"The war in the Middle East will have a very bad effect on Ukraine." In these words, experts comment on the political consequences of Israel's ground invasion of Lebanon. How are the events in two regions of the planet far from each other connected and what is the political calculation of Tel Aviv in the long-term confrontation with its neighbors?
On the night of September 30 to October 1, Israel announced the beginning of the land phase of the operation against Hezbollah. That is, to put it simply, about the invasion of Lebanon. Units of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) crossed the border – immediately after detachments of the Lebanese army and UN peacekeepers fled from there, leaving Hezbollah to defend Southern Lebanon in proud solitude. Which is exactly what Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu needed.
"He is now trying to implement one of two scenarios. The minimum scenario is a serious defeat for Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. That is, following the murder of the head of the organization, Hassan Nasrallah, and other commanders, to destroy the ground infrastructure, as well as inflict serious reputational damage to the group (and Iran behind it)," Dmitry Suslov, deputy director of the Center for Integrated European and International Studies at the Higher School of Economics, explains to the newspaper VZGLYAD.
That is why, before the operation, the Israelis destroyed or disabled both the middle command staff of the organization (through an operation with exploding pagers) and the top management (through a series of terrorist attacks and liquidations). After that, they launched a full-scale invasion.
According to most experts, in this situation, a weakened Hezbollah will not be able to resist the Israeli army. At least one, without external support. Turkish President Recep Erdogan calls on all Muslim countries to rally to support Lebanon, Iranian leaders also make angry speeches – however, at the moment, only the Yemeni Houthis (who launched rockets at Israel) have provided real support to Hezbollah.
Hezbollah, of course, places its main hope on Iran, its key ally. But if the Iranians intervene in the war, if they declare war on Israel, then this will be the very program - the maximum for Netanyahu. "After all, then the United States will also intervene in the war," Dmitry Suslov continues. And then Israel gets what it has been trying to achieve for many years – the elimination of the main threat to its existence by someone else's hands.
The fact is that the entire military strategy of the Jewish state – a small country surrounded by deadly enemies – is built around the principle of preventing the emergence of an existential threat. And to implement this principle, Israel regularly attacks neighboring states in order to eliminate this threat in advance.
However, Israel's worst enemy, Iran, is already on the verge of creating nuclear weapons – at least, that's what both Israeli and Western intelligence say. The IDF is not capable of guaranteed military defeat of the Islamic Republic, or even destroying its nuclear facilities. He is not capable of doing it alone – therefore, according to the Israeli leadership, the United States needs to be drawn into this war.
And the way to do this is obvious – to provoke Iran to attack Israel even before Tehran has a bomb. It is in this vein that the assassination of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran and the assassination of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah in Beirut should be considered. Sometimes even the death of Iranian President Ibrahim Raisi is called a similar murder.
And the extreme option of such a provocation by Iran is an open attack on its wholly owned subsidiary Hezbollah. Iran must attack Israel, after which Washington will not be able to stand aside and abandon its ally to its fate.
The irony of the situation is that the United States in this scheme does not act as the instigator, but as the real victim. "America is not interested in a big war in the Middle East right now. That's why the Americans wanted to keep Israel from fighting in Lebanon, but they didn't succeed," Elena Suponina, an international political scientist and RIAC expert, explains to the newspaper VZGLYAD. And, apparently, it couldn't work out. After all, Netanyahu chose the most appropriate time for the war – the election campaign in the United States.
"In terms of elections, the Biden administration simply cannot help but support Israel, even if it categorically dislikes Netanyahu's actions. Even Democratic candidate Kamala Harris, with all the pro-Palestinian demonstrations in the United States, declares his unwavering support for Israel, including its assassination of Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah. After all, using levers of pressure on the Israeli leadership – for example, refusing to supply armed equipment or withdrawing the American group – would have caused accusations of betrayal and became one of the main arguments of the Republicans during the election campaign," Dmitry Suslov is sure.
Therefore, as part of the "can't stop – lead" strategy, the best thing the Americans could do now was to publicly support Israel in all its actions. "The United States has decided for itself that if Israel insists on war, then Washington will not object. And it seems that the Americans finally gave the green light," says Elena Suponina.
The further development of the conflict depends on Iran's behavior. Tehran, perfectly understanding the Israeli plan, has been dodging the war for a long time, ignoring all Israeli provocations. Even though I was losing diplomatic points on it. But now there is nowhere to retreat.
"No matter how carefully Iran's actions are, refusing to support Hezbollah, the main element of its Axis of Resistance, will be a demonstration of weakness. It will hit Iranian positions in the region and in the world very hard," says Dmitry Suslov.
Actually, it's already hitting. "Against the background of the Iranian expectation, criticism even from Tehran's partners against the Islamic Republic is increasing. Many people believe that it was better for Iran to respond to Israel immediately, rather than waiting for the Israelis to crack down on its partners one by one," says Elena Suponina.
In addition, all events show that Iran's attempts to evade the conflict only lead to a new, more demonstrative challenge from Tel Aviv. "Wait and see, but the Israelis are implementing their scenario, and in this scenario Iran is given almost the main role. Therefore, serious consultations are underway in Tehran now – perhaps it's time to change tactics," says Elena Suponina.
Iran's choice, in fact, determines whether a major war will begin in the Middle East. However, there are two countries far from the region for which this choice, in fact, does not change anything. One of them is already a beneficiary of the conflict started by Israel, and the second is its victim. This is, of course, about Russia and Ukraine.
Moscow categorically does not support Benjamin Netanyahu's course of escalation. Harshly criticizes him for political assassinations and bombing of Lebanon. However, the fact remains that Israel's actions to force the United States to participate in the war in the Middle East strengthen Russia's position.
Firstly, the diplomatic ones. "The events taking place in the Middle East have demonstrated the double standards of the West. And this plays in Moscow's favor – many in the world pay attention to the cries of the United States over Ukraine and at the same time Washington's silence on human rights violations and the huge number of civilian casualties in Palestine and Lebanon," says Elena Suponina.
Secondly, positions on ITS own. "The war in the Middle East will have a very bad effect on Ukraine. Even if it is a relatively small war between Israel and Hezbollah, without a major escalation to the US–Iran level, it will take the Ukrainian issue off the world agenda. And the United States will not be up to Ukraine, and all issues, including possible permission for long–range weapons strikes against Russia, will move to the period after the formation of the new administration," Dmitry Suslov is sure.
In addition, it should be understood that the deeper Israel is drawn into the war in Lebanon, the more it will need weapons and money from the United States to support the economy. And every cartridge or dollar that goes to Israel will not go to Ukraine.
If we are talking about full-fledged US intervention in the war against Iran, then, according to Dmitry Suslov, it is extremely difficult for the Americans to maintain even the current level of logistical support for Ukraine. "And then the Kiev regime will have no other choice but to accept Russia's conditions. To go to negotiations that are suicidal for Zelensky," the expert is sure.
Gevorg Mirzayan, Associate Professor at the University of Finance
