Exactly. Neither the Biden administration, nor in a potential Trump administration, are in a position to meaningfully reduce support for Israel. Thus Israel can and will simply continue atrocities and terrorism/assassinations abroad, inviting retaliation, and then essentially hold itself hostage to force the US to reflexively step in to absorb it.
Good chance US gets chased out of Iraq and then Syria as a result. War in Lebanon also more likely than not in the coming year, I'd say.
I'm curious about the implications of South Africa going to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) over Israel's military actions in Gaza. Do you think that will have any influence on the level of violence in the region?
It's an "emperor's new clothes" moment. Ever since October 7th (and, indeed, ever since 1948 and long before) everyone has known perfectly well that "Israel" is illegitimate, immoral, and illegal. It survived because it was only following the example of the European settlers in the Americas, Africa, Australia, New Zealand, and elsewhere - and they got away with it.
Now that South Africa has shown the guts to force the issue in a formal arena - the ICJ - it's hard to see how others can go on ignoring the issue. Massive deliberate attempts at genocide against civilians, while actually boasting about it.
Hasan Illaik , Israel’s Gaza withdrawal, a prelude to full-out war [The Lebanese government is "captured" by the US/Israel, but Hezbollah can missile-blockade Israel.]
Don't be lulled by the Israeli troop withdrawal from northern Gaza. Tel Aviv has no intention of ending this war, and is escalating on all its other fronts, including with Lebanon.
At the start of the new year, Israel’s occupation army began implementing the withdrawal of a large portion of its forces from the northern Gaza Strip.
This withdrawal did not mean the end of the war on Gaza, and it certainly did not suggest calm on the Lebanese-Israeli front. On the contrary, reducing the pace of the war in the Gaza Strip increases the possibilities of an Israeli war on Lebanon...
..The third stage is coming
The first stage of Tel Aviv’s war was the mass destruction and occupation of northern Gaza; the second stage is the occupation of key points in the south of the Gaza Strip, where Palestinian civilians have flocked for safety. The current troop withdrawal from the territory’s north means that the Israelis are cementing their southern plans and preparing to move on to phase three: the long, low-intensity war.
As it enters the third stage, the occupation army intends to maintain a geographical buffer surrounding the northern Gaza Strip. It also plans to continue occupying the Gaza Valley area (central Gaza), while completing its operations in Khan Yunis in the south.
The fate of the Philadelphia axis – or Salah ad-Din Axis – a strip of land on the border between Gaza and Egypt which Israel wants to control, will be left to deliberations between Tel Aviv and Cairo. This is to ensure that incidents do not occur that lead to tension between the two parties, as well as to guarantee that refugees do not flow from the south of the Gaza Strip towards Sinai.
Israel’s ground withdrawal from northern Gaza is taking place primarily because the occupation army’s target bank has been depleted. All targets prior to the start of the war have been destroyed, and all new operational targets have been bombed.
Despite this, the Palestinian resistance continues to carry out operations against Israeli forces. These organizations remain relatively unscathed in the entire area of the northern Gaza Strip, which will increase the ability of the resistance to inflict losses on occupation ranks, now and in the future...
..These measures are being taken because Israel has patently failed to achieve the two main goals of its war, namely, eliminating the Hamas-led resistance in Gaza, and liberating the Israeli prisoners captured by the resistance on 7 October.
There remains a basic motive that must be noted: The Israeli army is currently putting all its efforts into implementing a US decision to push the war from its first and second phases into the third phase before the end of January 2024. This requires the war to be managed at a slower boil, drawing less attention to Israeli carnage and the mass suffering of Palestinians.
After three months of brutalities, Washington has assessed the Israeli army as unable to eliminate the resistance or the possibilities of regional escalation, and has noted the significant harm caused to the US administration of Joe Biden as he enters the presidential primary season...
..As the Israeli occupation army moves to focus its operations on the southern Gaza Strip, the intensity of military operations along the Lebanese border between Hezbollah and the Israeli army has also been ratcheted up.
