Ex-intel officer questions Israeli strategy in Lebanon as losses mount
Al Mayadeen | April 19, 2026
A former Israeli Military Intelligence officer has questioned the Israeli occupation’s strategy in southern Lebanon, pointing to mounting losses since the ceasefire took effect.
Retired Lieutenant Colonel Jacques Neriah told i24 News that Hezbollah has emerged stronger from the war despite extensive Israeli bombing and attacks, noting that the group “represents the resistance against Israel, and this is its primary source of strength.”
“If we are sustaining daily losses in Lebanon, how long can we endure this situation?” he asked.
2 killed, dozen injured since ceasefire
The Israeli military command had announced that an Israeli reservist soldier was killed and nine others were wounded in an improvised explosive device incident in southern Lebanon on Saturday. Reports indicate that the incident occurred in the border village of Kfar Kila, opposite of Metulla, which has seen extensive periods of Israeli military occupation and incursions since the 66-day war on Lebanon in 2024.
On Sunday, Israeli media reported that an Israeli soldier was killed and nine others were wounded, including one seriously, after an explosive device detonated in an area it occupies in southern Lebanon. The soldier served in the 769th “Hiram” Regional Brigade’s 7106th Battalion.
According to an initial military probe, the incident occurred during operations in Israeli-occupied territory, where an engineering vehicle was struck by an IED planted in the area. Troops securing the machinery were caught in the blast, resulting in multiple casualties. The wounded were airlifted to hospitals, while the Israeli regime says its forces launched their own attacks near the area following the explosion.
A day earlier, Israeli media reported that another reservist, a warrant officer, was killed and three soldiers were wounded in a similar explosion in the southern Lebanese village of Jebbayn. The troops were reportedly scanning a building for weapons when the device detonated.
Continued attacks, occupation in southern Lebanon
The Israeli military command had announced that its forces would operate in a so-called “advanced defense zone” within southern occupied Lebanon, extending from Ras al-Bayyada on the coast to Shebaa in the east. The zone is seen as a prelude to a prolonged Israeli occupation and an attempt to push settlers within Lebanese territory.
The announcement comes as part of a push by the Israeli regime to impose a new status quo in areas located in a region 8-10 km from Israeli sites in occupied Lebanese, Palestinian, and Syrian territories.
However, the Islamic Resistance in Lebanon has emphasized that a ceasefire must include a complete halt to Israeli violations, including incursions and destruction of property.
Hezbollah Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem stated that the Resistance remains prepared to respond to any aggression, stressing that the ceasefire cannot be one-sided and must be respected by both parties. He outlined key priorities for the next phase, including a full Israeli withdrawal from occupied Lebanese territory, the return of displaced residents to their villages, and the launch of reconstruction efforts supported at both the national and international levels.
Sheikh Qassem also stressed the importance of strengthening Lebanese sovereignty, maintaining internal unity, and preventing foreign interference.
Netanyahu’s ‘total victory’ to total flop
By Robert Inlakesh | Al Mayadeen | April 19, 2026
Promising annihilation, dominance, and total victory, the Israeli leadership has found itself in a predicament no closer to victory on any front. Tactical victories sold as strategic ones have been exposed; instead of meticulously planned operations, Tel Aviv engages in aggression without any discernible long-term strategy to achieve its stated aims.
Since October 7, 2023, the Israeli regime of old is no more. Instead of implementing methodical planning, public deception, and fighting the long game, its thinking has been replaced by a ruthlessly violent vengeance scheme that seeks to try and achieve in months what it was previously aiming for over decades.
The beginning of the war on Iran was not February 28, 2026; instead, it was October 7, 2023. This was the moment when everything changed in the strategic thinking of the Israeli leadership. For them, the illusion of absolute control and superiority was crushed under the boots of a few thousand Palestinian fighters, who single-handedly dealt the most severe blow to the Zionist regime in its history.
As an event, the collapse of the Israeli southern command at the hands of a guerrilla force possessing homemade light weapons, Operation Al-Aqsa Flood, represented the moment of a great shift. It wasn’t long before the decision was made to launch a genocide against the people of Gaza.
