Post New

Is Bibi escalating a war with Hezbullah in order to put a finger on the US election scales? If a war breaks out, the Biden administration will be forced to stand by and support Israel as it invades Lebanon, surely alienating a lot of young progressive voters who just recently started to warm to Kamala.

Bibi wants a Trump presidency and he seems to be making a move to secure it.

Is Bibi escalating a war with Hezbullah in order to put a finger on the US election scales?

Almost certainly not. His decisions regarding Hezbollah are almost certainly being driven first and foremost by domestic considerations, both political and national security interests. Seems pretty unlikely that the potential impact on the U.S. elections would be anything more than an afterthought in those calculations, compared to the vastly more important direct effects of war with Lebanon would have on his (and Israel's) situation.

His decisions regarding Hezbollah are almost certainly being driven first and foremost by domestic considerations, both political and national security interests.

What domestic political and security concerns would drive Bibi to go to war with Hezbullah in the month leading up to the U.S. election? This conflict is a year old, why the sudden rush to war?

The outcome of the US election IS a domestic political consideration in Israel. Especially for Bibi.

What domestic political and security concerns would drive Bibi to go to war with Hezbullah in the month leading up to the U.S. election? This conflict is a year old, why the sudden rush to war?

Because the conflict is a year old, and has not reached any satisfactory endpoint for Israel.

The argument has long run that it is in Netanyahu's personal best interests to keep the war in Gaza going, because it forestalls his reckoning on all of his domestic political problems (not least the massive security failure that allowed the 10/7 attacks in the first place). The presumption is that as long as the war is ongoing, he can deflect an accounting on those other issues. That's probably true, but only to an extent - if the war footing reaches a de facto stalemate or natural pause, he's going to be vulnerable. Netanyahu needs progress - or at least movement or uncertainty - to keep everyone from considering the possibility of a change at the top.

Plus, Israel has been facing somewhat of a two-front conflict for a while now. They evacuated several tens of thousands of people from the north, basically abandoning Kiryat Shmona and surrounding cities near the Lebanese border, and had to station a non-trivial force up there to deter Hezbollah attacks in support of Hamas. There's been no progress on getting that combat zone under control, either.

IMHO, the relevant date driving this isn't November 5, but October 7. We're coming up on an anniversary that's going to have profound political and emotional significance for the Israeli electorate. Netanyahu almost certainly wanted to go into that with some military momentum, which he wasn't going to get in Gaza. Hence, Hezbollah. Far more significant than whatever happens with the U.S. election.

As I've said before in other contexts about the conflict, it's not about us. Hamas didn't care who the U.S. President was when they planned their attacks, and I highly doubt that Netanyahu gives much weight to the U.S. in making decisions as momentous as whether to escalate war with Hezbollah.

This conflict is a year old, why the sudden rush to war?

Replying again (with apologies) because I forgot to mention the other likely explanation - happenstance.

Israel may not have had a choice on the timing. Per at least one report, Hezbollah was becoming suspicious:

As for the timing of the explosions, Israeli and US officials have said that Israeli intelligence services wanted the explosions to mark the first act of an all-out war with Hezbollah, but acted early after Hezbollah became suspicious – with more than one member believing the devices may have been tampered with.

"It was a use it or lose it moment," one US official told Axios, describing the reasoning Israel gave the US for the timing of the attack, although officials said Washington was not told of the specifics of the attack..

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-ea...

So it looks like Israel made the decision that it would be willing to overturn the status quo and go to war with Hezbollah earlier in the year (the pagers started being shipped into Lebanon in the spring), but the timing of that war may have been precipitated by Hezbollah's suspicions and not a specific timing choice by Israel.

I tend to doubt Israel is concerned about war with Lebanon. That would be like us being concerned about war with Mexico (if Mexico were launching the occasional missile at us). Mexico is not an existential threat to the US, and Lebanon isn't an existential threat to Israel. Israel would mop the floor with them. As they have done in the past (30 years ago?).

“ So it looks like Israel made the decision that it would be willing to overturn the status quo and go to war with Hezbollah earlier in the year (the pagers started being shipped into Lebanon in the spring), but the timing of that war may have been precipitated by Hezbollah's suspicions and not a specific timing choice by Israel.”

