Netanyahu seems determined to lash out at any and all opponents, as if Yahweh or the US can bail him out of whatever mess results. We’ll turn first, and briefly, to Netanyahu making official his new genocidal campaign against Lebanon, and then to his open defiance of the US on Israel’s expected counterstrike on Iran.
The fact that Netanyahu is out to flatten Lebanon is no surprise; UN officials were warning that it was on its way to becoming the next Gaza weeks ago. Some of the sorry details, first from Aljazeera:
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has warned Lebanon could face destruction “like Gaza” and claimed Israel has killed slain Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah’s “replacement, and the replacement of his replacement”….
“You have an opportunity to save Lebanon before it falls into the abyss of a long war that will lead to destruction and suffering like we see in Gaza,” Netanyahu said in his address, referring to the besieged enclave that has been under a relentless and bloody Israeli bombardment campaign for one year.
And the State Department confirmed that the Biden Administration is all in with more war crimes like collective punishment, and the extension of the Gaza genocide plan:
So the answer to your question is yes, we do support Israel launching these incursions to degrade Hizballah’s infrastructure so ultimately we can get a diplomatic resolution that allows 1701 to finally be fully implemented.
Needless to say, the assertion that Israel is attacking “Hizbollah’s infrastructure” when it destroys hospitals and apartments is an insult to intelligence.
While the US and Israel are on the same page regarding the destruction of Lebanon, they appear to be at odds over what exactly Israel will do in its planned counterattack on Iran. I do not believe that this is clever spin-doctoring to make the US look not involved. First, Israel has form. Biden and other officials repeatedly saying they would back Israel no matter what, combined with the failure to exert any meaningful curbs like withholding weapons (the one-week denial of certain heavy bombs was a lame charade), means that the Administration has made itself culpable for Israel’s actions. That is clear most of all to Muslim voters and pretty much anyone not in the mainstream media bubble. So the Administration and 12 other nations garnering front-page headline about their 21 day ceasefire scheme, only to have Israel assassinate Hassan Nasrallah, made all these leaders look like fools. There would have been reputationally much cheaper ways to try to distance the US from the assassination were that the intent.
Second, too much is being made public about the particulars of US and Israel arm-wrestling. The centerpiece is the sudden cancellation of Defense Minister Yoav Gallant’s trip to the Pentagon. The Financial Times had an early account:
Israel has told the US that defence minister Yoav Gallant will no longer travel to Washington this week, prompting fears the cancellation could jeopardise co-ordination with Israel over its response to Iran’s missile attack.
“We were just informed that minister Gallant will be postponing his trip to Washington, DC,” deputy Pentagon press secretary Sabrina Singh said on Tuesday, hours before he was due to fly to the US.
The visit, which had been scheduled at Gallant’s request, was seen as a crucial chance for the US and Israel to discuss Israel’s planned retaliation against Iran for its ballistic missile attack last week and its expanding conflict in Lebanon.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Gallant to postpone his visit to Washington, said a person familiar with the matter.
The prime minister did not want Gallant to go until his cabinet votes on the country’s response to Iran’s ballistic missile strike and Netanyahu speaks with US President Joe Biden on the phone, the person said.
A call between Netanyahu and Biden has been in the works for “many days” but has not taken place, they added.
A few hours later, Axios and the Wall Street Journal, both based on one source, said the call was on for Wednesday.
Gallant reportedly talks regularly to US Defense chief LLoyd Austin and is seen as the Israeli official most responsive to Pentagon concerns. I have the impression that like the IDF generally, he has been trying to constrain the prosecution of the war, if nothing else, out of an understanding of Israel’s limitations.
Reading between the lines of the Financial Times account, it looks as if Netanyahu was trying to force a call with Biden that Biden had been trying to put off, as in really put off. That might have been a wet-noodle-lashing level attempt to tell Netanyahu he was in the doghouse. I don’t buy the Knesset vote part of the excuse for one second; that would have perilous little bearing on the strike package details that Gallant was to discuss with the Pentagon. And this bloodthirsty Knesset would approve whatever self-destructive scheme was put before them regardless.
Aside from reasserting primacy over Biden, a second reason for Netanyahu insisting on a Biden talk before Gallant went to the US would be to curb Gallant’s freedom of action. If Gallant were worried about the political leaders being unrealistic about Iran’s defenses (particularly of its nuclear operations) and Iran’s ability to retaliate, it would be logical for him to scheme work with the Pentagon to revise whatever plans he was supposed to get agreed (or at least assented to) into something less perilous.
The Wall Street Journal had more detail in U.S. Frustrated by Israel’s Reluctance to Share Iran Retaliation Plans:
Israel has so far refused to divulge to the Biden administration details of its plans to retaliate against Tehran, U.S. officials said, even as the White House is urging its closest Middle East ally not to hit Iran’s oil facilities or nuclear sites amid fears of a widening regional war.