Inflicting the genocide was the whole strategy, not dealing a military defeat to Hamas or any other Palestinian organizations. Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu foolishly believed that the genocide would restore the Zionist entity’s prized “deterrence capacity”, while the side effects of the genocide would mean the de facto defeat of the Resistance, destroying Palestinian will to resist that could lead to a mass ethnic cleansing event that would end up inflicting a predicament on Hamas that replicates the PLO’s defeat in 1982.
When it became clear that this strategy was not working inside Gaza itself, the Israeli military continued without any clear goals and launched operation after operation in desperate attempts to achieve their desired outcomes. The majority of the tasks performed inside Gaza by the invading ground forces were simply round-the-clock demolition work; so much that they even recruited private businesses and settler employees to aid in these efforts.
Ultimately, they ran into a major problem; after two years, they had still failed and presented a plan to try to implement a West Bank-style occupation over Gaza City, a task that experts predicted could take them a decade. This is why they accepted a ceasefire, one in which the war was simply frozen and meant they were able to engage in a prisoner exchange.
In Lebanon, they were also put into a difficult predicament. The stance of former Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah had been that Lebanon would remain a support front for Gaza until the very end. “Hamas will win,” stated Nasrallah in a 2023 speech, after which he asserted that “no matter where the region is taken,” Hezbollah will stand with Gaza.
The daily operations by Hezbollah were a thorn in its side, which is why the Israelis began planning to escalate in an unprecedented way. Through their terrorist indiscriminate pager attacks, followed by the assassination of Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah and most of Hezbollah’s senior leadership, the Israelis believed they had dealt a death blow to Hezbollah.
Selling this lie to the public, the Israeli leadership claimed a major victory and alleged to have taken out around 80% of Hezbollah’s weapons arsenal.
In March, when Hezbollah began responding to the some 15,400 ceasefire violations committed by the Zionists, suddenly the Israeli public was jolted back by the power and coordination with which Hezbollah managed to attack, especially as these operations were carried out alongside Iran’s missile and drone strikes.
Eventually, failing to score victories in key towns like Bint Jbeil and Khiam, the Israelis begrudgingly accepted a temporary ceasefire, one that they immediately violated.
If it were true that the Israelis were close to, or even believed that a victory over Hezbollah was possible, they would not take any ceasefire agreement of any description. Instead, they were forced to go back to the drawing board.
Similarly, they launched the 12-day war on Iran and came out empty-handed. They also used their US allies to launch an air assault on Yemen and failed to achieve any of their goals. Then came the February 28 attack on Iran, where the largest blows were landed during the first 24 hours, yet even with the US on their side, their aspirations for regime change quickly faded into a distant memory.
When Yemen’s Ansar Allah joined the war in support of Iran and Hezbollah, the Israelis didn’t even launch strikes on Yemen, likely due to it being a useless endeavour.
So as it stands, the Lebanon front is again open, the Iran front was fought to a standstill with no goals achieved, Yemen is open whenever there is aggression on their allies, and Gaza is a temporarily frozen arena that they still have no plan for. Even in Syria, the constant aggression is like playing with fire.
Meanwhile, the delusional Zionist leadership is still chasing its aspirations of a “Greater Israel”, threatening even Turkey with retaliation for simply criticizing them. What this behaviour and all of their decision-making since October 7 point to is an irrational inability to close any conflict, lacking any coherent plans to win.
Therefore, the Israelis will use any and all ceasefire agreements in order to go back to the drawing board, in order to conjure up new plans for further aggression. Whether it’s a Lebanon, Gaza, or Iran ceasefire, they are not about to give up on attacking everyone mercilessly.
This means that despite all of its efforts and attacks over the past two and a half years, the predicament they find themselves in has not changed. A ceasefire kicks the can down the road, simply delaying the inevitable resumption of war. Either the Israelis are totally defeated in battle, or they will continue to attack again and again. This will go around in circles until they are eventually defeated.