That’s patently ridiculous. You don’t start a war because your technology might be obsolete in a few months. I doubt the Israeli military is led around by a technological nose ring.

That’s patently ridiculous.

I disagree.

This took -likely- years of planning. If your enemy is "on to you", you are faced with a choice: abandon all that work, or trigger it early and hope it has some effect. Likely they would never be able to get away with it again, so you roll the dice and hit the button.

That's what I would do if I had an operation years in the planning that was in jeopardy of being thwarted. (Caveat: no Israeli assets were in jeopardy by pushing the button...if there were assets in jeopardy, the decision may have been different.)

It also served as a major disruption to their communications since Hezbollah is going to be more suspicious of any new devices, which will delay deployment while they inspect them for booby traps.

I'm still not convinced it complied with international law, but I have to concede it was very clever.

That’s patently ridiculous. You don’t start a war because your technology might be obsolete in a few months.

Not ridiculous. It makes Bibi look good to the Israelis who are not happy with his 10-7, distracts focus on his problems and rallies the Israelis if there actually is a war. We did the same with GW2.

The anniversary of 10/7 has little to do with hezbullah and starting a war with them does nothing to signal a success in Gaza or an end to the war there. Opening a second front is politically and militarily risky.

You’ve offered a range of motives for why Bibi might start a war without addressing why the goal of intervening in the US election isn’t one of them. The Democratic Party has an ambiguous relationship with conservatives in Israel and even with Kamala in office the Israeli state has to be concerned about how far she can support them politically.

Trump, on the other had, has no qualms about supporting the most militant racists in the settler movement. Given this, the war with Hezbullah makes a lot of sense in pushing against the fissures in the Democratic Party political alliance.

It really is the only thing that explains the timing and makes sense of the risk to reward in this war push.

That’s patently ridiculous. You don’t start a war because your technology might be obsolete in a few months. I doubt the Israeli military is led around by a technological nose ring.

I think you're misunderstanding the point. This isn't a technology issue.

Israel started implementing the pager operation in the spring of this year. The plan was that the pagers would be detonated as part of a full-scale war against Hezbollah. The pager operation, if successful, would cripple Hezbollah's communications network and maim some non-trivial number of their personnel - which would give Israel considerable tactical advantages in the early stages of an escalation of hostilities.

The specific timing of when to "push the button" on the pagers was fluid. Once implemented, the pager tactic would only be successful if it wasn't discovered. The pagers were sabotaged by Israel - they were adulterated with several grams of explosive and separate computer hardware to allow for remote detonation. If that were discovered, Hezbollah would be able to avoid the trap.

So the decision to possibly go to war appears to have been made much earlier in the year. The pagers started shipping in the spring. The specific timing of when to set them off may have been driven by Hezbollah's suspicions, not by any specific desire on the part of Israel to start this phase off before or after either 10/7 or 11/5.

Again, exceedingly unlikely that any of this was driven by the US election cycle. I have no doubt that Netanyahu prefers a second Trump term to President Harris, but that was probably not a significant consideration in this specific decision.

Caveat: no Israeli assets were in jeopardy by pushing the button...if there were assets in jeopardy, the decision may have been different.<\i>

The tail is wagging the dog here, and A LOT of “assets” are at risk if this ends in a ground war. The Stalingrad like situation in Gaza is untenable, and adding a second front to that failure is not likely to make it winnable.

So the decision to possibly go to war appears to have been made much earlier in the year. <\i>

That’s your assumption. It’s just as likely that the need to use the toy now has led to war.

You’ve offered a range of motives for why Bibi might start a war without addressing why the goal of intervening in the US election isn’t one of them. The Democratic Party has an ambiguous relationship with conservatives in Israel and even with Kamala in office the Israeli state has to be concerned about how far she can support them politically.

Trump, on the other had, has no qualms about supporting the most militant racists in the settler movement. Given this, the war with Hezbullah makes a lot of sense in pushing against the fissures in the Democratic Party political alliance.

It barely has any impact in pushing against the Democratic Party alliance - in fact, I think it helps the Democrats. Hezbollah is less connected to the cause of Palestinian statehood, and more transparently a projection of Iranian military hegemony in the region, than Hamas (much less conflict in the West Bank). Engaging with Lebanon is more likely to help Harris than hurt her, because it distracts away from the Israel-Palestinian conflict. It's far easier - and defensible for Democrats - to justify sending arms to Israel to fight against Hezbollah than to fight in Gaza. The more they can talk about things going on in the region other than bombings in Gaza, the better for them. At worst it's somewhat of a wash for Democrats.

