This is a very important analysis. I was surprised to see such in-depth writing on the topic that became so much more critical after the tragic Majdal Shams missile attack and then not surprised to learn in the reading that you began this article before that attack. So here are my questions:
1. How much do you think Majdal Shams changes the equation? Maybe we'll even get an answer from the news before you respond to me here because I feel the waiting for the inevitable war is so stressful. I don't know how the country will react (and how the Druze will react) if the decision is made to go the diplomatic route before the Druze get their revenge.
2. If the Falaq-1 rocket is not a guided missile, then was this an "accident?" In other words, was Hezbollah aiming for a military base in the region and it fell short or sideways or whatever?
First, let me thank you for your comments and you are absolutely correct that I wrote the essay (but had not yet edited the article) before the Majdal Shams attack and then added a couple paragraphs after I learned of the tragedy.
Let me answer your questions in reverse order.
1) I do think think killing and injuring so many children on the soccer field was an “accident” of sorts in that I doubt that Hezbollah would think it beneficial to risk stirring up the Druze in Lebanon or to make enemies of Druze in Majdal Shams, where until now a large component of its citizens have maintained their primary allegiance to Syria rather than integrating with Israel (very unlike Druze living elsewhere in Israel other than the Golan who are loyal citizens and serve valiantly in the IDF).
However, this “accident” is a natural biproduct of Hezbollah’s intent to make northern Israel, including the Golan unlivable. That is why Hezbollah’s use of an inaccurate weapon, rather than a precision guided one that is in its inventory - likely in the thousands - furthers its goal, of spreading terror and making the region unlivable by making it unpredictable where its weapons will strike. As a result, not only will the citizens of Majdal Shams long remember this act, so will any other families considering a return to their homes anywhere along the northern borders and it likely will be in the back of the minds of people living further back .
Thus, seen as part of Hezbollah’s and Iran’s overall strategy, I would call the killing of the innocent children intentional.
2) I don’t think Majdal Shams changes the equation but it may well increase the tempo. For the last 9 months, the death of so many innocents has been more of a “when” rather than an “if”. However, because it involved the Druze, I think it adds a new equation and in a very tragic sense, an obligation. For the last several months I have been advocating a narrative - Israelis have the right to live in peace and security in their Jewish homeland, and that Israelis include Jews, Druze, Christian and Muslim citizens and residents. I have no knowledge of this, but I would think Israel’s leadership will strongly consider a response that makes clear that it values the lives of all that live in Israel’s territory, including the Druze of Majdal Shams. However, whether that response will touch off an immediate all-out war remains to be seen. And that is why I sent out the article with very few changes after Saturday’s tragedy - calibrating a response that maintains the advantage of timing and initiative for what what might come down the road will be challenging.
So, the equation has not changed, but the difficulty of solving it has increased and now there is a parallel equation that must be solved simultaneously.
On a totally different note - I found a typo in the piece that embarrasses me - I never meant to say in “precious” newsletters. I meant to say “previous". Oh well!
This is a very important analysis. I was surprised to see such in-depth writing on the topic that became so much more critical after the tragic Majdal Shams missile attack and then not surprised to learn in the reading that you began this article before that attack. So here are my questions:
1. How much do you think Majdal Shams changes the equation? Maybe we'll even get an answer from the news before you respond to me here because I feel the waiting for the inevitable war is so stressful. I don't know how the country will react (and how the Druze will react) if the decision is made to go the diplomatic route before the Druze get their revenge.
2. If the Falaq-1 rocket is not a guided missile, then was this an "accident?" In other words, was Hezbollah aiming for a military base in the region and it fell short or sideways or whatever?
First, let me thank you for your comments and you are absolutely correct that I wrote the essay (but had not yet edited the article) before the Majdal Shams attack and then added a couple paragraphs after I learned of the tragedy.
Let me answer your questions in reverse order.
1) I do think think killing and injuring so many children on the soccer field was an “accident” of sorts in that I doubt that Hezbollah would think it beneficial to risk stirring up the Druze in Lebanon or to make enemies of Druze in Majdal Shams, where until now a large component of its citizens have maintained their primary allegiance to Syria rather than integrating with Israel (very unlike Druze living elsewhere in Israel other than the Golan who are loyal citizens and serve valiantly in the IDF).
However, this “accident” is a natural biproduct of Hezbollah’s intent to make northern Israel, including the Golan unlivable. That is why Hezbollah’s use of an inaccurate weapon, rather than a precision guided one that is in its inventory - likely in the thousands - furthers its goal, of spreading terror and making the region unlivable by making it unpredictable where its weapons will strike. As a result, not only will the citizens of Majdal Shams long remember this act, so will any other families considering a return to their homes anywhere along the northern borders and it likely will be in the back of the minds of people living further back .
Thus, seen as part of Hezbollah’s and Iran’s overall strategy, I would call the killing of the innocent children intentional.
2) I don’t think Majdal Shams changes the equation but it may well increase the tempo. For the last 9 months, the death of so many innocents has been more of a “when” rather than an “if”. However, because it involved the Druze, I think it adds a new equation and in a very tragic sense, an obligation. For the last several months I have been advocating a narrative - Israelis have the right to live in peace and security in their Jewish homeland, and that Israelis include Jews, Druze, Christian and Muslim citizens and residents. I have no knowledge of this, but I would think Israel’s leadership will strongly consider a response that makes clear that it values the lives of all that live in Israel’s territory, including the Druze of Majdal Shams. However, whether that response will touch off an immediate all-out war remains to be seen. And that is why I sent out the article with very few changes after Saturday’s tragedy - calibrating a response that maintains the advantage of timing and initiative for what what might come down the road will be challenging.
So, the equation has not changed, but the difficulty of solving it has increased and now there is a parallel equation that must be solved simultaneously.
On a totally different note - I found a typo in the piece that embarrasses me - I never meant to say in “precious” newsletters. I meant to say “previous". Oh well!