Comment by einszwei 3 days ago
The answer isn't straight forward. 1980s invasion of Lebanon by Israel and it's withdrawal in 2000 was what made Hezbollah into the force that it is today.
The conflict has been simmering for decades
> the current round of war
Israel has been attacking Hezbollah non-stop in Syria for the last decade[0]. "The current round of war" is quite literally just Hezbollah firing back.
It's strange to me how Israel is able to fly sorties around the entire region and it's not considered an escalation, but the moment that we see responses it turns into the other side being the aggressor.
> while Israel has no desire to destroy Lebanon
The Israeli Dahiya doctrine[1] is literally based on the idea of destroying as much of Lebanon as possible to screw with Hezbollah's support and morale.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Israel_conflict_d...
Even the spokesperson of Hezbollah wouldn't say that the current round of war is "literally just Hezbollah firing back". If you're joking then I'm sorry for not catching it, but if not - Hezbollah announced that it's attacking Israel in support of Hamas's attack on Israel.
As for your second point, you're pointing to an Israeli strategy of fighting Hezbollah by pressuring Lebanese citizens against it. This has nothing to do with having the demolition of Lebanon as a goal.
Edit: I also recommend you read the Hebrew version of the Dahiya doctrine wikipage. As the doctrine is Israeli and in Hebrew originally, it explains it in much greater details. The doctrine has nothing to do with destroying Lebanon.
That doctrine has worked. 2006 to 2023 is the longest period of time without conflicts on this scale since before 1970. Until 2006 there were significant showdowns at most every 5 or 6 years.
The doctrine also is targeting infrastructure for the purpose of denying it to Hezbollah, which is utilizing it to support their fighting. Otherwise, per the wikipedia link on this doctrine, the doctrine has reduction of civilian casualties baked-in:
"in the first stage targets were attacked which formed an immediate threat, and in the second stage the population was evacuated for its protection, and only after the evacuation of the population were Hezbollah targets attacked more broadly."
> The doctrine also is targeting infrastructure for the purpose of denying it to Hezbollah
It also describes the infrastructure as literally every single Shiite city. I hope for all of us that Iran or similar doesn't apply this doctrine to Israel.
Hezbollah didn't exist in 1970s. It was founded in 1982
Like the famous quote said "We make peace with our enemies, not our friends" (I can't recall the source) - what is lacking here is diplomacy.
To repeat - Israel's invasion of Lebanon in 1980s was the catalyst for Hezbollah's rise. While they curbed PLO they created a more formidable adversary.
First, I forgot an 's there - I meant 1970s. Second, unfortunately for Lebanon, Hezbollah wasn't the only terrorist organization growing in it [0]. "The proximate cause of the Israeli invasion was the Coastal Road massacre that took place near Tel Aviv on 11 March 1978"
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1978_South_Lebanon_conflict
Hezbollah is somewhat of the successor organization of the most militant wings of groups like the PLO and Fatah, so I think it is relevant to speak of Hezbollah as in some sense existing in a nascent form prior to its founding
> Hinting at some kind of symmetry here seems weird.
Both sides (Israeli state, and Hezbollah) want to destroy each other. It's a simple symmetry. Conflating the military force with the territory and civilians living on it only obfuscates this.
> Both sides (Israeli state, and Hezbollah) want to destroy each other.
Have Hezbollah lay down their arms and convert their organization to peaceful gardeners and Israel has no interest in destroying them.
Have Israel lay down their arms and focus on peaceful gardening and few Israeli Jews will survive.
Such Symmetry. Enlightened Reddit really is something else.
> Have Israel lay down their arms and focus on peaceful gardening and few Israeli Jews will survive.
That's because the entire notion of Israel as a concept is predicated on it being under constant existential threats.
If Hezbollah goes away, then nothing changes in Lebanon: Lebanese identity isn't based on armed resistance. Israeli identity, however, has nothing else going for it besides armed conflict.
If conflicts were to go away, so would Israel. Israeli Jews would just be absorbed into whatever local culture they're in, just as they were prior to the formation of Israel (and just like they are outside of Israel). The remaining ones would be the ones engaging in armed conflict -- just as the original groups like Irgun and Lehi were.
I think the answer is fairly straightforward if you limit it to the current round in the conflict
Not to mention that Israel is no longer in Lebanon and Hezbollah can just stop firing rockets and the situation will go back to relative peace.
So sure the history is complicated, but current events are fairly straightfoward, you had relatively peaceful status que until Hezbollah broke it.
So given the context, why is Hezbollah not responsible for the current escalation?
Hezbollah was founded to drive Israel out of Lebanon, and Israel is no longer in Lebanon, so not sure how that context makes any difference to who started and is to blame for the current round of escalation.
The answer is pretty straight forward in the sense that the current round of war was initiated (proudly) by Hezbollah, and that while if Hezbollah stops shooting Israel would have no business with Lebanon, if Israel stops shooting into Lebanon Hezbollah has no intention of stopping too. Hezbollah wants to destroy Israel (they say that, not me), while Israel has no desire to destroy Lebanon. Hinting at some kind of symmetry here seems weird.
Israel invading into Lebanon in the late 1970 was a response to an attack originating there [0].
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coastal_Road_massacre#Israeli_...