‘Enough is enough’: In Israel, rationale for war trumps distrust of leaders
| Tel Aviv, Israel
As Israel batters Hezbollah in Lebanon, and as the world awaits Israel’s promised retaliation against Iran, Hezbollah’s sometimes deadly missile salvos are a reminder of the price Israelis are paying for the war on their northern border.
Still, while they are distrustful of their government, Israelis appear largely united around the war. The reason: a year of Hezbollah rocket fire that drove 65,000 residents of northern border communities from their homes.
Why We Wrote This
A story focused onTo endure war, a society usually needs both unity and trusted leadership. Yet as Israel takes on Hezbollah in Lebanon, the public consensus seems to be based mostly on a blend of confidence and caution – without faith in a government plan.
That unity mostly holds regarding Israel’s broader conflict with Iran, too. Most view the threats from Hezbollah and Iran as dangers that need to be confronted, and are increasingly confident Israel can do so.
“Of course everyone wants to destroy Hezbollah infrastructure – but the majority of Israelis don’t think the government has a clear policy,” cautions Dahlia Scheindlin, an expert on Israeli public opinion.
While the government said its objectives in Lebanon were to uproot Hezbollah infrastructure, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday suggested in an address directed at the Lebanese people that they should “free themselves from Hezbollah” or face a long war.
Israeli society is “starting from consensus” regarding the need to return northern residents home, says analyst Nimrod Goren, “but then you bring in the right-wing reality of this government, which has different goals.”
The blue skies above the northern port city of Haifa these days are a story told in the white contrails of Hezbollah missiles and the Israeli air defense systems knocking them down. From the ground are heard the attendant booms, the wail of air raid sirens, and the beating of footsteps running to shelter.
Early evening Wednesday, the army said a salvo of about 90 rockets had been fired from Lebanon toward northern Israel that day in a span of eight minutes.
In one town, a couple walking their dogs were killed. Television reports showed a burned-out home struck by a rocket and the funerals of young soldiers killed since Israeli forces entered southern Lebanon last week.
Why We Wrote This
A story focused onTo endure war, a society usually needs both unity and trusted leadership. Yet as Israel takes on Hezbollah in Lebanon, the public consensus seems to be based mostly on a blend of confidence and caution – without faith in a government plan.
Hezbollah’s ongoing attacks – as the Iran-backed militia is battered by Israel’s crushing offensive – are a reminder of the price being paid by Israelis, too, even if it is not the all-out, punishing barrage Israelis feared before their own offensive was launched.
Still, deeply divided politically, and angry at and distrustful of their government, Israelis appear largely united around the idea of fighting a war against Hezbollah.
The main reason: A year of sustained rocket fire by the Shiite militia, in support of its Iran-backed ally Hamas, has made it impossible for some 65,000 residents of northern border communities to live there.
That unity mostly holds regarding Israel’s broader conflict with Iran, too, even if the government has yet to articulate a clear, coherent policy, and as Israelis and the world await the promised retaliation for the second barrage of Iranian ballistic missiles.
While there is a division of opinion on how precisely to address the threats of Hezbollah and Iran, most view both as dangers that need to be confronted. And a growing confidence in Israel’s military position is fueling the perception they can be.
“Israelis are saying they cannot go on like this, enough is enough,” Uzi Rabi, director of the Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies at Tel Aviv University, says of the war of attrition with Hezbollah.
“Window of opportunity”
In recent weeks, Israel turned the tables on Hezbollah, the crown jewel of Iran’s “Axis of Resistance,” with an offensive that began with exploding beepers and continued with the killing of the majority of the organization’s senior command, including its leader, Hassan Nasrallah.
“The phenomenal success of Israel in Lebanon in recent weeks opened a window of opportunity to once and for all change the power equation in Lebanon: downgrading Hezbollah, creating a chance for a different future for Lebanon, and cutting off one of the most prominent arms of the Iranian octopus,” says Professor Rabi.
The Israeli army says it is making headway dismantling Hezbollah’s border installations, including underground tunnels from which the militants can operate from and even potentially enter Israel.
One such tunnel was found this week that crossed into Israeli territory, an army spokesperson said, an apparent corroboration of fears that Hezbollah could carry out its own version of the devastating Oct. 7 attack Hamas launched a year ago.
