The Biden Administration’s Short-Sighted Diplomatic Strategy regarding Israel’s strikes on Hezbollah is Puzzling.
For and By Practitioners
By Monte Erfourth, October 13, 2024
Introduction
As the Middle East experiences yet another protracted conflict, the Biden administration’s strategy—or lack thereof—regarding Israel’s strikes on Hezbollah is puzzling. Iran’s long-term investment in proxy forces such as Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis has created a well-oiled machine for regional disruption. This shadow war is designed to degrade Israel’s military, distract its leadership, and prevent a full focus on Tehran’s broader ambitions. The October 7, 2023, attack by Hamas, this past year-long barrage of over 8,000 missile strikes from Hezbollah, and shipping attacks by the Houthis appear to be part of a broader strategy to weaken Israel by overwhelming its defenses. Iran claims that the proxies they helped train, fund, arm, and support acted on their own. While there is evidence to support Iran’s attempts to call off proxy activities, they remain responsible for setting the conditions for violence evidenced across the region.
The Biden administration has responded with cautious diplomacy, pushing for de-escalation and peace negotiations that, at this point, seem destined to return the region to a fragile and unsustainable status quo. At the same time, Iran finishes its nuclear weapons programs. The strategic imperative, however, should be clear: Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis, as extensions of Iran’s offensive capabilities, must be severely degraded if there is any hope of lasting peace in the region. This would necessitate destroying Iran’s nuclear capability as well. This moment, however fraught, presents a critical opportunity to reshape the Middle East’s balance of power by reducing Iran's proxy forces to irrelevance, denying Iran the nuclear threat, and paving the way for a new and more favorable regional order.
Iran’s Proxy Strategy: Decades in the Making
Iran’s sponsorship of proxy groups has been a cornerstone of its regional strategy for decades. Hezbollah, which operates out of southern Lebanon, has become one of the most heavily armed non-state actors in the world, with an arsenal that rivals many national militaries. Hamas, often seen as the junior partner to Hezbollah but even more rabidly focused on the destruction of Israel, is deeply dependent on Iran’s strategic network. Meanwhile, the Houthis have turned Yemen into another front in Iran’s regional proxy war. Each of these groups serves Iran’s strategic objectives by keeping Israel off balance and constantly on the defensive.
Iran’s goal has always been to avoid direct confrontation with Israel, instead opting for asymmetric warfare carried out by proxies. Hezbollah’s missile stockpile has grown to a point, an estimated 150,000 until the IDF recently cut that number in half, can still inflict substantial damage on Israeli cities and military installations. Hezbollah has demonstrated a consistent willingness to do so, with its most recent attacks—on a scale not seen in years—evidence they are willing to push the envelope. Tehran was betting that Israel’s focus on defending against these immediate threats would prevent it from confronting Iran directly or taking broader military action against Hezbollah and Hamas. Israel’s pager attacks, killing top Hezbollah officials and destroying roughly half of Hezbollah’s weapons cache, pushed Iran to launch its largest missile and rocket attacks on Israel. With Hamas devastated and much of Hezbollah degraded Israel must press the attack on the proxies and confront Iran’s nuclear threat.
The Biden administration’s response has largely been to urge restraint and encourage a return to negotiations. This approach, however, fundamentally misunderstands the nature of the threat. Neither Iran nor its proxies are seeking peace or compromise with Israel; they aim to degrade Israel’s military capabilities while remaining insulated from direct retaliation. This strategy has worked for decades, but it has now reached a point where Israel can no longer tolerate the level of risk posed by these proxies. Washington's continued push for diplomacy without promoting a truly deterrent component like denying Iran its offensive capability will only embolden Iran and its allies. In short, a cease fire today is just an operational pause for Iran and its proxies to regroup for continued attacks in the future.
The Opportunity Israel Cannot Afford to Miss
Even as critics argue that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu may be using military operations to delay legal proceedings against him, there is no denying that Israel now has a unique opportunity to degrade Hezbollah and Hamas severely. The attacks of October 2023 were not just acts of terror; they were part of a Hamas (and likely Iran) strategy to push Israel into a war in Gaza that would see Israel become an international pariah and ultimately ground down in the immoral act of killing Palestinian civilians put in harm’s way by Hamas. The narrative war is certainly not working out for Israel; however, the just cause and opportunity to inflict lasting damage on Iran’s proxy forces is unfolding before our eyes.
The argument for continued peace negotiations at this point seems naive. Hamas and Hezbollah have shown little interest in serious talks, using each ceasefire as an opportunity to rebuild and rearm. A return to the status quo, which the Biden administration seems intent on facilitating, would only serve Iran’s interests, allowing it to continue its regional strategy of proxy warfare while avoiding direct confrontation. The status quo has never provided lasting security for Israel, and it won’t do so now.
Instead, the strategic imperative is clear: Iranian proxies must be effectively destroyed to "de-fang" Iran. Israel cannot afford to leave these groups intact, as doing so would only invite future attacks and embolden Iran to continue its proxy war. Tehran has invested heavily in these groups, both financially and militarily, and degrading their capabilities would send a clear message that Israel will not tolerate continued aggression. Additionally, destroying Iran’s nuclear capability should be on the table. Deny Iran the sum total of its offensive capability for the foreseeable future, of which Israel is moving close to achieving. This is not just a matter of Israeli security; it is about reshaping the balance of power in the Middle East and preventing Iran from using its proxies or nuclear threats to dominate the region.