Hezbollah denies involvement in deadly attack on UNIFIL in south Lebanon
Al-Mayadeen | April 18, 2026
Hezbollah has denied any involvement in an incident targeting United Nations observers in southern Lebanon earlier today.
In a statement, the group said it “calls for caution in issuing judgments and responsibilities regarding the incident,” urging restraint until facts are fully established.
The movement specifically rejected any responsibility for the incident involving UNIFIL forces in the al-Ghandourieh–Bint Jbeil area, stressing that blame should not be assigned before the Lebanese Army completes its investigation and clarifies the circumstances.
Emphasis on coordination and stability
Hezbollah also highlighted the importance of maintaining cooperation between local residents, UNIFIL, and the Lebanese Army. It emphasized the need for coordination between the army and UN peacekeepers, particularly given the current sensitive conditions.
The group further “expressed surprise at the [parties] that rushed to throw accusations arbitrarily, while remaining silent when Israeli forces target UNIFIL personnel.”
Earlier today, UNIFIL said a patrol clearing explosive ordnance along a road in the village of Ghandourieh came under small-arms fire “from non-state actors”, leaving one observer dead and three others wounded, including two in serious condition.
UNIFIL warns IOF movement limits threaten mission logistics flow
The United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) has reported that a routine convoy carrying military and civilian peacekeepers, along with essential contractors, was stopped by Israeli forces a few kilometres from its destination in Naqoura on Tuesday afternoon.
UNIFIL said the incident is not isolated, adding that similar restrictions, whether through physical roadblocks or the reversal of prior clearances, have affected both peacekeepers and essential supporting personnel.
The incidents are part of a broader pattern of Israeli aggression targeting the UNIFIL’s presence on the ground.
Late last month, a UNIFIL patrol was subjected to an Israeli attack on the Bani Hayyan-Tallouseh road, resulting in two peacekeepers killed and two others injured, with a helicopter from the Naqoura area intervening to evacuate the wounded.
The prospect of an expanded and far more violent war
By Kurt Nimmo | Another Day in the Empire | April 18, 2026
… Earlier this month, Israeli minister Bezalel Smotrich declared an official start to the Greater Israel project. He included Syria, Lebanon, and Palestine in the project. Since the establishment of Israel in 1948, Zionists have strived to weaken neighboring states, dismantle their military capacity, and worked to reshape the balance of power in West Asia. The original plan called for occupying and ethnically cleansing the entirety of Palestine, all of Jordan, south Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq, the Sinai Peninsula in Egypt, and northern Saudi Arabia.
The Nazis had a similar plan during their occupation of Europe in the Second World War. It was called the “Greater Germanic Reich” (Großgermanisches Reich). In the autumn of 1933, Adolf Hitler made plans to annex territories including Bohemia, parts of western Poland, and Austria to Germany. He also aimed to create satellite or puppet states that would lack independent economies or policies. Nazi racial theories classified the Germanic peoples of Europe as part of a racially superior Nordic subset within the broader Aryan race, which they considered to be the sole true bearers of civilized culture.
In Deuteronomy, the Jewish God chooses Israel to be his holy (kadosh) and treasured (segulah) people. Deuteronomy 14:2 states God has chosen the Jews “to be a people for Himself, a special treasure above all the peoples who are on the face of the earth.” According to the Torah, “Eretz Israel” (“Land of Israel” in Hebrew), now defined as “Greater Israel,” was “given” to the “children of Abraham” and serves as the basis for “a merger of religious fundamentalism and modern political ethno-nationalism, whereby ancient texts are used to justify a modern military expansionist state.” In regard to Lebanon, the Zionists believe Greater Israel extends up to the Sidon and Litani rivers.
According to Amichai Friedman, a rabbi in the Israeli Army, “This land is ours, the whole land, including Gaza, including Lebanon,” while Daniella Weiss, a Jewish ethnonationalist and former mayor of Kedumim, called for the “invasion of Lebanon” immediately after the war in Gaza. Lebanon-born Israeli journalist Edy Cohen posted to social media that areas of Lebanon, including Faraya and Kesrouan, will also suffer the fate of Gaza, that is to say ethnic cleansing, massacres, and wholesale theft of land, homes (those not demolished), and infrastructure. … Full article
Canada’s Carney Revives Online Censorship Bill
The bill that died with Trudeau’s election call is back, and so is the advisory panel that wrote it.
