Candace Owens and Briahna Joy Gray reveal media ‘red line’ on Israel
If Americans Knew | June 16, 2024
Conservative Candace Owens interviews progressive Briahna Joy Gray about their experiences getting fired because of their criticism of Israel. This clip is from the Candace Show on June 14, 2024.
Background information:
Krystal Ball, Saagar Enjeti, Glenn Greenwald reveal details of the campaign against her:
War on Gaza failed, war with Hezbollah ‘catastrophic’: Ex-Israeli Gen
Al Mayadeen | June 16, 2024
The war on Gaza has “lost its purpose” and its continuation for the past months has caused “Israel” losses on multiple fronts, Reserve Major General Yitzhak Brik underlined.
Brik has become a prominent critic of both the Israeli government and the military command’s performances, pointing to their failure in several sectors.
During an interview for 103 FM Radio, an affiliate of Israeli news outlet Maariv, Brik emphasized that the war on Gaza continues solely for the benefit of the occupation’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu.
As for the ongoing operation in the southernmost city of the Gaza Strip, Rafah, the former commander said that “Israeli objectives have not been achieved in the city, as in all of Gaza.”
He noted that the Israeli military is yet to reach or discover many of the Palestinian Resistance’s strategic tunnels. Moreover, Brik described the current proceedings in Rafah as “shameful”, explaining that Israeli occupation forces are not actually fighting Palestinian Resistance fighters, rather “they [Resistance fighters] are booby-trapping the roads and we [Israeli occupation forces] are being killed.”
“We have reduced the army’s capability over 20 years to the point where it cannot defeat Hamas,” he said in reference to the Palestinian Resistance.
War with Hezbollah to be catastrophic
As for the northern front with Lebanon, Brik stressed that any decision by the current Israeli government under the leadership of Netanyahu “will bring catastrophe to Israel.”
He said that the Israeli military cannot currently intercept Hezbollah’s missiles and drones. He then went on to question what would happen in occupied territories if thousands rather than dozens of rockets, drones, and missiles were fired at Israeli positions.
The Israeli occupation is currently suffering the ails of losses on multiple fronts, as its Brigades fail to contain Hezbollah’s responses and attacks in support of Palestine. At the same time, the Israeli occupation continues to admit to increasing losses across the Gaza Strip, where it was revealed that 10 officers and soldiers were killed in the Strip on Saturday.
With no plans for the day after the war being discussed within the coalition government, Israeli military defeat, inept attempts to replace the Resistance in the Gaza Strip, and the uncertainty of success on the Northern Front Israelis have once again slipped into anti-government protests.
On the other hand, the Palestinian Resistance and supporting factions across West Asia seem more united than ever in their fight against the Israeli occupiers.
How Hamas Defeated Israel
By Ted Rall – Sputnik – 16.06.2024
When residents of the Middle East woke up on the morning of October 7, 2023, the Palestinian cause was in a sorry state.
700,000 radical Israeli settler-colonists and sealed-off “military zones” occupied 60% of the occupied West Bank, which was blockaded by a Berlin-style border wall, so much that the United Nations human rights chief no longer believed that Palestinian sovereignty was even theoretically possible. The occupied Gaza Strip was subject to an Israeli blockade that destroyed the economy and drove the unemployment rate to 80%. President Donald Trump had moved the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem—a strong signal to Palestinians that the world would never allow them their own State—and Joe Biden had let it stay there. Muslim nations that had previously supported the Palestinian struggle (Bahrain, the UAE, Morocco and Sudan) normalized diplomatic relations with the hard-right government of Israel; Oman, Indonesia, Somalia and Saudi Arabia were expected to follow.
The world, including numerous Arab governments, had forgotten the Palestinians.
By the end of the day, everyone remembered them.
It had been necessary, Khalil al-Hayya, a member of Hamas’s top leadership told The New York Times two weeks after the attack, to “change the entire equation and not just have a clash. We succeeded in putting the Palestinian issue back on the table, and now no one in the region is experiencing calm.”
Whether you call it terrorism, asymmetric warfare, guerrilla warfare or resistance, an action like the October 7th raid on an Israeli music festival and nearby kibbutzim is a disadvantaged, underarmed and poorly-situated group’s attempt to flip the game table, catch an adversary by surprise and scramble the positions of the players in order to create a different situation.
It’s also a test of their adversary. More about that below.
Hamas has accomplished its objectives. Israel’s saturation bombing and starvation campaign launched after October 7th, which military analysts call the most brutal and systemic assault against a civilian population since World War II, shocked Muslims (and many other people) around the world. Under pressure from their subjects, the Saudis now say they will only consider a normalization deal that explicitly guarantees Palestinian statehood—something that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu refuses to consider. Biden, a self-declared Zionist and faithful supporter of the Jewish state throughout his career, now says he wants a two-state solution. He has also threatened to withhold arms, though using weasel words to justify redefining his “red line.” 61% of voters in the United States, to which Israel owes its creation and its closest military ally by far, now say the U.S. should stop supplying all weapons to Israel.
