather than causing destruction that would further worsen the social and economic distress of the Iranian people.
This is what many experts suggest, arguing that it’s a waste to use Israel’s resources and planning capabilities on a strike whose results will only be short-term. Therefore, the retaliatory strikes must avoid rallying the Iranian people around their fanatical religious leadership and instead emphasize the alienation between much of the population and its leadership, making it clear to those Iranians who fear the regime and obey it that it’s weaker than it appears and can be overthrown.
Ultimately, Israel’s strikes on Iran should focus on weakening the regime’s power bases rather than causing destruction that would further worsen the social and economic distress of the Iranian people. The Mossad and the IDF are well aware of the regime's power bases and its weak points — and they know how to target them.
Another constraint to consider is the U.S. For the Biden-Harris administration, on the eve of elections, it’s crucial to prevent a regional war and to avoid a rise in energy prices as a result of damage to Iran's oil infrastructure. Some might argue that a regional war is already taking place in the Middle East, with Iran and its proxies involved in Yemen, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and the Palestinians.
The U.S. and Israeli concerns
But when the U.S. talks about a regional war, they mean a conflict where Iran and its proxies will attempt, as they’ve already threatened, to strike at the U.S.’s Arab allies in the Middle East, chiefly Saudi Arabia and its oil facilities, the UAE and Jordan. The U.S. also fears that Iran and its proxies will try to harm the approximately 3,000 American soldiers still stationed in Iraq in such a scenario.
The second concern is the potential worsening of the U.S. economy ahead of the elections due to rising global energy prices. These two factors guide the U.S. in its firm demand that Israel avoid targeting two types of objectives: first, nuclear facilities, which the U.S. believes would lead to an all-out war.
Second, Iran’s oil infrastructure, as attacking these would cause a spike in energy prices and trigger a regional war, including strikes on Saudi oil facilities and elsewhere in the Middle East, as well as attacks on tankers transporting oil from the Persian Gulf to the rest of the world.
Israel can’t ignore the American demands, especially given the recognition that we are already in a prolonged conflict with the Iranian regime. In this confrontation, Jerusalem will need U.S. support — both in defense to intercept missiles and possibly in offense in the future.
It’s clear that the U.S. won’t join Israel in this effort at this stage, a fact that has already been delivered to Jerusalem. Therefore, Israel must carefully heed the "advice" U.S. President Joe Biden continuously sends its way.
3 View gallery
U.S. President Joe Biden, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei
(Photo: SAUL LOEB / AFP, Alex Kolomoisky)
A third consideration is operational. It’s not simple to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities comprehensively enough to neutralize them for years. Israel would most likely need U.S. aid if it wanted to accomplish that, if only because the facilities are numerous and scattered across Iran.
On the other hand, oil facilities are easier to attack, but this would require significant effort and perhaps more than one wave of strikes. Given that Israel is engaged in a long-term campaign — and especially since the Israeli Air Force and the country are currently deeply involved in active fighting in Lebanon, Gaza and the West Bank, as well as needing to ensure the Houthis in Yemen don’t inflict significant damage and casualties — these factors highlight the importance of choosing targets carefully. Their focus should be on significantly weakening the Iranian regime without triggering a regional war.
Get the Ynetnews app on your smartphone: