clear

Creating new perspectives since 2009

Are Israel’s tactical gains becoming a strategic victory over the resistance?

October 4, 2024 at 2:30 pm

Israeli tanks and APC’s gather by the Israeli – Lebanese border. Amid Israel’s escalating campaign against Hezbollah in Lebanon on September 30, 2024. [Erik Marmor/Getty Images]

The initial assessments of Israel’s response to the unprecedented resistance operation last October by Hamas echoed a familiar theme: observers predicted an equally unprecedented Israeli reaction, but like past conflicts, expected it to ultimately yield tactical gains without long-term strategic success.

Israel’s early response mirrored these expectations, with heavy bombardment and ground operations in Gaza. Yet, as the war, approaching its one-year mark, has expanded and evolved, particularly with the occupation state’s aggression against Lebanon, developments on the ground may no longer fit this narrative of strategic failure.

The question of whether Israel is still only making tactical gains or has transitioned to achieving strategic victories has gained traction recently, particularly in light of Israel’s outmaneuvering of Hezbollah with the “pager” terrorist attack and the disruption of its command and control structure, culminating in the targeted killing of its long-time leader, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah last week.

In previous conflicts, the occupation army’s responses to threats from Gaza, Hezbollah and other resistance factions were often characterised by short-term tactical victories. These included the destruction of military infrastructure, targeted assassinations and temporary weakening of enemy capabilities. However, these actions rarely resulted in long-term strategic success, as these adversaries would often regroup, rebuild and retaliate, while growing politically and with popular support. Hezbollah and Hamas in the 2006 and 2014 wars, respectively, are cases in point.

Initially, Israel’s operations in Gaza and its massively disproportionate response to the Al-Aqsa Flood operation followed this pattern, focused on immediate tactical victories. However, over the past year, Israel’s tactics have expanded well beyond Gaza, particularly after its bold assassinations of Ismail Haniyeh followed by Nasrallah and the bombing of Beirut and more recently, the limited yet costly raids into southern Lebanon. These actions represented a significant shift, as Israel openly crossed the multiple “red lines” set by Hezbollah and its close ally in the Axis of Resistance, Iran.

The killing of key Hezbollah and Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) figures, combined with other covert operations such as the near simultaneous explosion of thousands of Hezbollah’s communication devices, has significantly weakened the movement’s operational structure.

OPINION: What does Netanyahu mean when talking about changing the strategic reality of the Middle East?

Despite Hezbollah’s retaliatory rocket strikes on northern Israel, its response has been seen as restrained compared to the scale of Israel’s daily aggression and the intensity of its 2006 offensive. However, as the occupation army prepares for a formal ground invasion, it will soon be reminded of Hezbollah’s capabilities, as the group reverts to its guerrilla warfare tactics, where it has long excelled in inflicting significant losses on occupation forces.

Nevertheless, Hezbollah’s seemingly declining capacity to retaliate effectively, combined with Israel’s aggressive targeting of its leadership, while the Resistance Axis continues with its “strategic patience” raises the question: can we still talk about Israel achieving only tactical gains, or has the scope of its operations evolved to deliver lasting strategic results?

505 Hezbollah members have been killed in fighting between the Israeli army and Hezbollah on the Lebanese border since 8 October, 2023 [Murat Usubali/Anadolu Agency]

The potential existential threat posed by the Axis of Resistance’s “Unity of Fronts” strategy, which coordinates various regional militias to confront Israel on multiple fronts, was once viewed as a major strategic dilemma for Tel Aviv. This strategy envisions simultaneous attacks from Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Yemen to overwhelm the occupation state’s defenses. However, Israel appears to be systematically dismantling this threat by targeting key figures across the region. The recent string of assassinations, particularly in Lebanon and Syria, is as much about Israel’s proactive approach in neutralising high-level leaders before they can fully coordinate as it is about removing Iran’s deterrence on Israel’s borders.

While the Axis of Resistance has long been regarded as a major strategic challenge for Israel, current developments suggest that Israel may be gaining the upper hand so long as Iran fails to redress its red lines and effectively deter its escalations. If unchecked, these “tactical” actions could lead to lasting changes in the balance of power across the region.

While Iran has long been seen as the central force behind the Axis of Resistance, its reaction to the assassinations of top IRGC figures and of Nasrallah has been relatively restrained with so far a salvo of ballistic missile strikes. Many critics argue that Iran’s response has been largely theatrical, with more symbolic gestures than meaningful military escalation, especially given that previous Operation True Promise in April was similar in that it didn’t result in any fatalities, although it was more extensive in scope.

OPINION: Underestimating Yemeni resolve, Israel opens up a southern front

This raises questions about Tehran’s willingness or capacity to fully support Hezbollah or engage in a large-scale confrontation with the US-backed Israeli military. However, for the Islamic Republic, too much is at stake after decades of supporting and helping to establish the Lebanese resistance movement.

At the same time, resistance factions in Iraq and Yemen — two important pillars of the Resistance Axis — have demonstrated a greater willingness to engage in this widening war. In recent months, they have launched coordinated strikes on Israeli targets, including port cities and Tel Aviv itself. They have arguably been at the forefront of implementing the initial phases of the multi-front strategy against Israel, although their overall impact remains limited compared to Hezbollah’s traditional role as threat number one.

Unless Israel faces real repercussions, such as substantial attacks on its heartland — specifically Tel Aviv — the occupation state could continue to operate with relative impunity. For now, Israel’s latest aggressive posturing has largely gone unchecked, with minimal pushback. It is still noteworthy that the only countries and entities opposing Israel are within the Axis, yet tactics will need to evolve if they are to maintain a strategic edge.

It is increasingly difficult to argue that Israel’s operations are yielding only tactical gains. The elimination of key figures within the resistance, combined with crippling blows to Hezbollah’s infrastructure, suggests that Israel may indeed be achieving more substantial strategic results than previously thought.

Yet, without a significant challenge to its actions — whether through diplomatic pressure, military retaliation, or international repercussions — Israel’s aggressive strategy could continue to reshape the war in its favour.

There has never been a more urgent need for the implementation of the Unity of Fronts to ensure the region’s long-term security and to achieve the liberation of Palestine and other territories occupied by Israel. Of course, the occupation state is fully aware of this and is determined to prevent it from being realised.

READ: Yemen political leader praises Hezbollah role in 2006 war, reaffirms support

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.