Netanyahu doesn’t want Israel to become preoccupied with its Southern Front. A cease-fire, that was first called for by Hamas, will satisfy him now, on the assumption that it will last a few years, as did a similar ceasefire in 2014. Meanwhile, he can, with less distraction, turn his nearly full attention to the arms buildup by Hezbollah, supported by Iran, in the north. For the rulers in Tehran have done everything they can to let the world — and Israel — know that a war by Iran and Hezbollah on the Jewish state is not a question of “if” but of “when.”
Lieberman’s resignation in November made the Prime Minister appear to some, quite erroneously, as insufficiently tough on Hamas. He let loose the IAF in March with results sufficient to change Hamas’s tune overnight, and brought about its willingness to both conclude, and honor, a ceasefire. In that month, there was massive bombing after a rocket hit the Israeli village of Meshmeret. Among 30 high-value targets that the Israelis hit were the military intelligence headquarters of Hamas, the offices of Hamas head Ismael Haniyeh, and a major weapons storehouse. That was enough to get Hamas to sue for a ceasefire, to which Netanyahu agreed, in order to ensure that the attention of his military is focused further north, and especially to the problem of Iranian bases in Syria.
Though the Great March of Return continues in Gaza, its rioters receive ever-diminishing attention from the outside world, including fellow Arabs, which is not what Hamas expected. And the latest ceasefire with Hamas, that received quite a pummeling from the IAF, seems to be (mostly) holding. So Israel can return almost its full attention to bombing Iranian bases in Syria, and any weapons being shipped from those bases to Hezbollah in Lebanon. Israel still has to figure out a way to deal with those 120,000-140,000 rockets and missiles Hezbollah already has in Lebanon. Political considerations rule out a first-strike direct attack on Hezbollah’s missiles. But Israel could maneuver Hezbollah into launching an attack that would then justify a massive Israeli response. Israel could create an incident, possibly the assassination of a Hezbollah leader, so that Hezbollah feels compelled to respond, ideally with some sort of rocket barrage, thus giving Israel the excuse it needs to massively respond in turn, destroying as many weapons warehoused by Hezbollah in Lebanon as it can, before those rockets and missiles can be rained down on the Galilee.
Avigdor Lieberman has a fiery temperament; he’s famous for his outbursts. Netanyahu is sober and calculating. He’s weighed the risks to Israel of these violent exchanges with Hamas, which require the IAF and IDF focusing on the Southern Front, while Hezbollah in the north continues to enlarge its supplies of rockets and missiles. He’s concluded that the latest ceasefire in Gaza will hold for at least 5-6 months, as the previous one, concluded last November, did. After all, hat keeps the peace with Hamas is the threat of attacks by the IAF. He simply wants the Israeli military to hold Hamas to its cease-fire, not destroy the group, and meanwhile, to focus on countering the threat from Iran and Hezbollah, a problem that cannot wait.
In a few years a lot can happen. The regime of the Islamic Republic is now internally weaker than it has ever been, because of the discontent over Iran’s economic situation. Iran has been suffering from the renewed imposition of sanctions, triggered by the American pullout from the nuclear deal. It finds itself unable to sell one million barrels of oil of the 2.5 million total it had been selling before the sanctions were reimposed. More bad news: Iran’s foreign debt increased by 40% from 2017 to 2018. The Iranian riyal continues what Forbes magazine calls its “death spiral.” And to top it all off, Iran is now suffering its worst drought in at least 50 years; both agriculture and the raising of livestock have been hard hit.
This economic collapse has led Iranian crowds to shout “Death to Palestine” instead of “Death to Israel,” and “No to Syria, Yes to Iran.” In both cases, they were expressing opposition to Iran’s expensive foreign adventurism. Were these discontented to come to power, that would affect Hezbollah, which could no longer count on Iranian support. Deprived of such backing, Hezbollah might be more willing to deal with Israel, possibly surrendering part, or most, of its arsenal in exchange for Israeli promises not to attack it, but to leave the group alone, allowing it to at least maintain Shi’a dominance in both Lebanon and Syria.
Should nothing change in Iran, and Hezbollah remain the serious threat it is today, at least the IDF will now be able to devote much greater attention, and resources, to that northern threat, limiting its activity in Gaza to enforcing the ceasefire. Netanyahu could have adopted Lieberman’s line and bombed Hamas into complete submission. But if Hamas in Gaza were truly destroyed, it is Israel that would have to take control of that wretched place, to prevent anarchy and to keep the most dangerous group of all, ISIS, from assuming power. That’s a nightmarish task Israel wants to avoid. A weakened Hamas, too weak to fight Israel, but just strong enough to maintain its control of Gaza, would be the best possible outcome from Israel’s point of view. That was Netanyahu’s calculation back in November 2918, and it remains his calculation today.
Here’s a question or two for Avigdor Lieberman to consider. What must Hassan Nasrallah, the head of Hezbollah, or Ayatollah Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of Iran, now be thinking? Like you, but for very different reasons, they opposed the Israel-Hamas ceasefire. Can you think of any reason why Netanyahu’s agreeing to this ceasefire with Hamas — while firmly turning Israel’s attention back to the Northern Front, which is now the most important theatre in the Jewish state’s permanent war for survival — makes sense?
Pierre Mendes-France, the former Prime Minister of France who wisely pulled all French forces out of Vietnam in 1954, famously said that “to govern is to choose.” In Gaza, Netanyahu has chosen, wisely.