Hezbollah increased its targeting of occupation soldiers, both in their visible locations and inside the settlements of northern Palestine...
..By increasing its strikes, Israel’s leadership seeks to inflict the greatest possible number of losses among the ranks of the resistance fighters, as well as to spread panic among southern Lebanese residents – displacing more of them, and destroying the largest possible number of homes. This places a burden on both Hezbollah and the Lebanese state in the reconstruction process after the end of hostilities.
But there is a longer-term goal to this Israeli military performance. The government in Tel Aviv, according to its official statements, wants Hezbollah to withdraw from the south of the Litani, to ensure the security of Israeli settlers in northern Palestine who abandoned their homes, either voluntarily or under evacuation orders from their army. By some estimates, the number of Israelis fleeing their settlements in occupied north Palestine has reached more than 230,000 people...
..Israel is therefore hoping that Hezbollah will yield to pressure and meet its demands regarding the withdrawal of its fighters from the border area with occupied Palestine.
The Israeli assessment of Lebanese affairs preceded its assassination of Al-Arouri in Beirut on 2 January. But in the same way that Israel military commanders and politicians have under-estimated and dismissed armed Palestinian resistance initiatives within occupied lands prior to 7 October, they continue to cling to a dated Israeli calculus that Hezbollah will never fully retaliate, or that it will only do so in a way that stops short of war...
..But while Hezbollah takes into account the complex political and economic Lebanese reality, it is not prepared to make concessions. Sources in the resistance axis say that Israel, as Hezbollah sees it, is not in a position to go to war with Lebanon when it cannot even compensate or digest the massive strategic losses it has incurred from Operation Al-Aqsa Flood.
Despite its desire to not expand the war, Hezbollah has already begun to prepare for it...
..The bottom line is that Tel Aviv’s assessment of a war with Lebanon is based on its reading that Hezbollah wishes to prevent a major confrontation at any cost. Not only is this calculus wrong, but it has also muddled Israeli minds to the point where this may itself lead to the outbreak of a destructive war between the two sides.
"Tel Aviv has no intention of ending this war, and is escalating on all its other fronts, including with Lebanon".
That is exactly how the Germans managed to lose WW2, which began so promisingly for them. They kept on attacking more and more countries, almost as if daring fate to punish them. The USSR was their big mistake, although by 1941 a premptive attack may have been relatively their best options. Ironically, they thought the USSR would be a pushover. Drive in hard, win a few big battles, and "the whole rotten structure would collapse".
Loving the short, sweet, and precise analysis. I think China is watching the events in the Middle East with keen interest. Not saying they'll invade Taiwan, but the US Navy will play a big part in any shenanigans in that region.
Also, I think Russia checked US naval forces with the hypersonic missile-toting planes.
"An attack on Iran by the U.S. would likely elicit strong reactions from these countries, potentially escalating tensions".
A military attack on Iran by the USA would, of course, initiate a state of war. As have all the military attacks launched by the USA since 1945, without one single declaration of war - an endless series, if you will, of "days that will live in infamy".
As Iran is an important ally of both Russia and China, however, I would expect both those nations to support their ally - by force if necessary. In a conflict between the USA and those three Asian powers, there could be only one outcome: humiliating defeat for the USA. Moreover, NATO would be shown to be useless and pointless, as none of its members would dare to lift a finger to support the USA.
Even though I agree, a direct confrontation between the USA and Russia (or China or both) would almost always most likely result in nuclear war. These players know that.
Which let's me !HOPE! that such an outcome is unlikely. (Confrontation between the US, Iran, Russia, and China).
I like the idea of a shorter format. It will certainly appeal to more readers. Something like 2000-3000 words might be the sweet spot for me personally, varying by subject of course. Or a mix of short and long?
Good way to start the new short form articles, I personally do love the mammoth articles as you can really delve into far more details and depth with them, but the short form will very much appeal to a wider base and anything which gets more people reading your writings is a win for me.