To remind readers: Iran’s nuclear sites related to its enrichment program are buried very deeply underground. All sorts of experts have opined that the most Israel and the US could do to them, ex a nuclear attack, would be “cosmetic” damage; it’s doubtful that even a nuclear blast could do much harm. However, as far as I can tell, Iran also has one nuclear reactor which is for generating power,. I am not certain as to how far inside Iran it is and whether it is as well hardened as the other sites.
The Financial Times confirmed this established view in Can Israel destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities by itself? The first part of the article gives a drift of the gist:
But without US support, a solo Israeli air strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities would be highly risky and at best only delay rather than destroy its programme, according to analysts.
Why would an Israeli operation be difficult?
The first reason is distance. It is more than a thousand miles from Israel to Iran’s main nuclear bases, and to reach them Israeli planes would have to cross the sovereign airspace of Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Iraq, Syria and potentially Turkey.
The next is fuel. Flying to the targets and back would take all of Israel’s aerial refuelling capability and leave little or no margin for error, according to a report by the US Congressional Research Service.
The third is Iranian air defence. The country’s main nuclear sites are heavily guarded, and the Israeli bombers would need to be protected by fighter jets.
That would require a strike package totalling about 100 aircraft, according to the CRS report — equivalent to almost a third of the Israeli air force’s 340 combat-capable aircraft
We’ll return to the Journal:
U.S. officials are frustrated that they have been repeatedly caught off guard by Israel’s military actions in Gaza and Lebanon, and are seeking to head off further escalation…
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu blocked Gallant from departing to the U.S. on Tuesday night as Israel continued planning its Iran operation, an Israeli official said. U.S. officials said they don’t yet have either the timing of the strike or what Israel might target….
Army Gen. Erik Kurilla, who heads U.S. Central Command, which is responsible for U.S. military operations in the Middle East, traveled to Israel on Sunday where he met with Gallant and top Israeli military commanders, in part, to warn against striking Iran’s nuclear sites or oil facilities….
But U.S. officials won’t say if they have gotten assurances from Israel that Washington would be notified ahead of Israel’s expected strike on Iran…During the Washington meeting that was supposed to take place Wednesday, Gallant was expected to bring some details of the strike plan, including potential targets, U.S. officials said.
The fact that Kurilla met with Gallant and IDF officials Sunday could point to the Pentagon and the IDF were negotiating over the strike package, and Netanyahu deciding to kick that table over. It seems clear that Netanyahu is making very clear that the insanely destructive pols are in charge, not the professionals.
So why is Netanyahu insisting on talking to Biden? One can infer he either intends to make a one-way communication, like “Gallant will brief the Pentagon, but only at a high level and we may still revise our plans” or extract something, like “We won’t hit energy assets if join us in hitting XYZ other target.”
The bottom line is that Netanyahu would not be keeping the idea of an Iran attack so much in the press if he were trying to find a way out. So I would severely discount cheery takes like those of M.K. Bhadrakumar.
Given Israel’s fondness for civilian targets and humiliation, Israel may entirely avoid Iran’s military installations (which Iran has been trying to protect with Russia’s help) and strike important public infrastructure, like water purification or electricity generation or dams.
As many have pointed out, Iran’s success in repeatedly penetrating Israel air defenses plus its huge missile arsenal means it can choose how to prostrate Israel on a counterstrike. Iran has threatened to attack civilian infrastructure but I personally like the idea of completely destroying all its military airbases (Ben Gurion is also used for some military flights, so it might need to be roughed up a lot too). That would have the bonus of stopping the attacks on Lebanon.
However, if Israel really understands that (as opposed to continuing to live in the fantasy of its and the US’ superiority), that means the odds favor that it launch a nuclear attack, and not waste them on well bunkered nuclear installations but strike “decision centers.” That sort of disproportionate response would be entirely within character for them. It would best explain Netanyahu’s determination in light of the weakness of his conventional forces, even the vaunted air force, against Iran I am under the impression that Iran also has very secure bunkers for its leadership, but would all they key people actually go there? And how many critically important people (think the equivalent of senior and next level line managers) would perish?
We can only hope that the Israel is wildly overestimating the effectiveness of its conventional weapons. We’ll find out soon enough.
UPDATE: I am so dumb. I had even discussed this idea yesterday in comments apropos Iran’s possible use of its weapons-grade nuclear material.
The highest and best use for both Iran and Israel of a nuclear weapons capability is not a ground strike but an EMP. And if Israel fries Iran electronics, it destroys air defenses as well as the functioning of just about everything (save perhaps below ground equipment). So if it is going to go the nuke use route, this seems like the highest payoff.