The long-ignored Palestinian issue is so “back on the table” that Democrats worry that they might lose the battleground state of Michigan and the presidency due to the state’s substantial Arab population.
Many Israelis and their supporters fail to grasp the reality of the current situation. How can Hamas be winning? they ask. Israelis support the war effort and the IDF has only lost a few hundred troops, a fifth of them to friendly fire and accidents. Gaza, on the other hand, has been flattened. The IDF has killed at least 37,000 Palestinians, though Ralph Nader is surely closer to the truth when he estimates the total number, including the bodies buried under tens of millions of tons of rubble, at 200,000. Israel’s obvious objective, the expulsion of the surviving population and annexation of Gaza into Israel, appears tantalizingly close.
Yet, the Hamas leader Yehiya Sinwar was right when he told his close associates recently: “We have the Israelis right where we want them.”
The Israelis have committed the cardinal error of warfare: underestimating the intelligence of your enemy. Of course Hamas’ leaders knew exactly what Israel would do in response to October 7th. They have studied Israel’s behavior repeatedly over decades: when attacked, Israel always responds with overpowering force, much of it directed against civilians. And they don’t care how it looks. “Hamas knew Israel would strike back hard. That was the point,” Rita Katz of the SITE Intelligence Group told The Washington Post. “To Hamas, Palestinian suffering is a critical component in bringing about the instability and global outrage it seeks to exploit.”
The IDF always tortures civilians and demolishes homes and other infrastructure at an extravagant scale. So, like a chess player, Hamas goaded its aggressive adversary into a fierce attack because it was willing to make sacrifices—Hamas fighters, Palestinian civilians, Gazan infrastructure—in order to obtain something even more valuable.
As we’ve seen recently in northern Gaza, Hamas remains a potent military force able to engage the IDF in street combat. But survival isn’t Hamas’ primary objective. Making Israel look evil is—and Israel has fallen into their trap.
The test Israel faced on October 7th was: can we exercise restraint? Like the United States, which faced a similar test on 9/11, Israel failed miserably. Israel’s over-the-top craziness has fulfilled Hamas’ main goal, which was to expose the Israeli government as bloodthirsty, oppressive monsters unworthy of the support of the world upon which it depends.
As a result, most of the world now recognizes Palestinian sovereignty. The International Criminal Court has ordered Israel to stop its military actions in southern Gaza. The International Court of Justice is preparing an arrest warrant for Netanyahu. And the United Nations expressly states that Israel is morally and ethically the same as Hamas, a terrorist organization guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Never mind the two-state solution — it’s dead, and not only because of Netanyahu. The globe is moving toward a new consensus: an end to the Israeli ethnostate from a bygone colonial era, replaced by a one person-one vote post-apartheid democracy.
Looking back to October, the only way Israel could have won at war with Hamas was to learn the lesson of the classic 1980s movie “War Games”: don’t play. Imagine, if you can, how Hamas’ leadership would have felt had Israel refused to take the bait on October 7th, responding only with pinpoint raids to try to rescue hostages, or negotiating for them, while playing the weeping victim for the cameras. It would have been a devastating moral and political defeat and the beginning of the end for the cause of Palestinian liberation.
Israel wanted Gaza. They may not even keep Israel.
Palestinian Resistance’s response to ‘Israel’s’ ceasefire proposal
Al Mayadeen | June 14, 2024
Al Mayadeen obtains a document outlining the fundamental principles of the Palestinian Resistance’s response to the Israeli proposal, as presented by US President Joe Biden, regarding the ceasefire agreement in the Gaza Strip.
After the Palestinian Resistance in the Gaza Strip recently submitted its response to the American proposal for a ceasefire, including comments and amendments reflecting its conditions, Al Mayadeen acquired a document outlining the basic principles of the response document.
Here is the text of the Resistance’s response:
Here are the foundational principles for an agreement between the Israeli and Palestinian sides in Gaza concerning the exchange of detainees and prisoners, as well as achieving sustainable calm.
This text outlines the fundamental principles for an agreement, referencing the Palestinian response to the Israeli proposal dated May 6, 2024.
The framework aims to release all Israeli captives in the Gaza Strip, including civilians and soldiers, regardless of their status (alive or deceased) or the duration of their detention. In exchange, there would be a reciprocal release of an agreed-upon number of prisoners held in Israeli prisons, to achieve a state of calm.
To achieve a permanent ceasefire, the following steps are proposed: the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the Gaza Strip, the reconstruction of Gaza, and the lifting of the blockade. This includes opening all border crossings to facilitate the movement of residents and unrestricted transport of goods.
