Israel’s relative position in the Middle East has deteriorated, which is why it would like to start a war big enough for the U.S. to ome to the rescue. From Ramzy Baroud at antiwar.com:
This article was written shortly before Israel assassinated the Deputy Head of Hamas Political Bureau Saleh al-Arouri in Beirut on January 2. The assassination is a further illustration of the Israeli government’s desire to escape the consequences of its disastrous war in Gaza, by igniting a regional conflict.
The clashes between Hezbollah and Israel are the closest to an actual war that the Lebanon-Israel border has seen since the war of 2006, which resulted in a rushed Israeli retreat, if not outright defeat.
We often refer to the ongoing conflict between Lebanon and Israel as ‘controlled’ clashes, simply because both sides are keen not to instigate or engage in an all-out war.
Obviously, Hezbollah wants to preserve Lebanese lives and civilian infrastructure, which would surely be seriously damaged, if not destroyed, should Israel decide to launch a war.
But Israel, too, understands that this is a different Hezbollah than that of the 1980s, 2000 and even 2006.
Compared to Israel’s behavior in the war of 2006, the Israeli response to Hezbollah’s military action – compelled by its solidarity with the Palestinian Resistance in Gaza – is greatly tamed.
For example, the 2006 war was presumably provoked by a Hezbollah attack on Israeli soldiers, which killed three. (Hezbollah says that the soldiers violated Lebanese sovereignty, as the Israeli army has indeed done numerous times before and since then.)
That single event led to a major war that wreaked havoc on Lebanon, but also resulted in the retreat and defeat of the Israeli army.
Imagine what Israel would have done by the standards of the 2006 war if Hezbollah had killed and wounded hundreds of Israeli soldiers, bombed scores of military bases, installations and even settlements, as it has done, on a daily basis, since early October.