Keep those gigantic walls of text still coming on top of these new shorter form articles though mate.
On the is it a bluff or prelude thing.
It could in fact turn out to be both simultaneously...
The withdrawal of the aircraft carrier was seen as deescalation - I'm not so sure it was. Two other options are running around my head.
1. The US on the surface pulls out assets - combined with certain other events, the bombing of the funeral (and likely more to come) hoping that Iran is provoked - cue the US not being the aggressor but responding etc.
2. The US is planning a huge strike against Iran and it knows Iran will respond against all naval assets in range, so it has pulled out the carrier (the veritable flagships /poster boys of the us navy - which are also insanely vulnerable and hard/impossible almost to defend against the type of stuff Iran would be throwing against them) it's be an unmitigated PR and prestige catastrophe if they lost it (which they most certainly would have) and certain other more sensitive to lose ships being pulled away on top, to be replaced by no frills missile launcher types.
Hope to god I'm wrong as a direct/open conflict between the USA and Iran will potentially escalate beyond control.very very quickly
One, outside a few (but influential figures in the U.S.) they don’t want to go to war with Iran. Not only it’s a losing proposition, brings in China and Russia, and will be very unwelcome in the region, it also takes them away from their focus on China. There is no appetite for that.
Two, the move to a low intensity fighting might fool western audiences but does nothing for the so called “axis of resistance”. The fighting on northern Israel, strikes on U.S. bases in Iraq and Syria, and the Houthis blockade of the Red Sea will continue.
Three, the main instigator for escalation is Israel because they are a regional balancer. Netanyahu’s personal interest and ideological bent also demands it. If they don’t escalate they’re forced to stop ... so they try to escalate. That will continue. Ironically, it’s a bit like Zelensky with Belgorod. Israel is not Ukraine though and remains to be seen if the non-tribe members have any balls to stop them.
Bottom line, the longer this lasts the higher the chance of escalation. What’s hard to predict is where will the spark be (Hezbollah or Houthis) and will the American reaction be straight on Iran or one if it’s members.
The compact analysis is probably necessary for USA audiences as they ease into facing their own roles in supporting Zionism. The ideology and execution of Zionism is racist, genocidal, and a ridiculous fairy-tale. By a visit from AIPAC, USA congress is required to sign Zionist documents of their personal support for Iseael in the first weeks of the taking office. Israel controls USA congress and Neocon Nikki Haley is running for president. 98% of Americans do not now what Neocons are and 75% do not know what Zionists are.
As a source of news, your job could be to slow role that bad news of who runs the USA.
I like the short ones, for mine one more paragraph or so on each, with a slightly deeper insight into strategy and global strategic context, would hit the nail on the head. It’s your thoughts on strategy that I really value.
It is abundantly obvious that Israel intends to goad its American goon and its buttbois into a war on Iran.
Yemen is but one facet of this.
America's wars on Iraq, Syria, and Libya (all at the behest of Israel) were the opening acts.
Exactly. Neither the Biden administration, nor in a potential Trump administration, are in a position to meaningfully reduce support for Israel. Thus Israel can and will simply continue atrocities and terrorism/assassinations abroad, inviting retaliation, and then essentially hold itself hostage to force the US to reflexively step in to absorb it.
Good chance US gets chased out of Iraq and then Syria as a result. War in Lebanon also more likely than not in the coming year, I'd say.
Nice and compact ! I also like the more detailed articles
I'm curious about the implications of South Africa going to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) over Israel's military actions in Gaza. Do you think that will have any influence on the level of violence in the region?
It's an "emperor's new clothes" moment. Ever since October 7th (and, indeed, ever since 1948 and long before) everyone has known perfectly well that "Israel" is illegitimate, immoral, and illegal. It survived because it was only following the example of the European settlers in the Americas, Africa, Australia, New Zealand, and elsewhere - and they got away with it.
Now that South Africa has shown the guts to force the issue in a formal arena - the ICJ - it's hard to see how others can go on ignoring the issue. Massive deliberate attempts at genocide against civilians, while actually boasting about it.