“We fear something like that could happen and that we need to dismantle such a threat. Any state would try to do the same. I don’t see it as a political issue,” says Dan Prath, a Haifa resident who is not a supporter of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government.
“Of course everyone wants to destroy Hezbollah infrastructure – but the majority of Israelis don’t think the government has a clear policy,” cautions Dahlia Scheindlin, a pollster and expert on Israeli public opinion.
A case in point: While his government had announced its objectives in southern Lebanon were to uproot Hezbollah infrastructure there, Mr. Netanyahu on Tuesday suggested in a video address directed at the Lebanese people that his aims were more far-reaching. He urged the Lebanese to “free themselves from Hezbollah” or face the prospect of an “abyss of a long war that will lead to destruction and suffering like we see in Gaza.”
In a poll by the Israel Democracy Institute, 47% of Jewish Israelis said they supported a ground invasion of southern Lebanon while 41% opposed it – reflecting a division between those on the center and left, and those on the right politically – and almost 60% of Arab Israeli citizens were opposed to it.
Israeli society is “starting from consensus” regarding the need to return the northern residents to their homes, says Nimrod Goren, president of the think tank Mitvim – The Israeli Institute for Regional Foreign Policies, “but then you bring in the right-wing reality of this government, which has different goals.”
Confronting Iran
Last week Israeli cellphones blared alarms warning people to seek shelter immediately. Within minutes the entire country was under a barrage of almost 200 Iranian ballistic missiles. It was payback, Tehran said, for the assassinations of Mr. Nasrallah, Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, and others.
While most missiles were intercepted, damage was limited, and no Israelis were killed, Mr. Netanyahu vowed Israel would strike back.
On Wednesday, Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant warned that the counterattack “will be lethal, precise, and especially surprising.”
Israeli TV commentators and politicians across the political spectrum have been urging the government to seize the momentum and strike the most potent of targets – Iranian nuclear facilities. Iran is estimated to be close to having a nuclear military capability.
Mr. Netanyahu himself has hinted to Iranians that whatever action comes next it could be bold, saying in a video addressed to them, “When Iran is finally free, and that moment will come a lot sooner than people think – everything will be different.”
Celine Touboul, co-executive director of the Economic Cooperation Foundation, a Tel Aviv think tank, says the long-serving Israeli leader “seems to now believe that via military means he could reshape the entire Middle East.”
Speaking of the calls to hit Iran hard by going after nuclear installations, even without crucial U.S. support, she says, “The impressive impact of the beeper attacks and targeted killing of Nasrallah has created a sense of invincibility.”
Echoing that “now or never” argument, the Dayan Center’s Professor Rabi allows that Israel has to be “very respectful of the United States.” But “If you are leader of the free world, this kind of opportunity might not be ever seen again – so if we skip it we will pay a heavy price in the years to come.”
The case for caution
Alon Pinkas, a former Israeli diplomat, urged caution, writing in the Haaretz newspaper: “If the objective is to inflict a resounding and debilitating blow to Iran’s nuclear program, Israel cannot do it without the United States.
“There’s no question that an Israeli air attack could do damage – possibly a lot of damage. But it would fall short of decisively destroying Iran’s nuclear infrastructure while risking a full-blown war for decades.”
A poll by the Jerusalem Center for Foreign and Security Affairs suggested many Israelis understand the need for caution. A majority, 68%, supported a direct attack on Iran of some kind if Hezbollah’s missile attacks were ongoing. But within that number, 37% said they would only support that if it were in cooperation with the U.S.; only 31% said they would support an attack without it.
“This is very rational, showing Israelis are weighing the circumstances, the cost, consequences, and necessary conditions,” says Dr. Scheindlin.
Grand plans for a remapped Middle East aside, analysts say if Israel wants to maintain strategic bonds with the U.S. and stabilize its own situation, including finally winning the release of the 101 hostages held by Hamas in Gaza, it ultimately has to move toward diplomatic solutions in a war that has put Israel in the line of fire from all directions.
“I don’t think arrangements in Gaza or in Lebanon will be built on trust, but will have to be built on mechanisms that will guarantee that security interests are met with the support of a strong coalition who will guarantee their implementation,” says Ms. Touboul. “In any case, Israel will maintain its right of self-defense.”