The framework agreement consists of three related and interconnected stages as follows:
The first phase (42 days)
1. Both parties agree to temporarily cease military operations, with Israeli forces withdrawing eastward and away from densely populated areas to position themselves along the border throughout the Gaza Strip. This includes the Philadelphi Axis and the Gaza Valley (Netzarim Axis and the Kuwait roundabout), as outlined below.
2. Temporary cessation of flights (both military and reconnaissance) over the Gaza Strip daily, to be restricted to 10 hours, extended to 12 hours on days designated for the exchange of captives and prisoners.
3. The agreement includes provisions for returning displaced individuals to their respective areas of residence, along with the withdrawal of forces from the Philadelphi axis and Gaza Valley (specifically the Netzarim axis and the Kuwait roundabout).
- On the third day (following the release of three detainees), Israeli forces will fully withdraw from the Rafah crossing, the entire Philadelphi Axis, and eastward from al-Rashid Street to Salah al-Din Street. All military sites and installations in the area will be dismantled by no later than the seventh day. From the first day, displaced individuals will begin returning to their residences (without carrying weapons), and residents will enjoy unrestricted movement throughout the Gaza Strip. Additionally, humanitarian aid will enter via al-Rashid Street from the outset without restrictions.
- By the 22nd day, Israeli forces will withdraw from the central areas of the Gaza Strip, specifically the Netzarim Axis and the Kuwait Roundabout axis, to a nearby border area. All military sites and installations in this zone will be dismantled. Displaced individuals will continue returning to their residences throughout the Gaza Strip, without carrying weapons, with a focus on facilitating their return from the South to the North. The agreement ensures unrestricted freedom of movement for the population across all areas of the Gaza Strip.
- From the first day onwards, a substantial amount of humanitarian aid, relief materials, and fuel will be delivered, totaling 600 trucks daily. This includes 50 fuel trucks, with 300 allocated for the northern regions. The aid will support the operation of power stations and trade activities, and provide equipment for rubble removal, hospital rehabilitation, and operational needs across Gaza’s health services and bakeries. This humanitarian assistance will be sustained throughout all phases of the agreement.
4. Prisoner-captive exchange between both sides:
During this initial phase, Hamas will release 32 Israeli captives, including both living individuals and the remains of the deceased. This group includes women (both civilians and female soldiers), children (under 19 years who are not conscripts), elderly individuals (over 50 years old), and civilians who are sick or wounded. In exchange, an agreed number of prisoners held in Israeli prisons and detention centers will be released.
- Hamas would release all living Israeli captives, which includes civilian women and children (under 19 years old who are not conscripts). In return, “Israel” agrees to release 30 women and children for each Israeli captive released, based on lists provided by Hamas, according to their date of capture.
- Hamas would release all living Israeli detainees, including elderly individuals (over 50 years old) and sick or wounded civilians. In exchange, “Israel” agrees to release 30 elderly individuals (over 50 years old) and any sick or wounded civilian detainees for every Israeli captive, based on lists provided by Hamas sorted by the oldest arrests.
- Hamas would release all living Israeli female captives and recruits, in exchange for “Israel” releasing 50 detainees from its prisons for every Israeli female captive released (30 sentenced to life, 20 to other sentences) based on lists provided by Hamas.
5. Mechanism for exchanging detainees and prisoners between the two parties during the first phase:
- By the third day, Hamas will release three Israeli captives, prioritizing civilians. By the seventh day, Hamas will release three Israeli captives, prioritizing civilians.
- Afterward, Hamas will release three Israeli detainees every seven days, beginning with women (both civilians and soldiers, if possible), and prioritizing all living detainees for release before addressing the transfer of body parts and remains of the deceased.
- In return, “Israel” will release the agreed-upon number of detainees in Israeli prisons for every Israeli captive who is released, provided that this happens simultaneously and on the same day according to the lists that Hamas will provide.
- During the sixth week, Hamas will release the remaining detainees included in this stage. In exchange, the agreed-upon number of detainees will be released from Israeli prisons simultaneously and on the same day, based on lists provided by Hamas.
- By the seventh day, Hamas will disclose the available information regarding the number of Israeli detainees to be released in this phase, contingent upon “Israel” providing adequate information to Hamas and relevant international authorities regarding Palestinian prisoners and detainees from the Gaza Strip, particularly those arrested after October 7, 2023.
- On the 22nd day, “Israel” will release all detainees who were re-detained following the Gilad Shalit deal.
- If the number of Israeli detainees to be released in this stage does not reach 32, Hamas will supplement the release with body parts or remains of the deceased from the same categories outlined for this stage. In exchange, “Israel” will release all women, children (under 19 years old), patients, and elderly individuals (over 50 years old) who were arrested from the Gaza Strip after October 7, 2023.