War on Gaza: Turkey backs South Africa 'genocide' case against Israel at ICJ
Ankara says Israel's crimes against humanity in Gaza should not go unpunished in another deterioration in ties between the two states
https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/war-gaza-turkey-south-african-backs-case-israel-icj
ICJ to hold first hearing on January 11 to consider South Africa’s case against Israel
https://en.ypagency.net/315337
Hi Diana,
I don't think that it will have any impact on the ground.
It never had.
But certainly, it will impact geopolitics and the stance of many countries worldwide towards Israel.
As all other commentators say... The current campaign of Israel is a tremendous own goal...
I'm sad to hear this. Like many, I just want to see the killing and destruction stopped.
I fully agree. There would be nothing better than peace...
We should hope and pray for that always! At least I do.
I do too.
Hasan Illaik , Israel’s Gaza withdrawal, a prelude to full-out war [The Lebanese government is "captured" by the US/Israel, but Hezbollah can missile-blockade Israel.]
Don't be lulled by the Israeli troop withdrawal from northern Gaza. Tel Aviv has no intention of ending this war, and is escalating on all its other fronts, including with Lebanon.
At the start of the new year, Israel’s occupation army began implementing the withdrawal of a large portion of its forces from the northern Gaza Strip.
This withdrawal did not mean the end of the war on Gaza, and it certainly did not suggest calm on the Lebanese-Israeli front. On the contrary, reducing the pace of the war in the Gaza Strip increases the possibilities of an Israeli war on Lebanon...
..The third stage is coming
The first stage of Tel Aviv’s war was the mass destruction and occupation of northern Gaza; the second stage is the occupation of key points in the south of the Gaza Strip, where Palestinian civilians have flocked for safety. The current troop withdrawal from the territory’s north means that the Israelis are cementing their southern plans and preparing to move on to phase three: the long, low-intensity war.
As it enters the third stage, the occupation army intends to maintain a geographical buffer surrounding the northern Gaza Strip. It also plans to continue occupying the Gaza Valley area (central Gaza), while completing its operations in Khan Yunis in the south.
The fate of the Philadelphia axis – or Salah ad-Din Axis – a strip of land on the border between Gaza and Egypt which Israel wants to control, will be left to deliberations between Tel Aviv and Cairo. This is to ensure that incidents do not occur that lead to tension between the two parties, as well as to guarantee that refugees do not flow from the south of the Gaza Strip towards Sinai.
Israel’s ground withdrawal from northern Gaza is taking place primarily because the occupation army’s target bank has been depleted. All targets prior to the start of the war have been destroyed, and all new operational targets have been bombed.
Despite this, the Palestinian resistance continues to carry out operations against Israeli forces. These organizations remain relatively unscathed in the entire area of the northern Gaza Strip, which will increase the ability of the resistance to inflict losses on occupation ranks, now and in the future...
..These measures are being taken because Israel has patently failed to achieve the two main goals of its war, namely, eliminating the Hamas-led resistance in Gaza, and liberating the Israeli prisoners captured by the resistance on 7 October.
There remains a basic motive that must be noted: The Israeli army is currently putting all its efforts into implementing a US decision to push the war from its first and second phases into the third phase before the end of January 2024. This requires the war to be managed at a slower boil, drawing less attention to Israeli carnage and the mass suffering of Palestinians.
After three months of brutalities, Washington has assessed the Israeli army as unable to eliminate the resistance or the possibilities of regional escalation, and has noted the significant harm caused to the US administration of Joe Biden as he enters the presidential primary season...
..As the Israeli occupation army moves to focus its operations on the southern Gaza Strip, the intensity of military operations along the Lebanese border between Hezbollah and the Israeli army has also been ratcheted up.
Hezbollah increased its targeting of occupation soldiers, both in their visible locations and inside the settlements of northern Palestine...
