The time has come to let it be said that the Middle East is on the brink of a much more serious war. After the devastating Israeli attack on what it said was Hezbollah’s headquarters in Beirut, which killed that organization’s leader Hassan Nasrallah, it appears the region is already there.
The Lebanese capital suffered a series of devastating explosions, according to its inhabitants. A friend of mine in the city said they were the most powerful she had ever heard in any of the Lebanon wars.
The Israel Defense Forces claimed on Saturday that it had eliminated Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and other commanders of the organization. Hezbollah later confirmed the death of its leader.
That did not mark the end of the bombings. Israeli forces announced that attacks against Hezbollah targets continue.
At the beginning of the day there were hopes, however dim, that Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was at least prepared to discuss a proposal for a 21-day ceasefire. It had been proposed by the United States and France with the support of Israel’s most important Western allies.
However, in a typically defiant – and at times aggressive – speech to the United Nations General Assembly in New York, Netanyahu did not mention diplomacy.
Israel, he declared, had no choice but to fight savage enemies who sought its annihilation. Hezbollah would be defeated and there would be a complete victory over Hamas in Gaza, which would ensure the return of the Israeli hostages.
Far from being lambs led to the slaughter – a phrase often used in Israel in reference to the Holocaust – Israel, he claimed, was winning.
The powerful attack in Beirut that occurred as he was concluding his speech was an even more emphatic sign that A truce in Lebanon was not on Israel’s agenda.
It seems more likely that the attack was coordinated to happen after Netanyahu’s threats that Israel could – and would – hit its enemies wherever they were.
The Pentagon, the US Department of Defense, said it had not received advance warning from Israel about the attack.
A photo released by the prime minister’s office in Jerusalem showed him controlling communications equipment in what appeared to be his hotel in New York City.
The caption said it was the moment he was authorizing the attack.
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken defended the policy he has been promoting for months. He said there was still room for negotiation. That statement is ringing more and more empty..
The Americans have very few levers to use against either side. By law, they cannot talk with Hezbollah or Hamas because they are classified as foreign terrorist organizations.
With the US elections just weeks away, they are less likely to apply more pressure on Israel than they have already put on it in the last year.
The challenges of Israel and Hezbollah
Powerful voices in the Israeli government and army wanted to attack Hezbollah in the days after the Hamas attacks on October 7. They maintained that they could deal a decisive blow to their enemies in Lebanon.
The Americans persuaded them not to do so, arguing that the trouble it would unleash throughout the region could negate any potential security benefits for Israel.
But over the last year, Netanyahu routinely defied President Joe Biden’s wishes about the way Israel conducted the war.
Despite supplying Israel with the planes and bombs it used in the Beirut attack, President Biden and his team were mere spectators.
His policy during the last year, as a constant supporter of Israel, was to try to influence Netanyahu, showing solidarity and support, providing weapons and diplomatic protection.
Biden believed he could persuade Netanyahu not only to change the way Israel fights – the president has repeatedly said it is causing too much suffering and killing too many Palestinian civilians – but to accept an American plan for the day after, which would be It was based on the creation of an independent Palestinian state existing side by side with Israel.
Netanyahu flatly rejected the idea and has ignored Biden’s advice.
After the attack in Beirut, Blinken repeated his view that a combination of deterrence and diplomacy had prevented a broader war in the Middle East. But as events quickly spiral out of US control, it doesn’t sound very convincing.
There are big decisions to make on the horizon. First of all, without Nasrallah, Hezbollah will have to decide what to do with the rest of its arsenal. Will they try to mount a much more intense attack on Israel? And if they don’t use the rest of their rockets and missiles, they might think that Israel can do them even more harm.
Israelis also face very momentous decisions. They have already mentioned a ground operation in Lebanon and, although they have not yet mobilized all the reservists they would need, the invasion is on their agenda.
Some in Lebanon believe that in a ground war Hezbollah could neutralize some of the power of the Israeli army.
Western diplomats, including Israel’s staunchest allies, hoped to calm the issue by urging Israel to accept a diplomatic solution.
Now you will find yourself looking at the events with dismay and also a sense of helplessness.
click here to read more stories from BBC News World.
You can also follow us on YouTube, instagram, TikTok, x, Facebook and in our new whatsapp channelwhere you will find breaking news and our best content.
And remember that you can receive notifications in our app. Download the latest version and activate them.
- Hezbollah confirms the death of its leader Hassan Nasrallah in an Israeli attack
- Who was Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of the powerful Islamist group Hezbollah that Israel eliminated in an airstrike on Beirut
- What is Hezbollah, Israel’s enemy in Lebanon (and how powerful it is)