RSS
The Truth About Israel’s Operation in Lebanon — and What Comes Next
In a dramatic preemptive strike, the IDF flew into Lebanon just before dawn on Sunday and destroyed a massive Hezbollah missile and drone force just minutes before it left the ground. So far, news in English has been at best incomplete and at worst outright misleading. It’s important to note that even though Israelis are using the words, “preemptive strike,” Israel did not start nor escalate these hostilities. Below is a detailed account, analysis, and predictions for the coming days, based on the best information available at this time.
Hezbollah’s attack, which was reportedly intended to launch at 5:00 AM, included thousands of rockets, missiles and drones: among them several dozen long range guided missiles aimed at the “Gush Dan” area of central Israel, which includes Tel Aviv and Ben Gurion Airport. Yet at 4:40 AM, just minutes before the intended strike, some hundred Israeli fighter jets and an unknown number of helicopters flew multiple sorties deep into Lebanon, destroying nearly all the projectiles before they left the ground. A relatively small number of rockets hit parts of northern Israel: Hezbollah claims it succeeded in firing 320 projectiles and “successfully” completed the “first phase” of its revenge for Israel’s assasination of Hezbollah military chef Fuad Shuk in Beirut last month.
Despite Hezbollah’s claims of victory, the IDF has demonstrated two dramatic capabilities: the first is strong intelligence. Israel not only identified the intended strike before it occurred, but also pinpointed the exact location of individual rocket and drone launchers on the ground. The second capability is the Israeli Air Force (IAF)’s effectiveness: flying into Lebanon as if Hezbollah’s air defenses simply did not exist at all, carrying out a huge operation in multiple sorties, and then returning home with reportedly no IDF casualties, injuries, or equipment damage.
So far there has been no unusually large call-up of reserves, indicating that Israel is not likely proceeding toward a ground campaign at this time. Yet many Israelis believe an all out war in Lebanon to be inevitable and perhaps even desirable: with the entire north of Israel uninhabitable under an unending barrage of Hezbollah rockets, some 60,000 Israelis living for almost a year as “internally displaced persons” (effectively refugees in their own country), and Hezbollah’s range of destruction constantly expanding. Logically there are only two possible outcomes: a political solution, or a full scale war.
Hezbollah, which answers to Iran, has made it clear that the terror group will not agree to any negotiated solution until after Hamas agrees to a permanent ceasefire with Israel in Gaza. Yet recent events (including a round of fresh refusals just in recent days) indicate that Hamas is not likely to agree to any offer in the near future. This eliminates a political solution, leaving only the military option.
The military option in Lebanon will not be some kind of “Gaza Part II” but far more destructive. In a single day, Hezbollah can fire more rockets than Hamas did in an entire month, enough to overwhelm the Iron Dome missile defense system. An estimated 10% of Hezbollah’s arsenal is high yield, long range, precision missiles — capable of taking out electricity, communications, water, roads (that transport food), and, of course, large numbers of Israeli civilians. Israel had the luxury of warning Gaza’s civilians to evacuate before striking rocket launchers in civilian areas, leading to the lowest civilian to combatant casualty ratio for a conflict of this type in human history. Without the protection of Iron Dome, that kind of restraint will not be an option in Lebanon, where every moment of delay could mean the death of thousands of Israelis. Yet Hezbollah hides its munitions under densely populated civilian areas, such as Beirut, meaning that casualties could be far higher than in Gaza, and the Israeli home front will face a much greater burden than it has over the past 11 months.
Despite the high tensions, it does not seem likely that recent events will escalate into a regional conflict or a world war. Iran has demonstrated time and again that it will freely endanger its proxy states and their civilian populations, but will not risk its home front unless attacked directly. For example, Iran’s attack on Israel last April came in the wake of an Israeli strike on elite Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps commanders in Syria, and not in response to Israeli operations in Gaza or Lebanon. Russia and China have consistently confined themselves to “behind the scenes” support roles, and are equally unlikely to take direct military action for Hezbollah’s benefit. Finally, the United States has a massive force in the region, including missile defense and attack capabilities. Although America has been notoriously shy about taking offensive actions, even in response to recent Iranian strikes that killed US troops, America’s defensive capabilities have nonetheless proved impressive, and even its aversion to offense could change at any time.
As I mentioned earlier, it’s important to note that even though Israelis are using the words, “preemptive strike,” Israel did not start nor escalate these hostilities. To the contrary, Israel has demonstrated astounding restraint, as it has been under relentless attack for 11 months, and has acted only responsively. If it were not for Israel’s Sunday operation in Lebanon, it is likely that hundreds or even thousands of Israelis could have died.
Daniel Pomerantz is the CEO of RealityCheck, an organization dedicated to deepening public conversation through robust research studies and public speaking.
The post The Truth About Israel’s Operation in Lebanon — and What Comes Next first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Trump Nominates Marco Rubio for US Secretary of State
US President-elect Donald Trump on Wednesday confirmed that he will nominate Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) to serve as secretary of state in his incoming administration, a potential signal that the next White House will take a more adversarial posture toward Iran.
