Israel is waiting for the response. The delay in Iran and Hezbollah's retaliation is intentional, aimed at fraying the nerves of Israeli citizens. This cynical pattern of behavior is part of a plan to exhaust Israeli society and undermine its economy and legitimacy in an endless war until it collapses. This is a test of the national spirit and resilience, and Israelis are already internalizing that there will be even tougher challenges ahead. In the face of such threats, it is crucial to reassess national security concepts and investigate the failures of October 7.
Who is more resilient?
But is the situation in Israel is really so bad compared to our enemies? In Lebanon, there is a mass exodus of residents from the Dahiya neighborhood, Hezbollah's stronghold. Even the Al-Akhbar newspaper, which is associated with the Shiite terror organization, published an article about the mass departure of the neighborhood's residents to places considered safer. Photos from Beirut's airport reveal genuine panic among citizens trying to leave Lebanon at any cost. These images are emerging alongside an increasing flow of videos from Gaza, where residents attack Hamas and accuse it of causing the population's suffering and 'trading in the blood' of Palestinian civilians. In one video on Telegram that became viral, a Gazan cries out, "Save us from Hamas before you save us from the Jews."
Many in Israel believe that we have an inherent disadvantage in 'resilience' compared to our enemies due to Islamic fundamentalism, which supposedly gives our enemies a mythical belief in the righteousness of their cause and a greater willingness to sacrifice. It seems to us that this is a type of resilience that Western societies today are no longer capable of developing. Against the backdrop of polarization in Israel, our enemies tend to emphasize the Islamic-Palestinian ethos of stubborn resistance and steadfastness (Sumud).
What has become increasingly apparent in recent times is that the ethos of Sumud is not voluntary based but is the result of coercive mechanisms. Here, it is important to remember two things: First, coercion is not resilience. What we perceive as Islamic resilience and steadfastness is actually evidence of a lack of civic courage or an inability to resist Hamas's regime in Gaza, Hezbollah's takeover of the public space in Lebanon, or the repression of the Ayatollahs' regime in Iran. Second, hatred is not resilience. Hatred for Israel is deeply rooted in the Middle East, but 'Islamic resilience' is a creation of political power mechanisms, meaning it is a construct, not a spirit.
As we have written before (see Israeli vs. Palestinian National Resilience), a comparison may reveal that Israel actually has several structural advantages that make it potentially more resilient. For example, even after 'the great year of polarization,' following the judicial reform, Israel has not reached the depths of division seen in Palestinian or Lebanese politics, nor the levels of internal violence there. The national consciousness in Israeli society is much more developed than that of the Palestinians or the Lebanese, which rely on tribal and clan loyalties.
The Conclusion: Focus on Dismantling the Coercion Mechanisms and Challenging Our Enemies' Sovereignty
The key to victory over our enemies lies in severely damaging and constantly challenging the sovereign-governing space, the power-building and armament processes, and the coercion mechanisms of our enemies. For example, even if Hamas still enjoys popularity among Palestinians, the collapse of its governance capabilities in both the civil and humanitarian spheres means dismantling the central mechanism that perpetuates the Palestinian struggle ethos (see our policy paper on the humanitarian challenge in Gaza). Therefore, it is also important to strengthen factions in Lebanon that oppose Hezbollah and empower elements and groups in Iran that are hostile to the Tehran regime.
Israel should exploit two key weaknesses that characterize all entities in the Muqawama axis, whether states, terror armies or militias: The first is economic. 'Muqawama economies' are structured in a way that they destroy the economies of the states. In Iran (the Revolutionary Guards), in Yemen, in Lebanon, or in Gaza, the 'resistance' entities drive a parallel economy to that of the state, motivated by a desire to maximize their own economic profit at the expense of the state and its citizens. Unlike Adam Smith's principle, the “invisible hand” of the Muqwawma scoops up all the profits for itself.
Socially, there is no 'Muqawama' without oppression and social unrest. The reactionary and coercive agenda of the resistance entities creates many internal enemies and gradually erodes their popularity, even among their natural support base, whether in Lebanon, Gaza, or Iran.
Therefore, an Israeli approach that seeks to challenge the sovereign space of the resistance entities by leveraging social unrest in the face of repression and the state of the economy is the key to dealing with Iran and its proxies. Israeli society can win the resilience competition.
Next, we will also discuss what Israel can do to strengthen its own resilience. Our ability to translate these insights into detailed actionable plan.
Comments