By Christina Maas | Reclaim The Net | April 18, 2026
Canada’s Liberal government is preparing to revive legislation that would hand the state new powers over what Canadians can say online, with Prime Minister Mark Carney’s team signaling that a rebooted “online harms” law is coming.
A report submitted to the Senate social affairs committee confirms the direction.
The Department of Industry told senators that Ottawa is working toward a “future online safety regime” aimed at reducing online “harms,” a category the government itself gets to define. To shape the proposal, officials have brought back the Expert Advisory Group on Online Safety, the same body that helped design the previous censorship attempt.
“To advise on this proposal, the government has recently reconvened the Expert Advisory Group on Online Safety, whose members previously contributed to the development of online harms legislation, to engage on new and emerging issues related to online harms,” the department said.
“Any future legislative proposal would be subject to parliamentary scrutiny, and details will be made public at the appropriate time.”
One of the members back at the table is Bernie Farber of the Canadian Anti-Hate Network. The advisory group helps shape what the government will treat as hateful, harmful, or dangerous.
That definition, once written into law, determines which posts get deleted, which accounts get silenced, and which Canadians face fines or house arrest for saying the wrong thing online.
Canadian Culture Minister Marc Miller telegraphed the timing this week, suggesting a new law targeting “online harms” is needed and likely coming soon. With the Liberals now holding a majority after three byelection wins and the defection of five MPs from the Conservatives and NDP, the procedural obstacles that killed previous attempts have largely disappeared. A social media ban for children is also on the table.
The last attempt, Bill C-63, known as the Online Harms Act, was introduced under the familiar justification of protecting children from online exploitation.
The bill died when former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau called the 2025 federal election. Its actual reach went well beyond child safety. It targeted lawful internet content that authorities deemed “likely to foment detestation or vilification of an individual or group,” wording broad enough to sweep up political argument, satire, religious commentary, and journalism, depending on who was reading it. Breaking the rule carried fines of up to $70,000 or house arrest.
Before C-63 there was Bill C-36, a 2021 effort to amend the Criminal Code along similar lines. Neither bill made it through. Both kept returning in slightly different forms.
The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, Canada’s leading constitutional freedom organization, has launched a national campaign urging the Carney government to abandon the project entirely.
The JCCF warned that the Online Harms Act would “dramatically expand government censorship powers, punish lawful expression online, and authorize preemptive restrictions on individual liberty.”
“In doing so, it would represent a fundamental departure from Canada’s long-standing commitment to freedom of expression and due process,” the organization said.
Preemptive restrictions, the legal mechanism the previous bill contained, mean punishing or silencing someone before they have said anything unlawful. Canadian courts have historically treated prior restraint as the most serious form of speech suppression. The revived framework appears to contemplate it as a feature.
The chilling effect is already setting in. Writers, commentators, and small publishers in Canada began adjusting what they posted during the C-63 debate, well before any law took effect. The threat alone was enough to quiet a portion of online political speech.
A reintroduced bill, backed by a majority government and an advisory panel stacked with people who see the internet as a venue that needs controlling, makes that quieting louder.
The Liberal government has said repeatedly that some version of Bill C-63 is coming back. What it has not said, in any substantive form, is who decides what counts as hate, what counts as harm, and what counts as the kind of speech a democracy is supposed to tolerate even when it finds it ugly. Those definitions will sit with the same government promising the law, and the same advisory group promising to help write it.
Israeli soldiers kill UNICEF truck drivers delivering water to Gaza families

The Cradle | April 18, 2026
Israeli soldiers killed two Palestinian truck drivers hired by UNICEF and injured two others during routine water delivery operations at a filling point in northern Gaza on 17 April.