..By increasing its strikes, Israel’s leadership seeks to inflict the greatest possible number of losses among the ranks of the resistance fighters, as well as to spread panic among southern Lebanese residents – displacing more of them, and destroying the largest possible number of homes. This places a burden on both Hezbollah and the Lebanese state in the reconstruction process after the end of hostilities.
But there is a longer-term goal to this Israeli military performance. The government in Tel Aviv, according to its official statements, wants Hezbollah to withdraw from the south of the Litani, to ensure the security of Israeli settlers in northern Palestine who abandoned their homes, either voluntarily or under evacuation orders from their army. By some estimates, the number of Israelis fleeing their settlements in occupied north Palestine has reached more than 230,000 people...
..Israel is therefore hoping that Hezbollah will yield to pressure and meet its demands regarding the withdrawal of its fighters from the border area with occupied Palestine.
The Israeli assessment of Lebanese affairs preceded its assassination of Al-Arouri in Beirut on 2 January. But in the same way that Israel military commanders and politicians have under-estimated and dismissed armed Palestinian resistance initiatives within occupied lands prior to 7 October, they continue to cling to a dated Israeli calculus that Hezbollah will never fully retaliate, or that it will only do so in a way that stops short of war...
..But while Hezbollah takes into account the complex political and economic Lebanese reality, it is not prepared to make concessions. Sources in the resistance axis say that Israel, as Hezbollah sees it, is not in a position to go to war with Lebanon when it cannot even compensate or digest the massive strategic losses it has incurred from Operation Al-Aqsa Flood.
Despite its desire to not expand the war, Hezbollah has already begun to prepare for it...
..The bottom line is that Tel Aviv’s assessment of a war with Lebanon is based on its reading that Hezbollah wishes to prevent a major confrontation at any cost. Not only is this calculus wrong, but it has also muddled Israeli minds to the point where this may itself lead to the outbreak of a destructive war between the two sides.
https://new.thecradle.co/articles/israels-gaza-withdrawal-a-prelude-to-full-out-war
I agree that there are other plans.
That's essentially also what I wrote in the article.
The point is... There is a difference between what one WANTS to do and what onme CAN do.
We will see how that plays out and then we are going to re-evaluate.
Yes, "we shall see" as the wise old man kept saying in the Chinese parable.
:-)
"Tel Aviv has no intention of ending this war, and is escalating on all its other fronts, including with Lebanon".
That is exactly how the Germans managed to lose WW2, which began so promisingly for them. They kept on attacking more and more countries, almost as if daring fate to punish them. The USSR was their big mistake, although by 1941 a premptive attack may have been relatively their best options. Ironically, they thought the USSR would be a pushover. Drive in hard, win a few big battles, and "the whole rotten structure would collapse".
Parallels abound...
;-(
Loving the short, sweet, and precise analysis. I think China is watching the events in the Middle East with keen interest. Not saying they'll invade Taiwan, but the US Navy will play a big part in any shenanigans in that region.
Also, I think Russia checked US naval forces with the hypersonic missile-toting planes.
Yes, I agree.
Thanks, BTW :)
"An attack on Iran by the U.S. would likely elicit strong reactions from these countries, potentially escalating tensions".
A military attack on Iran by the USA would, of course, initiate a state of war. As have all the military attacks launched by the USA since 1945, without one single declaration of war - an endless series, if you will, of "days that will live in infamy".
As Iran is an important ally of both Russia and China, however, I would expect both those nations to support their ally - by force if necessary. In a conflict between the USA and those three Asian powers, there could be only one outcome: humiliating defeat for the USA. Moreover, NATO would be shown to be useless and pointless, as none of its members would dare to lift a finger to support the USA.
Even though I agree, a direct confrontation between the USA and Russia (or China or both) would almost always most likely result in nuclear war. These players know that.
Which let's me !HOPE! that such an outcome is unlikely. (Confrontation between the US, Iran, Russia, and China).
I like the idea of a shorter format. It will certainly appeal to more readers. Something like 2000-3000 words might be the sweet spot for me personally, varying by subject of course. Or a mix of short and long?
