Who wants to expand the war in the Middle East (and why)
Throughout the first phase of the renewed Palestinian conflict, starting from the Resistance attack on 7 October, the Israeli press hammered on the danger posed by Hezbollah; moreover, when Israel tried to invade Lebanon (again), in 2006, it took a beating from the Shiite militia, which was much less powerful at the time. It is no coincidence that over 230,000 Israelis have been displaced from the north of the country, precisely for fear of attacks from Lebanon, and the IDF maintains a large part of its Iron Dome anti-missile systems there.
The Israeli government is well aware that a confrontation with Hezbollah is potentially devastating, also because it would immediately mobilize, to a much greater level than the current one, all the formations of the Axis of Resistance; not only in Lebanon, but also in Iraq, Yemen and Syria. It is already believed that there are several thousand Iraqi fighters in the country of cedars. And clearly American support - which would certainly not be lacking - could not go much beyond air-naval support: the few thousand US soldiers present in the area are practically almost everywhere surrounded by hostile forces.
Basically, therefore, as much as they might like it, in Tel Aviv they know well that a war with Hezbollah would have a very high cost; but, in addition to the desire to eliminate what they consider a thorn in their side, the greatest ambition is to be able to strike Iran, at least in such a way as to postpone as much as possible the possibility of building a nuclear device, and to carry out a first- strike against Israel. But Iran is no longer what it was a few years ago, and a conflict with Tehran would have enormous costs for Israel. Unless, of course, we drag the USA into it too. Or rather, the Israeli calculation still foresees suffering great damage, but thanks to American intervention - he believes - Iran's war potential (nuclear and otherwise) would be annihilated, and therefore the game would be worth the risk.
The point is that in Washington they are not at all willing to get involved in a conflict like that right now. Meanwhile, because it would paralyze trade routes and cause the price of oil to skyrocket: Bab el Mandeeb and Hormuz would immediately be completely closed to maritime traffic. Then because they are still trying to find a way out of the Ukrainian quagmire, and Israel is 100% dependent on US supplies. Not to mention the fact that the USA has many military bases in that area, which would transform into just as many targets in an instant. And not with the rockets with which the Iraqi militias poke them, but with the Iranian hypersonics. And not just the bases in Iraq and Syria, but the strategic ones in Djibouti and Qatar. The US wants to destroy the ayatollah regime as much as the Israelis, but not now.
The problem is that Israel is in a cul-de-sac. The genocidal campaign in the Gaza Strip has clearly failed to achieve its objective of provoking an exodus of Palestinians to Egypt or elsewhere, not only because they are not leaving, but also because the project of a new Nakba appears unacceptable even to the best friends of Israel. The war against the Resistance is a total failure. Almost three months after October 7, the IDF has neither succeeded in taking control of the Strip, nor in destroying the infrastructural network of Hamas and other armed groups, nor in freeing even a single prisoner. On the contrary, the losses - no matter how much they try to hide them - are very high, both in terms of men and resources. In the first three days of the year, the IDF admitted the loss of over 70 soldiers and officers. A disaster, a prelude to full-blown defeat.
Hence, the urgency to shift not only the attention, but the entire axis of the conflict. The whole band of extremist fanatics who govern the country know well that their days are numbered, and that the end of the war also means their political end; even more so if it were to end in defeat. A shock for the whole of Israel, which would initially fall on the political and military leaders.
Therefore, while the United States withdraws the naval team led by the aircraft carrier G. Ford from the eastern Mediterranean, and stammers at the gates of the Red Sea with the failed 'international naval mission', three highly targeted attacks are carried out in a very short time (also and above all in a political sense): an air attack in Syria kills a senior general of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, then the killing of Hamas' number two in Beirut, in the heart of a neighborhood controlled by Hezbollah, and finally the devastating terrorist attack in Iran (over 100 dead) a few steps from the tomb of General Soleimani and on the anniversary of the attack in which he was killed. The intent to provoke a reaction is blatantly evident, and the purpose is precisely to raise to cover the fact that Israel is losing.
A very risky move, which risks unleashing a potentially devastating conflict well beyond the regional sphere, and which would set fire to the dust in an area of global strategic interest, in which, among other things, Russian and American soldiers are located a few kilometers away from each other (in Syria). Without forgetting that, if it is unimaginable for the USA to let Israel be destroyed, for Russia (but also for China) it is unacceptable to let Iran be destroyed; which, it should not be forgotten, is not only an important military partner - especially for Moscow - and a member of the BRICS+, but also a fundamental hub in the Eurasian trade routes that Russia and China are developing.
Unleashing a conflict in that area, where multiple strategic interests intertwine, would be truly madness. But Israel has always shown that it is totally disinterested in the rest of the world, and that it only considers what it believes is its own interest. Furthermore, at this stage the Jewish state finds itself in a particular situation, with a fanatical but fragile government, with the armed forces which have lost their aura of invincibility in 48 hours and which are floundering in obvious difficulties, and with a country stunned and scared, who takes refuge in religious fanaticism and exasperated racism as an antidote to fear.
In short, we are at a point in which the possibilities of avoiding an epochal disaster are almost exclusively in the hands of those we consider barbarians, autocrats and terrorists, since it is on their foresight, on their ability not to fall for very serious provocations, that the explosion depends or less than the conflict closest to a world war.
Fortunately for us, Khamenei, Nasrallah, Haniyeh, Jibril and the others have so far demonstrated that they possess this ability. It remains to be seen how far Israel will go, if this is not enough, and how much they will know and be able not to give their side to the enemy.
π₯π₯π₯ follow me on πππ₯ππ π«ππ¦!