That's why the domestic factors I raised are so much more significant. They launched now because they were about to lose a once-in-a-generation tactical coup against Hezbollah's personnel and communications network. It's politically beneficial domestically to Netanyahu to show movement in the war right around 10/7, especially given that Israel had to abandon a big chunk of territory up along the Lebanese border.

It would be silly for Netanyahu to base the decision whether to launch or not based on something as minor as an indirect and potentially trivial impact on the U.S. election - one that could just as easily be a benefit to the Democrats as the Republicans - rather than the far more significant direct impacts on his own country.

It’s just as likely that the need to use the toy now has led to war.

It's not a "toy." It was a deadly serious (and successful) act of sabotage that crippled Hezbollah's communication network (and hindered their ability to replace it, since they have to be suspicious of any alternative technology). It injured several thousand of their personnel. It demoralized them and cast doubt on the capabilities of their leadership, certainly their counter-intelligence folks.

Not everything is about us. Not everything revolves around the things that we think are important, like who wins the Presidency. Israel, like every country on earth, has their own domestic issues and policy concerns and national interests and everything else that influences both their electorate and their political leaders. Netanyahu, like every politician everywhere, is going to be first and foremost concerned with his own domestic electorate, and not the possible second- or third-order effects of going to war on the election in another country. Even the U.S.

It barely has any impact in pushing against the Democratic Party alliance - in fact, I think it helps the Democrats. Hezbollah is less connected to the cause of Palestinian statehood, and more transparently a projection of Iranian military hegemony in the region, than Hamas (much less conflict in the West Bank).

This is where we disagree. The young progressives who might make a difference on college campuses across the purple states don’t share your instinctive acceptance of Israel as a natural ally of the US in the region, and could generally care less about hezbullah’s relationship with Iran. They see an extension of Israeli war crimes in the region. It’s hard to shake the image of an obedient daughter obliterated because the Israeli military had to use their Trojan horse immediately.

Those votes, should an Israeli war in Lebanon occur(and why use the toy if you’re not going to war), could be the difference in our election.

And there is nothing silly about Bibi’s calculus. As I said, a trump victory seals settler rule over the Israeli state, and the settler coalition has no qualms about waging total war on the Palestinian people and their allies in the region. A Harris victory might spell the end of Bibi, or at least the end of his free reign.

Unless you assume the war decision was already made, which I don’t, then the decision to activate was a decision to “use the toy”.

As I said before, US politics is also domestic politics in Israel. Given their vulnerability and their dependence on us support, American politics matters A LOT. This is especially true for the ruling settler coalition.

The young progressives who might make a difference on college campuses across the purple states don’t share your instinctive acceptance of Israel as a natural ally of the US in the region, and could generally care less about hezbullah’s relationship with Iran.

---------------------

Agreed. The New Yorker has a story on this exact dynamic in Michigan.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2024/09/30/unco...

Troy Zukowski, a representative of the Michigan Jewish Democrats who considers himself “center left,” told me, “If Harris were to threaten to cut off aid to Israel, that would be political suicide. But I’m confident she won’t do anything like that.” Other Michigan voters have the opposite view. In 2022, Michigan had the highest youth turnout of any state, and it has the largest proportion of Arab American residents. According to a poll in March, a majority of Americans disapproved of Israel’s military actions in Gaza. Another poll showed that a majority of Americans did not want to send weapons to Israel; among likely Democratic voters, young voters, and Black voters, the proportion was at least three-quarters. “The D.C. bigwigs I talk to are in total denial about how pissed off people are,” Andy Levin said. When it comes to the general election, “they go, ‘What are these people gonna do? Stay home?’ ” He widened his eyes and smacked a palm against his forehead: Yeah, no **** they will.

WTH

The young progressives who might make a difference on college campuses across the purple states don’t share your instinctive acceptance of Israel as a natural ally of the US in the region, and could generally care less about hezbullah’s relationship with Iran. They see an extension of Israeli war crimes in the region. It’s hard to shake the image of an obedient daughter obliterated because the Israeli military had to use their Trojan horse immediately.