Yes, I think a mix will be the way to go from April onwards (as announced).
Good way to start the new short form articles, I personally do love the mammoth articles as you can really delve into far more details and depth with them, but the short form will very much appeal to a wider base and anything which gets more people reading your writings is a win for me.
Keep those gigantic walls of text still coming on top of these new shorter form articles though mate.
On the is it a bluff or prelude thing.
It could in fact turn out to be both simultaneously...
The withdrawal of the aircraft carrier was seen as deescalation - I'm not so sure it was. Two other options are running around my head.
1. The US on the surface pulls out assets - combined with certain other events, the bombing of the funeral (and likely more to come) hoping that Iran is provoked - cue the US not being the aggressor but responding etc.
2. The US is planning a huge strike against Iran and it knows Iran will respond against all naval assets in range, so it has pulled out the carrier (the veritable flagships /poster boys of the us navy - which are also insanely vulnerable and hard/impossible almost to defend against the type of stuff Iran would be throwing against them) it's be an unmitigated PR and prestige catastrophe if they lost it (which they most certainly would have) and certain other more sensitive to lose ships being pulled away on top, to be replaced by no frills missile launcher types.
Hope to god I'm wrong as a direct/open conflict between the USA and Iran will potentially escalate beyond control.very very quickly
The ships are visibly gone, but the subs?
Gigantic walls of text 😄😄😄 I must admit, I enjoyed that quite a bit! Please keep your comments coming, deal?
You wrote a very good and more nuanced comment. Thanks.
Thank you very much for your analyses - always informative and interesting!
Contrary to the apparent general consensus, I personally prefer the long reports and really hope they won't be too infrequent!
No worries...
I also feel uncomfortable with the shorter version.
I could have written many more details, but I had to hold back.
It's not a good feeling :)
However, it might be necessary.
Perhaps going forward, I'll mix short and detailed analysis.
Oops: Cheers from Cheyenne!
:D Cheers!
I like the compact format of this post. The analysis is great, as usual.
Thank you :)
The USA is too afraid of damaging its military image. One successful attack on an American ship, and they look the fool before elections.
Right
One, outside a few (but influential figures in the U.S.) they don’t want to go to war with Iran. Not only it’s a losing proposition, brings in China and Russia, and will be very unwelcome in the region, it also takes them away from their focus on China. There is no appetite for that.
Two, the move to a low intensity fighting might fool western audiences but does nothing for the so called “axis of resistance”. The fighting on northern Israel, strikes on U.S. bases in Iraq and Syria, and the Houthis blockade of the Red Sea will continue.
Three, the main instigator for escalation is Israel because they are a regional balancer. Netanyahu’s personal interest and ideological bent also demands it. If they don’t escalate they’re forced to stop ... so they try to escalate. That will continue. Ironically, it’s a bit like Zelensky with Belgorod. Israel is not Ukraine though and remains to be seen if the non-tribe members have any balls to stop them.
Bottom line, the longer this lasts the higher the chance of escalation. What’s hard to predict is where will the spark be (Hezbollah or Houthis) and will the American reaction be straight on Iran or one if it’s members.
The compact analysis is probably necessary for USA audiences as they ease into facing their own roles in supporting Zionism. The ideology and execution of Zionism is racist, genocidal, and a ridiculous fairy-tale. By a visit from AIPAC, USA congress is required to sign Zionist documents of their personal support for Iseael in the first weeks of the taking office. Israel controls USA congress and Neocon Nikki Haley is running for president. 98% of Americans do not now what Neocons are and 75% do not know what Zionists are.
As a source of news, your job could be to slow role that bad news of who runs the USA.
Sweetness, short, yes; succinct and readable to this little old lady. Thank you, all, at the BMA Team❤️🐈⬛
Thanks from the BMA Team, JG :)
I like the short ones, for mine one more paragraph or so on each, with a slightly deeper insight into strategy and global strategic context, would hit the nail on the head. It’s your thoughts on strategy that I really value.