This exchange is expected to occur during the fifth week of this phase.
- The standards and criteria for a prisoner-captive exchange in this stage will apply to the two individuals, Hisham al-Sayyed and Avera Mengistu if they are confirmed to be alive.
- The exchange process is contingent upon adherence to the terms of the agreement, which include halting military operations by both parties, withdrawing Israeli forces along the border including the Philadelphi Axis and Rafah crossing, facilitating the return of displaced persons to their homes, and ensuring the unrestricted entry of humanitarian aid.
6. The Palestinian detainees who are liberated will not be re-detained on the same charges for which they were initially detained. “Israel” will not reincarcerate these prisoners to serve the remainder of their sentences, nor will they require them to sign any documents as a condition for their release. These measures will be accompanied by necessary legal procedures to ensure compliance with these terms.
- Restoring the conditions of prisoners and detainees in Israeli prisons and detention camps to what they were before October 7, 2023, including those who were arrested after this date.
7. The principles and criteria for exchanging detainees and prisoners in the first phase mentioned above do not serve as the basis for negotiating the exchange criteria in the second phase.
8. By the 16th day at the latest, indirect discussions will commence between the two parties to finalize the criteria for exchanging detainees, including conscripts and remaining individuals, for the second phase. This process must be completed and agreed upon before the end of the fifth week of this phase.
9. The United Nations, its agencies (including UNRWA), and other organizations will actively engage in providing humanitarian services across all areas of the Gaza Strip, a commitment that will be sustained throughout all stages of the agreement.
10. Infrastructure rehabilitation (including electricity, water, sewage, communications, and roads) across all areas of the Gaza Strip will commence immediately from day one. Necessary equipment for civil defense, public works, and municipal services will be deployed for debris removal and reconstruction, a process that will persist throughout all phases of the agreement.
11. The necessary supplies and resources will be provided to accommodate displaced persons who lost their homes during the war, ensuring a minimum of 60,000 temporary homes and 200,000 tents.
12. An agreed-upon number of wounded soldiers will be permitted to travel (at least 50 per day) through the Rafah crossing. Restrictions on travel will be lifted, and the movement of goods and trade will resume from the first day of this phase.
13. Arrangements and plans are underway for the reconstruction of homes, civilian facilities, and infrastructure destroyed during the war. Those affected will receive support and compensation under the supervision of several countries and organizations, including Egypt, Qatar, and the United Nations.
14. All procedures from this stage will carry over into the second stage, encompassing temporary cessation of military operations by both parties, relief efforts, shelter provisions, withdrawal of Israeli forces, cessation of flights, and more, until a sustainable calm is declared, marking a permanent cessation of military and hostile operations that comes into effect.
Negotiations will persist under the guarantee of mediators until both parties agree on the criteria for exchanging captives and detainees during the second phase.
The second phase (42 days):
15. Announcing the restoration of sustainable calm, which signifies a permanent cessation of military and hostile operations, will take effect before the captive-prisoner exchange between the two parties.
This exchange will involve all remaining Israeli male captives who are alive (both civilians and soldiers), in exchange for an agreed-upon number of detainees from Israeli prisons and detainees from Israeli detention centers. Additionally, it includes the complete withdrawal of Israeli forces from the Gaza Strip.
The third phase (42 days):
16. Both parties will exchange all body parts or remains of the deceased after their arrival and identification.
17. Initiate the Gaza Strip reconstruction plan, scheduled to span three to five years, encompassing the rebuilding of homes, civilian facilities, and infrastructure to support and compensate all affected groups. This effort will be overseen by several countries and organizations, including Egypt, Qatar, and the United Nations.
18. Ending the complete siege of the Gaza Strip entails opening all border crossings, notably the Rafah crossing, to facilitate the movement of residents and goods. Additionally, ensuring uninterrupted electricity supply throughout all areas of the Gaza Strip is paramount.
Guarantors of this agreement:
Qatar, Egypt, the United States, the United Nations, Turkey, Russia, and China
Pentagon blows $1bn in ‘unsustainable’ naval campaign against Yemen
The Cradle | June 15, 2024
The US military says it has spent about $1 billion in an unsustainable campaign to fight the Ansarallah-led Yemeni armed forces in the Red Sea, the Wall Street Journal reported on 15 June.
Since November, Yemeni forces have attacked Israeli-linked commercial ships traveling through the Red Sea, the world’s most important commercial sea route, in response to Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza.
After US and UK naval warships began carrying out attacks on the Yemeni navy and sites in the capital, Sanaa, Yemeni forces began attacking the warships as well.
To defend against Yemeni attacks, the US Navy has conducted more than 450 strikes and intercepted 200 drones and missiles in a campaign that US officials worry is not sustainable.