But those folks' opinions aren't going to be changed by engaging with Hezbollah. The faction within the Democratic party that's super-engaged on this issue isn't going to have their attitudes changed, or their hands strengthened, by opening up the conflict with Hezbollah.

That's the point. Compared to what's happening in Gaza and the West Bank, the impact on "young progressives who might make a difference on college campuses" from the engagement with Hezbollah is as trivial as a mousefart in a hurricane. And for the broader Democratic party, it makes it easier to minimize the disruption to the election effort. The broader the conflict, the less that any of the other players in the Democratic party have to treat the hostilities as solely about the Palestinians. In a close election, every issue is important - but even given that, the significance of "war with Hezbollah" (rather than with Hamas) is going to be so far down the list as to be trivial.

And there is nothing silly about Bibi’s calculus. As I said, a trump victory seals settler rule over the Israeli state, and the settler coalition has no qualms about waging total war on the Palestinian people and their allies in the region. A Harris victory might spell the end of Bibi, or at least the end of his free reign.

You're vastly overstating how decisive the US Administration matters to Netanyahu's fate, and implicitly massively overstating the role that he can play in affecting the electoral outcome here. Trump can't save Bibi if he loses control of the domestic political situation, and Harris can't doom him if he has the support of the electorate. And Netanyahu can have only the tiniest, barest, smallest impact on the U.S. election - which will almost certainly be minor compared to our domestic politics.

IOW, going to war with Hezbollah will certainly be something very important to the Israeli electorate, and certainly something that it utterly unimportant to the US electorate. Given that reality, it would indeed be silly for Netanyahu to base his decision making based on speculation about the US electorate rather than the impact on the Israeli electorate.

Netanyahu, like every politician everywhere, is going to be first and foremost concerned with his own domestic electorate, and not the possible second- or third-order effects of going to war on the election in another country.

Netanyahu has to look at his overall picture.
He's still fighting in Gaza, but has consolidated some and no longer has the entirety of the IDF engaged. Up north, Hezbollah has been firing rockets left and right for months at Haifa and was reported thinking about doing a 10/7-style attack of their own (granted, that's much harder to do along their border with Lebanon).

Should the Israelis sit back and wait for Hezbollah/Iran to fire even more rockets? Or should they send a message that says 'We can touch you anytime we want' and take several key chess pieces off the board? They clearly chose the latter and by doing so have likely set Hezbollah's communications back by several months, if not years.

BTW. For those who want to be Leon Panetta and call what the Israelis did 'terrorism', then be prepared to stop supporting US drone strikes anywhere in the world for any reason.

I agree. Hezbollah =/= Hamas. The plight of the Palestinians is tragic, and complicated. For good or bad, they are represented by Hamas (which also is a terrorist group). Hezbollah is a terrorist organization bent on the annihilation of Israel. They aren't terribly concerned about the Palestinians. About the only things they have in common is they hate Israel, and are funded by Iran.

Now, it is possible that some people aren't aware of that. So there may be some erroneous linkage amongst the US electorate (e.g. some progressives). But not much, IMO. I agree it won't affect the US election much. Not an issue for most of the populace.

You’ve offered a range of motives for why Bibi might start a war without addressing why the goal of intervening in the US election isn’t one of them.

I lack albaby's patience, so I will say this.
You have not addressed the possibility that Bibi is a lizard person and his goal is to distract people while he sheds his old skin.

Is he distracting from this?

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/25/world/middleeas...

As long as Bibi’s settler regime has the support of the US it will continue to do settler regime things. Things it was doing long before October 7th. Kamala will support the Israeli state as far as her coalition will permit. Trump and his rabidly Christian nationalist base will support the settler regime as far as the apocalypse. Bibi knows where his political future lies.

Is he distracting from this?

I just saw this a few minutes ago during my morning jaunt across the news pages, and yes, it is shocking. I do not know how Bibi isn’t a war criminal because of it.

My wife, who was raised Jewish (and occasionally references the heritage) agrees. Her quote: “I do not understand how the Jews, who had such horrible things done to them during World War II, can countenance this behavior today.”

I agree.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/25/world/middleeas...

Post New

US Policy FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.