The question is not "if" or "when", but "to what extent" Hizbollah will take revenge against Israel
Beirut (AsiaNews) - The question is not "if" or "when", but "to what extent" Hizbollah will avenge the killing of Jihad Mughniyeh, a leading member of the group, and Iranian General Mohammad Allahdadi, as well as four other men of the Party of God, following an Israeli raid in Syrian territory two days ago.
Yesterday, as expected, people shouted 'Death to Israel' at Mughniyeh's funeral (pictured). The same goes for Tehran's words of condemnation for the death of one of the top leaders of the Revolutionary Guard's Quds Corps, which operates outside Iran.
Iran's Supreme National Security Council Secretary Ali Shamkhani said that Hizbollah would certainly give a crushing response to the attack.
Hizbollah officials vowed to avenge the attack on Monday, telling Lebanese paper A-Safir that retaliation was "inevitable," though they added that "we will not act out of emotion."
Yesterday, al-Safir's editor voice more threats, sketching out the parameters of a future war with Israel, including the firing of thousands of rockets at the home front, attacks on civilian infrastructure targets and the deployment of Hizbollah forces in the Galilee, on the border with Syria.
Yet, Hizbollah does not appear to want a large-scale conflict because of its involvement in Syria in support of Bashar al-Assad's regime.
Iran too has no interest in a conflict because the latter could undermine nuclear negotiations currently under way with the 5+1 group (five permanent members of the Security Council, plus Germany).
In Israel, the government has refused to confirm the attack; however, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said yesterday that his country would not give up the right to defend itself against all those who want to propagate terror and attack its citizens.
The Jerusalem Post has drawn its own conclusions from such a statement, writing, "The question that now remains is the extent of Hezbollah's future attack".
"A relatively minor assault may result in a proportionate Israeli reply, which could in turn produce an end to the sequence of attacks, and a containment of the incident. Hezbollah has nothing to gain from opening a second front against Israel, at a time when it remains deeply embroiled in its costly intervention in Syria and the war against Sunni rebels."
"A large-scale Hezbollah attack would, however, open the door to a rapid deterioration of the northern front. The same is true of a mass casualty terrorist attack by Hezbollah targeting Israelis overseas, which could result in direct Israeli reprisals in Lebanon. Any miscalculation runs the risk of igniting a regional conflict."
Notwithstanding the strictly military aspects, some observers wonder if the decision to carry out the raid in Syria was not linked to the forthcoming general elections in Israel.
"Election campaigns in Israel, "Haaretz writes in an editorial, "are marked by high-profile military action, particularly when the party in power is in distress. The unstated assumption of our leaders is that the (Jewish) public loves easy military victories, and such shows of force are meant to buttress the image of the prime minister and defence minister and convince the voter that they must remain in office."
"Clearly it cannot be proven that this week's military action in Syria stemmed from electoral considerations rather than purely out of an effort to defend the country, but the circumstantial evidence of political influence is weighty."
Similarly, Yedioth Ahronoth notes that "Netanyahu won the 2013 elections because of the security agenda, which focused on the nuclear threat of then-Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The Likud campaign machine is now asking, 'Who do you want to fight Islamic terrorism - Buji and Tzipi or Bibi?'"
Therefore, "If Netanyahu succeeds in making security the hot-button issue by March, he will win. If the major topic reverts to socio-economic woes, the Labour Party will be able to set up" a different government.
.png)