“Their supply of weapons from Iran is cheap and highly sustainable, but ours is expensive, our supply chains are crunched, and our logistics tails are long,” said Emily Harding of the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. “We are playing whack-a-mole, and they are playing a long game.”
The Wall Street Journal provided details of a Yemeni attack on a US naval destroyer on 9 January, one of 80 attacks overall, which illustrated the difficulties US personnel face.
“It was just after 9 p.m. when radar operators aboard this U.S. Navy destroyer in the Red Sea spotted a tiny arrow on their screens: a missile hurtling toward them at five times the speed of sound,” The Journal reported.
“The crew of the warship with 300 sailors aboard had just seconds to shoot it down. As the projectile closed in, the Laboon launched an interceptor from silos beneath its deck, destroying the incoming missile in flight.”
Yemeni forces launched 18 drones and cruise missiles, along with the ballistic missile, at four American destroyers, a US aircraft carrier, and a UK warship throughout the 12-hour battle that day.
“These things are telephone pole-sized, you get three minutes of flight time, you detect it for 45 seconds, you get like 10 seconds to determine whether you’re going to shoot at it or not,” said Capt. David Wroe of the US carrier strike group in the Red Sea.
The longer the Yemeni attacks continue, the more likely it is that a US warship could be hit, Frank McKenzie, a retired Marine general, told The Journal. “There’s always a chance that something happens and one of our ships could be struck, and that chance only increases the longer we allow the situation to continue,” he added.
Biden’s Gaza ceasefire push is a road to fatal escalation
By Robert Inlakesh | RT | June 14, 2024
US President Joe Biden’s ceasefire push has so far led to further violence in Gaza and threatens to spill over into a war with Lebanon. Washington is either asleep at the wheel or is willing to push the entire region off a cliff in order to avoid ditching its “unconditional support” for Israel.
The speech delivered by Joe Biden on May 31, in which he presented an Israeli ceasefire proposal, urging both Hamas and the Israeli government to accept it, provided a glimpse of hope that finally the US was putting its foot down. The US President gave what seemed to be a reasonable roadmap to secure a lasting cessation of hostilities in Gaza and a prisoner exchange.
The immediate Hamas response was to view the speech “positively,” while still maintaining that it required an Israeli withdrawal of its forces from Gaza and a complete end to the war, in order to agree to any proposal. On the other hand, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, stuck with his previous rhetoric about the need to destroy Hamas, was indicating that he was not going to agree to a ceasefire.
Netanyahu took things even further by asserting that Joe Biden’s description of the Israeli ceasefire proposal was ”not accurate,” also making it clear that there would be no ceasefire until his war goals were achieved. Giving legitimacy to the Israeli PM’s assertions was an article published in The Economist that revealed details of the proposal, in which it became clear that the three-phase ceasefire would be more difficult to conclude, beyond its first phase, than Biden had let on.
Although a series of articles have been released in the Western media, including a Reuters interview with an anonymous Biden administration official, portraying the president’s actions as a bold attempt to pressure Israel to agree to its own proposal, it appears that this move is failing. As the daily death toll rises in besieged Gaza, the Israeli government continues to declare its intention to destroy Hamas, the Palestinian Party that it is supposedly about to conclude a deal with. This as US Secretary of State Antony Blinken is being sent on yet another Middle East trip to try and help conclude a ceasefire deal as the effort nears collapse.
Israel, meanwhile, continues to escalate its assault on the southernmost Gazan city of Rafah, while renewing incursions and aerial assaults throughout the strip. All of this flies in the face of the International Court of Justice (ICJ)’s recent ruling that ordered Israel to halt its military operation in Rafah. On top of this, the tit-for-tat battles that have been going on since October between Hezbollah and the Israeli military along the Lebanese border, have also escalated to what many consider to be a point of no return; making a new Israel-Lebanon war nearly inevitable.
All of this is very reminiscent of what happened before, when Hamas announced, on May 6, that it had agreed to a ceasefire proposal. The proposal was admitted to be almost identical to the one that was repeatedly lauded by Antony Blinken as a ”strong” deal during his last visit to the region.
On that same day, the Israeli military immediately launched its long-threatened offensive in southern Gaza, seizing the Rafah Crossing between the Palestinian territory and Egypt. At that time, the Israeli PM reiterated what he had been consistently saying beforehand about pursuing the destruction of Hamas and his government decided to signal their refusal to agree to the ceasefire.
Again, with the US now bringing forward Israel’s own ceasefire proposal, the predicament does not seem to have changed much. Benjamin Netanyahu is in a difficult position domestically, after failing to achieve any of his war goals in Gaza, he faces the prospect of his governing coalition collapsing if he accepts a ceasefire agreement with nothing to show for eight months of war. The Israeli people also heavily favor re-occupying the strip, with 0% of Israeli Jews polled saying they would like to see Hamas continuing to govern the besieged coastal enclave after the war.