“UNICEF is outraged by the killing of two drivers of trucks contracted by UNICEF to provide clean water to families in the Gaza Strip,” a statement from the UN agency reads.
UNICEF added the victims were “killed by Israeli fire in an incident that took place early this morning at the Mansoura water filling point in northern Gaza.”
The attack occurred during normal operations, with no changes in the convoy’s movements or procedures that morning.
UNICEF has since told its contractors to stand down at the site until conditions are safe enough to return.
“The Mansoura water filling point is currently the only operational truck filling point for the Mekorot water supply line serving Gaza City,” UNICEF said, highlighting the significance of the disruption.
“UNICEF and humanitarian partners use it multiple times a day to sustain critical water trucking operations for hundreds of thousands of people, including children.”
UNICEF called on Israeli authorities to “investigate this incident, and ensure full accountability,” adding that “Humanitarian workers, essential service providers, and civilian infrastructure, including critical water facilities, must never be targeted.”
In March, Israel slashed already restricted aid flows into Gaza, allowing just 640 trucks to enter out of 6,000 expected under existing arrangements – around 10 percent of the required amount.
Palestinian officials warn that the cuts have intensified shortages and pushed the strip closer to famine, with fuel, food, and basic goods increasingly scarce.
UNICEF said prices for essential items had surged by 200 to 300 percent, placing more than 1.5 million people at risk of severe food insecurity.
At the same time, Israeli attacks on the besieged Strip have continued despite the so-called ceasefire.
Earlier this month, Israeli forces shot and killed nine-year-old Palestinian schoolgirl Ritaj Reihan inside a tent classroom in northern Gaza, around two kilometers from the so-called ‘Yellow Line,’ in front of dozens of her classmates.
Iran defends limits on Strait of Hormuz passage
The Islamic Republic once again shut the strategic waterway due to what it described as US “piracy”

© Ruptly
RT | April 18, 2026
Iran said the renewed restrictions on maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz are justified under international law and necessary to counter hostile actions, Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baqaei has said in an interview with RT.
Iranian military officials said on Saturday that Tehran had reasserted “strict control” over the strategic route, which carries about 20% of global oil, citing the continued US blockade of its ports, just a day after declaring it open. The Revolutionary Guard Navy Command later said the strait would remain under Iranian military control as long as US restrictions stay in place.
“There was no safe and secure passage in this waterway,” Baqaei told RT on Saturday, adding that as a coastal state Iran has the right under international law to take measures against what it sees as hostile actions.
“We cannot allow enemy vessels, especially military ones or those linked to countries involved in aggression, to pass through the strait normally, as they pose a direct threat,” the spokesman stated.
The US-Israeli bombing campaign prompted Iran to restrict passage through the strait for “enemy ships,” triggering a breakdown in supply chains and sending global crude oil prices soaring.
Oil prices eased during the first round of US-Iran talks in Islamabad last weekend on hopes of the Strait reopening. After the negotiations collapsed, US President Donald Trump ordered a naval blockade on Iranian ports and shipping, prompting tankers to turn back and pushing prices back toward $100 a barrel.
On Friday, Iranian authorities said the waterway was fully open to commercial vessels for the remainder of the ten-day Israel–Lebanon ceasefire, lowering crude oil prices on de-escalation hopes. Tehran later reversed the decision after Trump said the US blockade of Iranian ports would remain in full force until a peace deal is reached.
The disruption in the Strait of Hormuz has triggered broad global economic ripple effects, with Europe facing higher fuel and energy costs due to reduced oil flows. The International Energy Agency has warned of rising market volatility and possible jet fuel shortages within six weeks if disruptions continue. Humanitarian organizations have also flagged growing risks to global food security as fertilizer and agricultural supply chains are affected.
US Middle East Policy: The Growing Propensity for Genocide
Arab Center Washington DC | April 10, 2026
Professor John Mearsheimer discusses the #IranWar, the #Gaza genocide, and the US policy toward the Middle East.
His remarks were the keynote address for Arab Center’s Eleventh Annual Conference.
