Deterrence in Disarray
The Shifting Dynamics of Middle Eastern Conflict
In recent times, the Middle East has been teetering on the edge of major conflict, driven by the assassinations of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and Hamas chief Yaya Sinwar. These events have triggered an alarming escalation in violence, with Israel intensifying its airstrikes across Lebanon and Gaza. Meanwhile, retaliatory missile launches from Hezbollah, Hamas, and even Iran have created a dangerous spiral bloodshed. Amid rising tensions, the European Union’s top diplomat, Josep Borrell, is calling for an immediate ceasefire, hoping that Sinwar’s death may offer a chance for de-escalation.
However, beneath the calls for peace lies a more troubling reality: the near-total collapse of deterrence in the region. Deterrence, a strategy aimed at preventing an adversary from taking an unwanted action through the threat of significant retaliation, was once crucial for maintaining fragile stability. Now, with deterrence almost entirely disintegrated, both sides are locked in a cycle of escalating violence, increasing the risk of a full-scale war. Understanding why deterrence has broken down and how to restore it is essential for navigating out of this volatile situation. Without addressing this core issue, any diplomatic efforts may prove to be short-lived.
The recent of assassination of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah by Israeli airstrikes marked a major turning point. Nasrallah, who led Hezbollah for over 30 years, was killed in an air attack on Beirut. Israel’s decision to target Nasrallah reflects a broader strategy of dismantling Hezbollah’s leadership in order to weaken the group’s operational capabilities and send a clear message to Iran, its chief backer. Instead of restoring deterrence, this assassination escalated tensions. Hezbollah responded with missile strikes, and Iran deepened its involvement in the conflict to retaliate for its ally’s death. These traditional deterrence mechanisms that were once designed to limit the scale of conflict, are now rapidly falling apart. And while the Hezbollah leader may be gone, the group’s capacity to strike back remains intact, raising fears of prolonged instability across Lebanon and the broader region.
In response to these developments the United States has increased its military presence in the region, deploying aircraft carriers and missile-capable submarines to deter further escalation. This show of force aimed to prevent Hezbollah from launching more attacks against Israel and to send a clear signal to Iran. Hezbollah's leadership has dismissed these U.S. deployments, with Nasrallah stating before his death that their fleets do not scare them. Despite U.S. warnings, pro-Iran militias in Syria and Iraq have continued their assaults on American forces in the area. Washington’s retaliatory strikes have failed to deter these groups, highlighting that deterrence—whether through military presence or targeted killings—has not succeeded in stabilizing the situation.
Yahya Sinwar, the leader of Hamas in Gaza, was also killed by Israeli forces. Sinwar became a high-priority target for Israel after the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack that resulted in casualties and hostages. Sinwar was reportedly killed by chance during a firefight in Rafah, Gaza when Israeli soldiers stumbled upon him. Sinwar’s death was intended to disrupt Hamas leadership and weaken its resistance coordination. Despite this, Hamas continues its activities. Israel faces ongoing challenges from Gaza, and groups from Lebanon launch attacks. The effectiveness of targeted killings on restoring deterrence remains uncertain, as the removal of leaders has often led to intensified conflict. This ongoing instability displays the complexity of using targeted killings as a strategy, as it often fails to achieve long-term peace and may instead fuel further violence.
In the wake of this escalating violence with the deaths of Nasrallah and Sinwar, Joseph Borell, the EU’s foreign policy chief has called for an immediate ceasefire. Borrell sees this moment as a crucial way to stop the violence and start peace talks, stressing the importance for diplomacy over military actions. His effort shows the EU’s commitment to preventing a broader conflict and restoring stability through dialogue. By prioritizing diplomacy, the EU aims to mitigate the humanitarian crisis and foster long-term peace in a region plagued by instability.
Meanwhile, the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) is facing considerable difficulties. UNIFIL recently intercepted a drone near the southern coast of Lebanon, and its peacekeepers have been caught in the crossfire between Hezbollah and Israel, resulting in injuries and damage to UN positions. Despite these dangers, UNIFIL remains essential for maintaining the fragile peace along the Lebanon-Israel border. There are growing demands to strengthen their mandate to better protect both peacekeepers and civilians. Borrell’s focus on diplomacy and the continued presence of UNIFIL showcase the vital importance of international efforts to prevent further escalation. However, without increased support for these diplomatic initiatives, the region risks descending further into conflict.
The U.S. has increased its military presence in the Middle East to counter Iranian-backed militias and Hezbollah, conducting airstrikes against ISIS in Syria and aiming to deter further escalations. This is crucial because attacks on U.S. troops complicate stabilization efforts, highlighting the volatile nature of the region and the potential for wider conflict. Diplomatically, Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s Middle East tour aims to prevent regional conflict by engaging with Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia, showcasing the U.S.'s role as a key mediator between Israel and Arab neighbors. This is important for maintaining regional stability and preventing a broader war, which could have global repercussions. The U.S. also collaborates with the EU and UN for diplomatic solutions, recognizing that lasting peace requires a united international front. The Abraham Accords which highlights U.S. peace brokering, has had recent escalations hindered progress, showcasing the delicate balance needed for diplomacy. Iran’s support for groups like Hezbollah and Hamas challenges U.S. diplomacy, as does Israel’s military actions in Gaza, complicating peace talks with Arab nations.
These obstacles highlight the complex interplay of military and diplomatic efforts needed to achieve stability. The implications of failing to navigate these challenges are significant, as it could lead to increased violence, humanitarian crises, and a destabilized region that affects global security and economic interests. Therefore, the U.S.'s actions in the Middle East are not just about regional stability but are crucial for global peace and security.
The Middle East is now at a turning point, with intensified military actions pushing the region towards major conflict. The collapse of deterrence has heightened the risk of war, and without a meaningful ceasefire brokered by international actors like the U.S., EU, and UN, the danger of a broader conflict will grow. The EU’s diplomatic initiatives, spearheaded by Josep Borrell, along with the UN’s peacekeeping efforts through UNIFIL, are crucial for de-escalation. However, these initiatives require stronger backing from regional actors, particularly those with influence over Hezbollah and Hamas. Furthermore, the U.S. needs to extend its strategic role beyond mere military deterrence to promote long-term peace negotiations. Although military presence is crucial for deterring Iran and its allies, lasting peace depends on diplomacy.