Therefore, Netanyahu knows the political repercussions for him and others in the Israeli ruling class if he accepts a ceasefire agreement with Hamas. However, he also knows that, despite US pressure on his government to bring the war in Gaza to an end, the American government has no teeth behind its forceful statements and will indefinitely continue its “unconditional support” for Israel.
Not only that, when the International Criminal Court (ICC)’s chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, called for the issuance of arrest warrants for Netanyahu and his defense minister, Yoav Gallant, the US government threatened the court. US lawmakers immediately began to draft legislation to sanction the ICC. When the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued its provisional rulings, as a result of the so-far successful South African genocide case against Israel, the US announced it disagreed with the conclusions.
Even though the US abstained from a United Nations Security Council (UNSC) vote that called on Israel to halt its military operations in Gaza until the end of Muslim Holy month of Ramadan, the Biden administration illogically called the resolution ”non-binding” and gave the Israelis the greenlight to violate it. American lawmakers have even just drafted legislation to condition aid to the Maldives, after that nation made an independent decision to stop Israeli citizens from entering their country due to war crimes committed in Gaza. Now the UN has added Israel to its infamous blacklist for killing Palestinian children, and the US has implemented another double-standard in continuing to provide weapons to a nation added to this list.
Despite the mountains of reports of war crimes from international human rights groups, the decisions made by the UNSC, UN general assembly, the ICC and ICJ, the United States government works to protect the Israeli government at all costs. This has to be kept in mind when we look at the American approach to implementing “red lines” with their Israeli allies, which the Biden administration still cannot find the words to actually define. Even when it comes to the invasion of Rafah, which Washington openly said would be a “disaster,” it was simultaneously preparing another military aid package worth 14 billion dollars.
Understanding all of this, Benjamin Netanyahu was still invited to Washington to address the US Congress and faced with some pressure to conclude a deal. He can rest assured that the Americans will stand by his side no matter what he chooses to do. So, if you are Netanyahu, what incentive is there to stop the war at this point? The Biden administration is filled to the brim with empty and vacuous strategies, which have led to public calls for ending the war, while privately refusing to ever hold Israel accountable.
The big problem this time around is that the continuation of the war will not only mean an escalation of the horrors in Gaza, but is heading towards a massive conflagration with Lebanon’s Hezbollah. Unlike Hamas, Hezbollah possesses the missile capabilities to respond to Israeli airstrikes with devastating effect that could lead to the deaths of hundreds, even thousands, of Israelis. Under great domestic pressure to launch an assault on Lebanese territory, Benjamin Netanyahu appears to be closer to opening a catastrophic conflict with Lebanon, instead of concluding a ceasefire and prisoner exchange with Gaza. In his eyes, a war with Lebanon could even provide the perfect lethal distraction that would enable him to negotiate a ceasefire in Gaza, but at the expense of triggering a much larger and deadlier war.
Has Israel considered a loss to Hezbollah?
By Ali Rizk | The Cradle | June 11, 2024
As the war in Gaza lags on, cross-border exchanges on the Lebanese–Israeli front have intensified. Fighting between Hezbollah and the Israeli military has taken a heavy toll on both sides. The Lebanese resistance movement has lost over 300 fighters, with Israeli shelling resulting in the displacement of tens of thousands of Lebanese residents of the country’s southern villages.
Israel has not fared much better, with at least sixty thousand northern settlers forced to flee their homes. While the occupation army has confirmed the death of around a dozen of its soldiers in the exchanges with Hezbollah, the real number is estimated to be much higher.
In March, The Cradle gained intel that over 230 Israeli troops had been killed in combat since 8 October 2023.
The rising threat of a large-scale war
While the northern conflict currently remains within the boundaries of ‘controlled escalation,’ the prospects of a full-blown war between Hezbollah and Israel may be steadily increasing. Far-right members of the Israeli government, who are key to keeping Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s governing coalition intact, have become noticeably more vocal in supporting escalation on the Lebanese front.
Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich has called for launching an attack on Beirut, describing it as “the capital of terrorism.” Given these stances, it cannot be entirely dismissed that Netanyahu may opt to escalate against Lebanon.
Indeed, recent statements by the Israeli prime minister suggest that some form of wider escalation on the northern front may be in the making.
Speaking during a visit to the headquarters of the Israeli military’s Northern Command, Netanyahu referred to “surprising plans” being devised to deal with Hezbollah, aiming to “restore security to the north and to restore residents safely to their homes” without going into further detail.
Amid these developments, the Israeli military recently completed a drill that simulated a ground incursion into Lebanon.
A large-scale Israeli offensive on Lebanon in the near future would also be consistent with earlier assessments made by US officials, who, in late February, predicted a possible ground incursion into Lebanon by the late spring or early summer.
