Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the members of the Diplomatic-Security Cabinet, who toured the Israel-Lebanon border on Tuesday, were the first to hear about the fifth Hezbollah terror tunnel snaking under the security fence.
News of the discovery officially broke only on Thursday, after the IDF had destroyed the underground passageway, along with a somewhat laconic report on the progress of Operation Northern Shield saying that the effort to neutralize the tunnel threat was nearing its end.
IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Gadi Eizenkot and GOC Northern Command Maj. Gen. Yoel Strick briefed the ministers on the operation's progress, underscoring the fact that the IDF has effectively deprived Hezbollah of a unique, strategic asset that would have allowed it to mark significant gains in the next conflict: psychologically, knowing that active Hezbollah tunnels run under Israeli communities adjacent to the northern border could have potentially caused public panic in the sector; but worse, operationally, these tunnels would have allowed the Shiite terrorist group to potentially use a brutal tactical gambit to declare war on Israel – as they would have allowed them to overrun one of the communities and abduct or murder numerous Israelis.
Eizenkot and Strick made it clear to the ministers that Hezbollah may be down – but it is by no means out and that, having lost its tunnel enterprise, it will undoubtedly turn its attention to devising new ways with which to challenge Israel in the next war.
It is unclear to what extent this information troubled the ministers, if at all. They were familiar with the tunnel threat and authorized the operation to destroy them, but on Tuesday – a day after snap elections were called and set for April 19 and a day before the vote on the dissolution of the 20th Knesset – they were likely far more preoccupied with politics.
Reporters who were invited to join the tour couldn't help but notice the unofficial game of musical chairs that saw the ministers compete for who got to sit the closest to Netanyahu during the briefing and who got to stand right next to him in the various photo-ops.
These scenes were obscured by the political firestorm of recent days, but they were enough to put the IDF on alert: In any election campaign, the military is wary of being used as a political tool. Base and border tours and visiting soldiers in the various sectors are classic photo-ops for any politician, and given the tensions simmering on all sectors, there is no shortage of such opportunities. Given that the new chief of staff, Aviv Kochavi, is slated to assume his duties in 18 days, the IDF's efforts to keep itself out of the political game will be even more challenging, especially at a time when there are plenty of reasons for meetings with the political echelon.
The alleged Israeli strike in Syria, which according to foreign media reports targeted several Hezbollah leaders as well as Iranian ammunition depots near Damascus, is sure to also be linked to the elections, but it is important to clarify that that is not the case.
Operations of this kind usually require rapid planning, meaning they are formulated from the ground up: Military Intelligence often makes its determinations in real-time and relays it to the chief of staff, who has to greenlight a plan of action, which is prepared while the political echelon is briefed on the matter and is required to approve it.
This is a ritual in which the IDF is well-versed, and the government almost always backs the proposed operational plans. This is a familiar, intimate dance between the military and governing echelons and it is devoid of any political cynicism.
The Israeli public knows only about the end part of this process. Were more of it made public, the arguments accusing the military of holding back on its use of force would subside. Contrary to the Israeli take on things, the sides taking the blows – Syria, Hezbollah and Iran – think Israel is borderline "crazy" and Russia has even gone on the record as saying that the "Israeli aggression must be restrained."
This week's strike took place against the backdrop of these familiar elements, but this was not "just" another strike of an Iranian weapons convoy en route to Hezbollah. The technical details, namely the nature of the target and the method of attack, were perhaps routine – as far as a raid of this nature could be routine – but all the rest was unusual. Israel used it to make it clear, in no uncertain terms, that it was serious when it said it would take action to maintain its security interests, regardless of any foreign actor's presence in the Middle East.
This message was intended for many ears, not just the obvious ones in Tehran, Damascus, and Beirut, but mainly those in Moscow and Washington.
U.S. President Trump's decision to withdraw American troops from Syria met a mix of surprise, disappointment and concern in Israel, as while the Americans did not protect our security interest directly, their presence in Syria was enough to cool the engines of the Iranian-Syrian axis, and it provided a crucial balance to the overt Russian belligerence.
The feeling in Jerusalem was that Israel was "left on its own," which is not the end of the world, but it certainly makes for a very complex and volatile situation.
Russia is no longer willing to turn a blind eye to Israeli raids, not because it is rooting for Iran, but because it needs and wants calm on the ground so it can enjoy the fruits of Syria's economic rehabilitation. As far as Moscow is concerned, the equation is simple: more raids equal a regional mess, which in turn means less money.
Since the Sept. 17 incident in which a Russian reconnaissance plane was downed by Syrian aid defenses responding to an Israeli airstrike, Israel has spared no effort to improve its relations with Russia, and while the Kremlin has been anything but warm and fuzzy, it has made it a point to maintain the deconfliction channel set up between the IDF and the Russian forces in Syria. Still, while Israel has been able to maintain some operational leeway, it has substantially narrowed.
Russia did not spare Israel its criticism over Wednesday's raid. Some of this was meant for Syria's ears, as Damascus must be wondering why Moscow doesn't simply order Israel to halt all strikes, and for Israel's ears, as the Kremlin believes the IDF is exercising excessive force. For whatever reason, Russia refrains from doing the simple and obvious thing of all – preventing Iranian activity – which is the source of all evil, in Syria.
Military Intelligence assessment of 2019 states that the likelihood of war in the northern sector remains low: Syria has no interest in one and neither does Iran or Hezbollah, certainly after the group's tunnel project has been destroyed. But the area remains a tinderbox and the slightest spark could ignite it and drag all parties into a conflict no one desires.
The likelihood of war will further increase if Hezbollah accelerates the development of its precision-missile program on Lebanese soil. Israel will continue with its public diplomacy and diplomatic campaign, as it has done in recent months, but it may find that military moves are unavoidable, regardless of their inherent risk. This is a likely scenario with which cabinet ministers are familiar. It will require military preparation, which takes place routinely, but also preparations in terms of domestic and international legitimacy.
This has many implications, two of which are especially important during this period: first, the need to leave no stone unturned in order to reach understandings with Russia, and second, fostering public confidence – not an easy task during election time, when every statement is perceived as part of a political campaign.
The key to success on both fronts is a clean and practical process focused on leaving the IDF and the decision-making process outside the election campaign.
