[ad_1]
The world – Lebanon
The Lebanese daily Al-Akhbar wrote today that the manifestation of the reality that “Israel” is deterred by the resistance in Lebanon has been repeated by officials of the enemy entity, in addition to being a tangible reality for years. The last person to express this clearly is the official in the Lebanese arena of the Military Intelligence Division of the Israeli occupation army. In his response to the question of “Israel” refraining from targeting Hezbollah’s precision missiles, he stressed that targeting is difficult and complicated because it causes war. In this, he describes the actual positioning of “Israel” vis-à-vis Hezbollah, which is based on the deterrence of activating military options against it in Lebanon.
The significance of this talk is that it stems from the words of the Israeli official who is most familiar with intra-equations and the severity of their violation. It is true that his statement was based on the reality of refraining from attacking Hezbollah militarily, but he also explains, to justify, that the abstention is the result of fear of war.
But what prompts “Israel” to export two opposing positions between threatening and expressing fear of war if it resorted to implementing the threat? A question that arises and deserves an explanation.
However, the Israeli army wants to understand the other side, and here it refers to Hezbollah and Lebanon, which is ready and ready to go to war to achieve its security interests or to prevent them from being harmed. These threats, as Tel Aviv sees them, are a crisis in non-war times and cannot be separated from them, whether these threats are translated into practice or remain words without action.
And Tel Aviv officials are being forced to launch threats as one of the weapons that is expected to deter Hezbollah, at one level or another, from continuing the qualitative expansion of its capabilities. Likewise, the excessive issuance of threats and the elaboration of details of the party’s ability to damage the “Israeli interior” is a parallel attempt to lead others to confront Hezbollah’s weapons and increase them, either at home by intimidating it and then later. inciting or against the international community to exert pressure on Lebanon. The two trends, as reported, put pressure on the Israelis with the result, and increase their level of concern and questioning about the reluctance of the occupying entity to confront this weapon (precision missiles) and eradicate it, according to the threats they hear. of its officials. .
The meaning is that “Israel”, in its effort to improve its deterrence and incite others against Hezbollah’s weapons, is causing anguish and a corresponding result, increasing the level of anxiety and fear among its public, forcing it to do Statements that reduce the level of anxiety by stating that he does not implement his threats because he cares about not provoking war. But in parallel, in the second part, this statement increases the tranquility of Hezbollah and confirms its estimates on the level of reluctance of “Israel” to use its military options against the Lebanese arena.
So it is a sequence of causes and effects that feed back on each other. On the one hand it is imperative that “Israel” make threats, and on the other hand it indirectly withdraws from them, and then returns to them, and so on … which is a contradictory sequence that makes the threat empty its effect and efficacy, not only to demonstrate Israel’s actual abstention from translating threats into action, but rather to demonstrate the reason for this abstinence, which is fear of war. This is the end result that Tel Aviv brought, between a willingness to terrorize Hezbollah and reassure its followers.