Hezbollah’s increasing capabilities
Hezbollah’s challenge to Israel appears to be on the rise, reflecting a failure of Tel Aviv’s current strategy of relying on precision surgical strikes. According to the Israeli institute Alma, which monitors developments on the Lebanese–Israeli front, 325 cross-border attacks were carried out by Hezbollah in May, the highest number of monthly attacks on this front since 7 October.
The resistance movement’s operations have also become more sophisticated, revealing capabilities it has introduced for the first time. Hezbollah managed to destroy an advanced surveillance balloon used to detect incoming attacks in an operation conducted via a kamikaze drone.
It has also upgraded its drone capabilities, recently launching a twin-kamikaze drone attack on the northern town of Hurfeish and conducting its first-ever air raid through an armed UAV equipped with S5 rockets. The operation targeted Israeli soldiers in the settlement of Metula and was the first time in which an Arab force had launched an airstrike on Israel.
Most recently, Hezbollah released footage on 6 June showing a guided missile attack on an Iron Dome platform in Israel’s Ramot Naftali barracks in the Galilee.
What to expect in a full-scale war
The increased sophistication of Hezbollah’s operations can also be seen as fueling Tel Aviv’s urgency to take decisive action against the resistance group. This was expressed by former Israeli war cabinet minister Benny Gantz, who described the Lebanese front as the most significant and pressing operative front in the current conflict, warning that the “moment of truth” was now close.
However, what the Lebanese movement has demonstrated since 7 October also serves as a warning of what awaits the occupation state if an all-out war were to erupt.
The Israeli military is expected to employ methods similar to 2006 in that it would carry out destructive air raids on ‘Hezbollah strongholds’ in southern Lebanon, Beirut, and the Bekaa region.
Speaking to The Cradle, retired Lebanese Brigadier General Elias Farhat explains:
There is no such thing as a limited full-scale war. A full-scale war will have to include all of Hezbollah’s strongholds.
However, any Israeli onslaught on par or exceeding what happened in 2006 is almost certainly going to be met, this time, with a much harsher response from Hezbollah.
The Lebanese movement has amassed a far larger rocket and missile arsenal, with estimates pointing to over 150,000 of these weapons now in its possession. Given this military build-up, Hezbollah is widely recognized today as the world’s heaviest armed non-state actor.
Perhaps even more importantly, its arsenal includes precision missiles such as the Fateh 110, enabling it to aim at strategic Israeli installations that could cause immense damage. Against this backdrop, Israeli experts have warned of a MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) scenario in the event of a full-scale war with Hezbollah.
It is also possible the Lebanese movement possesses military capabilities that could undermine Israel’s air power advantage. The group has already demonstrated its air defense capability against Israeli drones, having succeeded in shooting down several ‘Hermes’ UAVs in the current round of hostilities.
The bigger danger to Israel, however, would be Hezbollah’s possession of air defenses capable of shooting down not only drones but Israeli warplanes. Given the strengthening of military ties between Russia and Iran, the possibility of Hezbollah accessing Moscow’s enhanced anti-aircraft technology is increased.
The resistance movement has already announced that it launched surface-to-air missiles at Israeli warplanes that had broken the sound barrier and had hence forced the aircraft to retreat.
This marks the first development of its kind in the history of warfare between Hezbollah and Israel and could merely be a warning shot for what could transpire in the event of an all-out war.
That Hezbollah would unveil such weapons in a full-scale conflict is consistent with its strategy of saving its best for such confrontations. In 2006, it surprised the Israeli military by striking a warship in a missile attack.
Israel would also likely face superior offensive ground operations in a full-scale war with Hezbollah. The Lebanese movement gained valuable experience in such operations while fighting extremist groups in Syria.
As Hussein Ibish of the Arab Gulf States Institute recounts to The Cradle:
“The combination of Hezbollah ground fighters and Russian air and signals intelligence dominance was the ‘A-Team’ on behalf of the Assad [government] in the Syrian war.”
Given this experience and its ability to launch airstrikes via UAVs, Hezbollah likely retains the capacity to launch offensive infantry operations – importantly, with air cover.
Manpower and tactical advantages
Hezbollah will also likely enjoy an advantage in terms of reliable, tested, and highly motivated manpower. Due to its close ties with allied resistance factions in Iraq and Yemen, fighters from these countries are likely to come to Hezbollah’s aid in a full-scale conflict with Israel.
The Lebanese movement’s Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah alluded to this factor in a 2017 speech. Israel, by contrast, appears to be suffering from a shortage of manpower in its military ranks, not to mention tanking troop and commander morale, highlighted on Sunday by yet another high-level military resignation, this time Gaza Division Commander Brigadier-General Avi Rosenfeld.