John J. Mearsheimer is an American political scientist and international relations scholar who serves as the R. Wendell Harrison Distinguished Service Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago and is the author of How States Think: The Rationality of Foreign Policy, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, The Great Delusion: Liberal Dreams and International Realities, and The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, among other works.
Daniel Davis: Iran Reopens the Strait of Hormuz
Glenn Diesen | April 17, 2026
Lt. Col. Daniel Davis is a 4x combat veteran, the recipient of the Ridenhour Prize for Truth-Telling, and is the host of the Daniel Davis Deep Dive YouTube channel. Lt. Col. Davis discusses Iran’s announcement that it is reopening the Strait of Hormuz, yet the US decides to maintain the blockade on Iranian ports. While diplomatic developments are positive, the statements from the US and Iran do not correspond with each other.
Daniel Davis Deep Dive: https://www.youtube.com/@DanielDavisDeepDive/videos
Follow Prof. Glenn Diesen:
- Substack: https://glenndiesen.substack.com/
- X/Twitter: https://x.com/Glenn_Diesen
- Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/glenndiesen
Support the research by Prof. Glenn Diesen:
- PayPal: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/glenndiesen
- Buy me a Coffee: buymeacoffee.com/gdieseng
- Go Fund Me: https://gofund.me/09ea012f
Israeli General: War with Iran does not serve Israel as global standing erodes over Gaza
MEMO | April 17, 2026
A former Israeli General close to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has warned of the strategic and political consequences of the ongoing conflict, saying a military confrontation with Iran is not in Israel’s interest.
Major General (res.) Giora Eiland, former head of Israel’s National Security Council, said in remarks reported by Israeli media platform Walla that Israel’s international standing has sharply declined over the past three years, adding that the war in Gaza is the main driver of this deterioration.
He said the prevailing view among political circles in Europe and the United States is that Netanyahu has drawn Washington into an unnecessary confrontation.
Eiland added that these tensions have caused tangible harm to the global economy and threatened its stability, fuelling international public opinion against Israeli policies.
He stressed that the erosion of Israel’s standing is no longer limited to international institutions, but has become “clear and evident” within the United States, Israel’s closest ally.
The collapse is real – Lebanon ceasefire marks a historic strategic defeat
By Ramzy Baroud | MEMO | April 17, 2026
A ceasefire in Lebanon was announced on Thursday by US President Donald Trump, but its reality tells a very different story. The ceasefire was not the product of American diplomacy, nor Israeli strategic calculation. It was imposed—largely as a result of sustained Iranian pressure.
Washington, Tel Aviv, and their allies—including some within Lebanon itself—will continue to deny this reality. Acknowledging Iran’s role would mean admitting that a historic precedent has been set: for the first time, forces opposing the United States and Israel have succeeded in imposing conditions on both.
This is not a minor development. It is a strategic rupture. But it is not the only fundamental shift now underway: Israel’s very approach to war and diplomacy is itself changing.
After failing to secure victory through overwhelming violence, Israel is increasingly relying on coercive diplomacy to impose political outcomes.
Over the past two to three decades, this Israeli strategy has become unmistakably clear: achieving through diplomacy what it has failed to impose on the battlefield.
‘Diplomacy’ as War
Israeli ‘diplomacy’ does not conform to the conventional meaning of the term. It is not negotiation between equals, nor a genuine pursuit of peace. Rather, it is diplomacy fused with violence: assassinations, sieges, blockades, political coercion, and the systematic manipulation of internal divisions within opposing societies. It is diplomacy as an extension of war by other means.
Likewise, Israel’s conception of the ‘battlefield’ is fundamentally different. The deliberate targeting of civilians and civilian infrastructure is not incidental, nor merely ‘collateral damage’; it is central to the strategy itself.
Nowhere is this clearer than in Gaza. Following the ongoing genocide, vast swathes of Gaza have been reduced to rubble, with estimates indicating that around 90 percent of the whole of Gaza has been destroyed. According to the Gaza Ministry of Health, women and children consistently account for roughly 70 percent of all of Gaza’s casualties.