Trump’s confirmation came a couple days after several media outlets reported that he was expected to tap Rubio, 53, to head the US State Department. The move to place a lawmaker known for his hawkish foreign policy views as the nation’s top diplomat has mollified concerns among some critics that the second Trump administration would adopt a more isolationist approach to international affairs.
“Marco is a Highly Respected Leader, and a very powerful Voice for Freedom. He will be a strong Advocate for our Nation, a true friend to our Allies, and a fearless Warrior who will never back down to our adversaries,” Trump said in an official statement. “I look forward to working with Marco to Make America, and the World, Safe and Great Again!”
Rubio issued a brief statement advocating an approach of “peace through strength” to international relations.
“As Secretary of State, I will work every day to carry out his foreign policy agenda. Under the leadership of President Trump we will deliver peace through strength and always put the interests of Americans and America above all else,” Rubio said on X/Twitter.
Since his election to the Senate in 2010, Rubio has developed a reputation as a foreign policy hawk, advocating for greater investments in the US military and a tougher approach to adversaries such as Iran, China, Cuba, and Venezuela.
Rubio’s policy views have previously resulted in conflict with more isolationist members of the Republican Party, who have argued that the US should step back from international conflicts and increase focus on domestic issues.
The selection of Rubio also indicates the incoming Trump administration will be diplomatically supportive of Israel.
In the year following the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas’s massacre across southern Israel last Oct. 7, Rubio has steadfastly signaled his support for the Jewish state, resisting calls for a ceasefire in Gaza and underscoring the importance of Israel achieving a decisive win against Hamas.
He stated in October 2023 that Israel has “no choice but to seek the complete eradication of Hamas in Gaza,” adding that “this tragically necessary effort will come at a horrifying price” and that “the price of failing to permanently eliminate this group of sadistic savages is even more horrifying.”
In May 2024, the senator cautioned that the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah, the Iran-backed terrorist organization in Lebanon, could soon break out into full-scale war.
“The imperative that Israel has at some point to address it, even though there’s a real threat there of a full-scale war with Hezbollah, which militarily is a lot more challenging and destructive,” Rubio said.
Last month, Rubio condemned Iran’s direct attack against Israel after the Iranian regime fired a barrage of nearly 200 ballistic missiles at the Jewish state.
“I urge the reimposition of a maximum pressure campaign against Iran and fully support Israel’s right to respond disproportionately to stop this threat. The United States will continue to stand with Israel,” Rubio said in a statement.
Rubio has also assigned blame to Iran for fomenting instability and chaos in the Middle East, adding that the regime has also acted as the “primary” oppressor of its own civilians.
“The primary source of violence, conflict, suffering, and instability in the Middle East is the criminal ‘Islamic Republic’ regime which has also oppressed the people of [Iran] for almost [45] years,” Rubio said on X/Twitter.
Beyond Rubio, Trump has also handpicked other administration members with pro-Israel bonafides. Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY), a lawmaker who has gone viral for her blistering repudiations of university presidents over their response campus antisemitism, has been selected to serve as ambassador to the United Nations. Trump also selected Rep. Mike Waltz (R-FL) to serve as his next national security adviser.
The post Trump Nominates Marco Rubio for US Secretary of State first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Trump’s Top National Security Picks Have Expressed Strongly Pro-Israel, Anti-Iran Views
US President-elect Donald Trump’s selections for national security adviser and defense secretary have a history of making statements in support of Israel’s right to defend itself from neighboring threats.
In the week following his resounding victory at the polls, Trump has swiftly moved to fill his incoming cabinet with allies of Israel.
Among his top national security picks, the president-elect has chosen US. Rep. Mike Waltz (R-FL) to serve as his national security adviser and nominated Fox News host and Army National Guard officer Pete Hegseth as the next secretary of defense.
Waltz, a Green Beret and former Pentagon policy adviser, has developed a hawkish reputation on foreign policy matters. He supported Israel’s retaliatory strikes against Iran in October, arguing that the Jewish state should target Kharg Island, a major hub of the regime’s oil exports. The representative also suggested that Israel attack Iran’s nuclear facilities outside of Tehran. The lawmaker has openly criticized the Biden administration for allegedly holding Israel back from a full force retaliation against Iran.
Waltz has also argued that the US should attempt to weaken Iran through sanctioning the Chinese buyers of Iranian oil, saying that isolating Iran economically would cripple their ability to finance the operations of terrorist groups such as Hamas, the Houthis, and Hezbollah. He has also helped spearhead bipartisan efforts to recategorize the Houthis in Yemen as an official international terrorist organization, a move that he argues would isolate the group by making financial transactions with them illegal.
On Tuesday, Trump raised eyebrows by tapping Hegseth to head the Pentagon. Hegseth, a former infantry officer in the Army National Guard deployed to the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, has repeatedly expressed affinity for Israel. Hegseth, a devout Christian, argued on television that Jews have a right to live in Israel on Biblical grounds. In his 2020 book, American Crusade, Our Fight to Stay Free, he stated that Israel is “central to the story of Western civilization” and that the Jewish state is “inextricably linked” to America.