Israeli defenses are also unlikely to succeed when facing large barrages of Hezbollah missiles and drones. Unlike Iran’s retaliatory attack on 13 April, where the US and allies shot down a large fraction of the incoming drones and missiles, similar-style attacks launched by Hezbollah would be far more difficult to deal with.
The closer geographical distance means much less time to intercept and shoot down such attacks. Hezbollah, which relies heavily on the element of surprise in its military tactics, will also certainly not telegraph its attacks beforehand as Iran did. As a result, Israel would likely remain exposed to immense attacks through surface-to-surface missiles, kamikaze drones, and airstrikes via UAVs.
Moreover, the Lebanese resistance has spent many months tirelessly disabling Israel’s “eyes and ears” in the north, reportedly destroying over 1,650 pieces of intelligence, surveillance, and target acquisition (ISR) equipment since the conflict’s onset.
Israel is increasingly operating blindly in that vital northern theater, allowing Hezbollah to repeatedly and successfully strike at qualitative targets, penetrate more deeply into the occupation state, and employ more advanced weaponry.
The US response
While it is likely that the US will rush to defend its Israeli ally, the bigger question is how far it is willing to go. As indicated above, defensive measures are unlikely to significantly undermine the severity of Hezbollah’s cross-border missile and drone operations.
Judging from its approach following the Iranian attack on Israel, Washington is unlikely to go beyond defensive support. Following Operation True Promise, the White House reportedly informed Tel Aviv that it would have no part in any offensive action against Tehran, effectively leaving its Israeli ally with little choice but to settle for a far less proportionate response to Iran’s significant military operation.
Given how that situation unfolded, it would be a risky gamble for Israel to pin its hopes on its US security guarantor assuming an offensive role in a major war with Hezbollah. Tensions are also rising between the US and rival superpowers, reinforcing this dynamic.
Speaking to The Cradle, Steven Simon, Senior Director for the Middle East and North Africa in the US National Security Council during the Obama administration, emphasizes that “a direct combat role beyond air defenses (in a full-scale war between Hezbollah and Israel) is highly unlikely.” This is especially the case, he adds, “given tensions with Russia and China.”
Nawaf al-Musawi, Hezbollah’s Resource and Border Affairs official and one of the movement’s strategic thinkers, offers this prediction:
The Israeli occupation needs weapons from Washington for any war it wishes to wage against Lebanon. After any war with Lebanon, the region will not be the same as it was before. The next war with Israel will be the final war.
Pro-Palestine Irish MEP loses seat, blames ‘establishment’

Al Mayadeen | June 12, 2024
Clare Daly, an Irish leftwing MEP and advocate for Palestine, has lost her seat in the European Parliament. A harsh critic of the Israeli occupation, as well as a frequent critic of Western militarism, Daly slipped behind her opponents in Dublin’s district, The Guardian reported Tuesday.
According to the article, throughout her tenure in the European Parliament, Daly blasted the West for “militarism” and gained a big social media following. She was featured in state media outlets in China and Russia, which her opponents used as a card to accuse her of supporting “authoritarian regimes”.
Furthermore, The Guardian reported that Daly lost her seat despite support from luminaries such as Eurythmics singer Annie Lennox and actress Susan Sarandon. Sarandon is a well-known pro-Palestine campaigner who has been constantly accused of anti-semitism for her sheer support for Palestine.
Daly was one of “Israel’s” toughest opponents in the European Parliament, Israeli public radio KAN said on Wednesday. Daly posted on X in April that the “whole world” knew “Israel” was destabilizing the Middle East and accused the occupation of genocide.
She also accused the European Parliament of “telling a fairytale in which Iran’s the aggressor.”
Following Operation Al-Aqsa Flood on October 7, Daly responded to “unelected” EU President Ursula von der Leyen, stating that the latter’s stance does not reflect the true voice of the European Union and in no way reflects the bloc’s peaceful approach in terms of foreign policy.
“Today, Hamas terrorists have struck at the heart of Israel capturing and killing innocent women and children. Israel has the right to defend itself – today and in the days to come. The European Union stands with Israel,” von der Leyen tweeted on X on Saturday.
“Who do you think you are? You’re unelected and have no authority to determine EU foreign policy, which is set by the EU Council. Europe does NOT “stand with Israel.” We stand for peace. You do not speak for us. If you’ve nothing constructive to say, and you clearly don’t – shut up,” Daly wrote in response.
Following the announcement of her loss at the elections, Daly thanked those who voted for her and expressed that “it is testament to the success and reach of the work we’ve done that the establishment came out in such force to harm my chances of reelection.
Daly could have been the victim of Israeli lobbying to oust her from her position for her tough stance on “Israel” and her unapologetic support of Palestine.
Daly turned down an interview with an RTÉ reporter as she left the count facility in south Dublin expressing, “You had no interest in talking to me for five years, so I’ve no interest in talking to you.”