This is not collateral damage. It is the deliberate destruction of a civilian population, an act of genocide that is designed to force mass displacement and remake the political and demographic reality in Israel’s favor.
The same logic extends beyond Gaza. It shapes Israel’s wars in Lebanon against Hezbollah and its broader confrontation with Iran.
The United States, Israel’s principal ally, has historically operated within a similar paradigm. From Vietnam to Iraq, civilian populations, infrastructure, and even the environment itself have borne the brunt of American warfare.
A Faltering Model
It is often argued that Israel turned to ‘diplomacy’ following its forced withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000 under resistance pressure. While this moment was pivotal, it was not the beginning.
Earlier precedents exist. The First Intifada (1987–1993) demonstrated that a sustained popular uprising could not be crushed through brute force alone. Despite Israel’s extensive repression, the revolt endured.
It was in this context that the Oslo Accords emerged—not as a genuine peace process, but as a strategic lifeline. Through Oslo, Israel achieved politically what it could not impose militarily: the pacification of the uprising, the institutionalization of Palestinian political fragmentation, and the transformation of the Palestinian Authority into a mechanism for internal control.
Meanwhile, settlement expansion accelerated, and Israel reaped the global legitimacy of appearing as a ‘peace-seeking’ state.
Yet the last two decades have exposed the limits of this model.
From Lebanon in 2006 to repeated wars on Gaza (2008–09, 2012, 2014, 2021, and the ongoing genocide since 2023), Israel has failed to secure decisive strategic victories. Its ongoing confrontations with Hezbollah and Iran further underscore this failure
Not only has Israel been unable to achieve its stated military objectives, but it has also failed to translate overwhelming firepower—even genocide—into lasting political gains.
Some interpret this as a shift toward perpetual war under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. But this reading is incomplete.
Perpetual War?
Netanyahu understands that these wars cannot be sustained indefinitely. Yet ending them without victory would carry even greater consequences: the collapse of Israel’s deterrence doctrine and, potentially, the unraveling of its broader project of regional dominance.
This dilemma strikes at the heart of Zionist ideology, particularly Ze’ev Jabotinsky’s concept of the ‘Iron Wall’—the belief that overwhelming, unrelenting force would eventually compel indigenous resistance to surrender.
Today, that premise is being tested—and found wanting.
Netanyahu has repeatedly framed current wars as existential, comparable in significance to 1948—the war that resulted in the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians during the Nakba and the establishment of Israel.
Indeed, the parallels are unmistakable: mass displacement, civilian terror, systematic destruction, and unwavering Western backing—once from Britain, now from the United States.
But there is a critical difference: The 1948 war led to the creation of Israel; the current wars are about its survival as an exclusivist settler colonial project.
And herein lies the paradox: the longer these wars continue, the more they expose Israel’s inability to secure decisive outcomes. Yet ending them without victory risks a historic defeat—not only for Netanyahu, but for the ideological foundations of the Israeli state itself.
Israeli society appears to recognize the stakes. Polls throughout 2024 and 2025 have shown overwhelming support among Israeli Jews for continued military campaigns in Gaza and confrontations with Iran and Lebanon.
Public discourse frames this support in terms of ‘security’ and ‘deterrence’. But the underlying reality is deeper: a collective recognition that the long-standing project of military supremacy is faltering.
Having failed to subdue Gaza despite the genocide, Israel is now attempting to achieve through diplomatic maneuvering what it could not secure through war. Proposals for international oversight, stabilization forces, and externally imposed governance structures are all variations of this approach
But these efforts are unlikely to succeed.
Gaza is no longer isolated. The regional dimension of the conflict has expanded, linking Lebanon, Iran, and other actors into a broader, interconnected front.
Balance is Shifting
In Lebanon, Israel has been repeatedly forced toward ceasefire arrangements not out of choice, but because it failed to defeat Hezbollah or break the will of the Lebanese people.
This dynamic extends to Iran. Following the joint aggression on Iran starting February 28, both the United States and Israel were compelled to accept de-escalation frameworks after failing to achieve rapid or decisive outcomes.