The Nuclear Question: The Next Strategic Imperative
While degrading Iran’s proxy forces is essential, it is not enough. Tehran’s pursuit of nuclear capabilities poses an existential threat not only to Israel but to the entire region. The Biden administration has been focused on reviving the 2015 nuclear agreement, but this approach ignores the broader context. Iran’s proxies have created a strategic buffer that allows Tehran to pursue its nuclear ambitions with minimal interference. The October 2023 attacks and the ongoing missile barrage from Hezbollah are not isolated events—they are part of a broader strategy designed to distract Israel from Iran’s nuclear program.
Destroying Iran’s offensive capabilities, including its nuclear infrastructure, must be the next strategic imperative. Israel has the military capabilities to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities, but such an operation would require international support, particularly from the United States. The Biden administration’s reluctance to fully commit to Israel’s military campaign against Hezbollah suggests that Washington is not prepared to take the necessary steps to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power. This hesitancy is dangerous. Allowing Iran to maintain its proxy network while advancing its nuclear program would create an untenable situation in which Israel faces an ever-growing threat on multiple fronts.
The Tempting—but Dangerous—Notion of Regime Change
There is a tempting argument for pursuing regime change in Iran, particularly given the widespread dissatisfaction with the regime both domestically and internationally. However, such a move would be fraught with risks and could lead to greater instability. While there is little doubt that Iran’s leadership is committed to its regional ambitions and proxy warfare strategy, removing the regime could create a power vacuum that would be difficult to manage.
Regime change is not necessary to achieve the strategic objectives outlined here. Destroying Iran’s offensive capabilities—both its proxies and its nuclear program—would be sufficient to change the regional dynamic. Once Iran’s ability to project power through its proxies is eliminated, the regime may be more willing to negotiate a lasting peace. The focus should be on reducing Iran’s military capabilities, not on regime change, which could have unpredictable and destabilizing consequences. The deterrence message this would send to Russia, China, and other U.S. rivals would be more valuable than any short-term cease-fire.
The Role of the Abraham Accords: Boxing in Iran
One of the most promising developments in recent years has been the Abraham Accords, which have opened the door to closer relations between Israel and several Arab states. These agreements represent a crucial element in boxing in Iran and creating a regional coalition that can counter Tehran’s influence. Renewing and expanding the Abraham Accords should be a priority for the Biden administration. By forging closer ties between Israel and the ruling elites across the region, the United States and its allies can create a united front that isolates Iran and prevents it from using its proxies to destabilize the region.
The Abraham Accords also offer a model for a new kind of peace in the Middle East—one that is based on mutual security and economic cooperation rather than on fragile ceasefires. A renewed focus on the Accords could help create the conditions for a more enduring period of stability, even if permanent peace remains elusive. The Middle East has a long history of violence fueled by old grudges, and it is unlikely that any agreement will permanently resolve all of the region’s conflicts. However, by reducing Iran’s ability to wage proxy wars, the Accords can create a more stable and secure Middle East framework than initially conceived.
Conclusion: The Moment for Action is Now
The Biden administration’s hesitancy to fully support Israel’s strikes on Hezbollah is a strategic miscalculation that could have long-term consequences for the Middle East. Iran’s proxy network has gone too far, and the opportunity to severely degrade these forces should not be missed. The alternative—a return to the status quo—would leave Israel vulnerable and allow Iran to continue its campaign of regional disruption through its proxies.
This is not a time for hand-wringing or cautious diplomacy. The opportunity to reshape the region’s strategic landscape is at hand, and it must be seized. The Biden administration needs to step up its support for Israel and recognize that peace negotiations with groups like Hamas and Hezbollah are not viable. A new strategy is needed, focusing on degrading Iran’s offensive capabilities and creating a regional coalition through the Abraham Accords. Only by taking decisive action now can the United States and its allies hope to achieve a lasting peace that benefits the entire region.
Notes
1. Banco, Erin. "Inside the Break Between the US and Israel Over How to Handle Hezbollah." Politico, September 24, 2024. https://www.politico.com/news/2024/09/24/us-israel-hezbollah-diplomacy-00180860.
2. Reisinezhad, Arash. "Iran’s Israel Strategy Has Already Changed." Foreign Policy, October 11, 2024. https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/10/11/irans-israel-strategy-has-already-changed/.
3. Nasr, Vali. "Iran-Israel Conflict: Will Biden Restrain Netanyahu?" Foreign Policy, October 3, 2024. https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/10/03/iran-israel-hezbollah-biden-netanyahu-war/.
4. Stephens, Bret. "Why We Need to Escalate in Iran." The New York Times, October 1, 2024. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/01/opinion/we-absolutely-need-to-escalate-in-iran.html.
5. Karim Sadjadpour, “Iran’s Proxies: A Strategic Necessity,” Foreign Affairs, July 2024.
6. Michael Knights, “The Missile Threat: Hezbollah’s Arsenal and Israel’s Response,” The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, February 2024.
Comentarios