“If you love America, you should love Israel. We share history, we share faith, and we share freedom. We love free people, free expression, and free markets,” he wrote. “And whereas America is blessed with two big, beautiful oceans to protect it, Israel is surrounded on all sides by countries that either used to seek, or still seek, to wipe the nation off the map.”
During a 2016 trip to Israel, Hegseth said that he was “struck by the pervasive sense of purpose which permeates Israel and its people who understand the special nature of its founding and defense.” He also said that America can “learn from Israel” and that the Jewish state “is indispensable for the future of the West and human freedom.”
Following the 2020 killing of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani, who headed the Quds Force responsible for overseeing Iran’s proxies and terrorist operations abroad, Hegseth urged then-President Trump to bomb Iran’s nuclear production facilities.
“I happen to believe that we can’t kick the can down the road any longer in trying to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear bomb. They used the killing of Soleimani as an excuse to say ‘we’re scrapping the Iran Deal.’ We all know they were scrapping it anyway,” Hegseth said on Fox News, adding that America should notify Iran of its plans to destroy its “nuclear production facilities,” “key infrastructure,” “missile sites,” and “port capabilities.”
Hegseth also argued that attempts to restrain Israel from direct confrontation with Iran are “ridiculous” and that the Islamic regime represents an “existential threat” to the Jewish state.
“Israel wants to deal with Iran, we should let them … If it was not for Israel, Iran would have had the bomb already,” he said.
The post Trump’s Top National Security Picks Have Expressed Strongly Pro-Israel, Anti-Iran Views first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
American Jewish Organizations React to Trump’s Choice for US Ambassador to Israel
American Jewish organizations were quick to react to US President-elect Donald Trump’s announcement that he would choose former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee to be the next US ambassador to Israel after he assumes office in January.
“Mike has been a great public servant, governor, and leader in faith for many years. He loves Israel, and the people of Israel, and likewise, the people of Israel love him. Mike will work tirelessly to bring about peace in the Middle East!” Trump wrote in his announcement.
Huckabee, an evangelical Christian, has long been a vocal pro-Israel voice. He has repudiated the anti-Israel protests that erupted in the wake of Hamas’s massacre across southern Israel last Oct. 7 and criticized incumbent US President Joe Biden for sympathizing with anti-Israel protesters during his speech at the 2024 Democratic National Convention (DNC). The incoming ambassador also lambasted the anti-Israel encampments at elite universities, stating that there should be “outrage” over the targeting and mistreatment of Jewish college students.
Ted Deutch, the CEO of the American Jewish Committee (AJC), posted on X on Tuesday that his organization “looks forward to working with Gov. Huckabee and newly appointed Special Envoy for the Middle East Steven Witkoff to strengthen the US-Israel relationship, bolster Israel-diaspora relations, and promote strong connections between American Jewry and Israel.”
Other Jewish communal organizations, such as the Jewish Federations of North America and the Anti-Defamation League, have so far not made statements.
The Republican Jewish Committee (RJC) said it was “thrilled” with the choice. “As a man of deep faith,” the RJC wrote, “we know Governor Huckabee’s abounding love of Israel and its people is second to none.”
It continued, “As the Jewish state continues to fight an existential war for survival against Iran and its terrorist proxies, Governor Huckabee will represent America’s ironclad commitment to Israel’s security with distinction.”
On the other side, however, the Jewish Democratic Council of America (JDCA) called Huckabee “utterly unqualified for this role” and argued that “his extremist views with regard to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will not further the national security interests of the United States or advance prospects for peace between Israelis and Palestinians.”
Huckabee told Israel’s Army Radio in his first interview since the announcement of his ambassadorship that “of course” the annexation of the West Bank is a possibility during Trump’s second presidential term.
“Unfortunately, when it comes to the US-Israel relationship,” the JDCA concluded, “Donald Trump will continue to only be motivated by his own narrow self-interest, and we’re deeply concerned about what that means for the United States and Israel.”
J Street also opposed the choice, writing in a statement that “Huckabee, a right-wing, evangelical minister with a long history of championing settlement expansion, annexation, and a radical ‘Greater Israel’ agenda, holds principles and espouses views that — if now implemented — would shatter the foundations on which a healthy and strong US-Israel relationship has been built over the past 75 years.”
J Street on Monday urged the Biden administration to withhold offensive weapons from Israel as part of a partial arms embargo, arguing that the United States needs to hold Israel accountable for alleged human rights “violations” before Trump takes office.
Huckabee has taken positions on the Israel-Palestinian conflict considered further to the right than most American Jews and politicians. The former governor has defended Israel’s right to build settlements in the West Bank, acknowledging the Jewish people’s ties to the land dating back to the ancient world.
“There is no such thing as the West Bank — it’s Judea and Samaria,” Huckabee has said, referring to the biblical names for the area. “There is no such thing as settlements — they’re communities, they’re neighborhoods, they’re cities. There is no such thing as an occupation.”
Huckabee has also argued, including during his 2008 US presidential campaign, that any future Palestinian state should be created from land in Arab countries, rather than from territory that Israel captured in 1967 during the Six-Day War.
The post American Jewish Organizations React to Trump’s Choice for US Ambassador to Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.