The expectation that Iran could be quickly destabilized—replicating the models of Iraq or Libya—proved illusory. Instead, the confrontation revealed the limits of military escalation and forced a return to negotiations.
This is the essence of Israel’s current predicament.
Diplomacy, in this model, is not an alternative to war—it is a pause within it. A temporary tool used to regroup before the next phase of confrontation.
But in Israel’s case, this aggressive ‘diplomacy’ is increasingly becoming the only available tool, precisely because its military strategy has failed to deliver victory.
Lebanon was meant to be the exception—a theater where Israel could isolate and defeat Hezbollah. Instead, it became further evidence of strategic failure.
Efforts to separate the fronts—Gaza, Lebanon, Yemen, Iran—have collapsed. Iran has explicitly linked its diplomatic engagement to developments on other fronts, forcing Israel into a broader strategic entanglement it cannot control.
This marks a profound shift.
The foundational pillars of Israeli strategy—overwhelming force, fragmentation of adversaries, narrative control, and political engineering—are no longer functioning as they once did
Yet Netanyahu continues to project victory, declaring success at regular intervals, invoking deterrence, and framing ongoing wars as strategic achievements.
But these narratives ring hollow.
The reality, increasingly evident to observers across the region and beyond, is that the balance is finally shifting.
For the first time in decades, the trajectory of history is no longer bending in Israel’s favor.
Trump keeps Hormuz blockade despite Iran reopening passage
Al Mayadeen | April 17, 2026
US President Donald Trump announced that Washington will maintain its naval blockade targeting Iran, even after Tehran declared the Strait of Hormuz open to commercial shipping.
“THE STRAIT OF HORMUZ IS COMPLETELY OPEN AND READY FOR BUSINESS AND FULL PASSAGE, BUT THE NAVAL BLOCKADE WILL REMAIN IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT AS IT PERTAINS TO IRAN, ONLY, UNTIL SUCH TIME AS OUR TRANSACTION WITH IRAN IS 100% COMPLETE,” Trump said in a post on Truth Social on Friday.
He added that an agreement may be imminent, claiming that most negotiation points between Washington and Tehran have already been settled.
Iran reopens strategic waterway amid ceasefire
Iran’s move to reopen the Strait of Hormuz came in the context of broader regional de-escalation. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi announced that all commercial vessels would be permitted to pass through the vital waterway.
“In line with the ceasefire in Lebanon, the passage for all commercial vessels through Strait of Hormuz is declared completely open for the remaining period of ceasefire, on the coordinated route as already announced by Ports and Maritime Organisation of the Islamic Rep. of Iran,” Araghchi stated on April 17 via X.
The announcement ties maritime security in the Gulf to developments in Lebanon, where a temporary ceasefire has reduced immediate regional tensions.
Tankers continue transit despite US measures
Despite Washington’s insistence on maintaining its blockade, maritime activity suggests that Iranian oil shipments have not been halted.
Reports indicate that Iranian vessels have continued to navigate the Strait of Hormuz, reaching international waters and proceeding toward their destinations.
According to AFP, citing maritime tracking firm Kpler, three sanctioned Iranian oil tankers successfully exited the Gulf through the strait in recent days.
The vessels, The Deep Sea, Sonia I, and Diona, carried a combined five million barrels of crude oil after departing from Kharg Island. Their movement underscores the continued flow of Iranian oil toward Asian markets despite US efforts to restrict exports.
This development highlights the limitations of enforcement mechanisms, particularly as vessels employ tracking avoidance tactics and indirect shipping routes.
Strategic tensions between de-escalation and pressure
The parallel developments, Tehran reopening the strait and Washington maintaining its blockade, reflect a broader contradiction in the current phase of regional dynamics.
Iran’s decision signals a willingness to facilitate global trade flows and align maritime policy with ceasefire conditions. In contrast, the US approach continues to prioritize economic pressure, even amid signs of diplomatic progress.
The continued movement of Iranian tankers suggests that enforcement gaps remain, raising questions about the practical effectiveness of the blockade.
