Israel’s tactical gains, strategic losses and the security black hole

The ongoing conflict between Israel and Hezbollah, coupled with the war ostensibly against Hamas in Gaza, presents a complex battlefield where tactical victories mask growing strategic vulnerabilities. While Israel has achieved key military successes, such as the assassination of prominent Hezbollah and Hamas leaders and the destruction of critical infrastructure, these gains have not translated into long-term security. Instead, Israel appears to be spiralling into a “security black hole”, where its military dominance is undermined by internal instability, economic strain and societal erosion.

Israel’s current strategy relies heavily on military force, with a specific focus on inflicting mass civilian casualties in an attempt to fracture popular support for Hezbollah and Hamas within Lebanon and Gaza respectively. In southern Lebanon, Israel’s most extensive air strikes in decades have caused significant destruction to Hezbollah’s military infrastructure and civilian areas alike. This approach is designed to erode Hezbollah’s base of support by turning the Lebanese public against the group. However, this strategy seems to be having the opposite effect. Rather than weakening Hezbollah’s standing, the attacks have led to widespread condemnation of Israel, with many Lebanese—regardless of their stance on Hezbollah—rallying against Israeli aggression.

Historically, Israel’s use of overwhelming force to achieve political ends has often backfired, and this time is no different.

The 2006 Lebanon War, which also saw heavy Israeli bombardment, failed to dismantle Hezbollah. Instead, the movement emerged stronger politically, while Israel faced international criticism for its indiscriminate targeting of civilians. Today, the stakes are even higher, as Lebanon’s fragile political and economic state makes it more vulnerable to external shocks. Rather than creating dissent within Lebanon, Israel’s air strikes have unified the Lebanese population against a common enemy.

READ: Hezbollah forces 2 Israel warplanes out of Lebanese airspace

Israel’s strategic predicament is compounded by its inability to secure decisive victories, despite its superior military technology. The concept of a “security black hole” reflects the paradox that while Israel can win air battles, it is losing the broader strategic game. Hezbollah continues to launch rocket attacks on Israeli cities, reaching as far as Tel Aviv, despite Israeli efforts to neutralise Hezbollah’s military capabilities. The Lebanese movement’s restrained use of its advanced missile arsenal — likely influenced by both internal and external pressures — has surprised many observers. This restraint may be driven by Lebanon’s dire economic condition, as a full-scale war would devastate the country and alienate Hezbollah from a population already suffering under economic collapse.

Hezbollah’s reluctance to escalate the conflict reflects a complex set of calculations. On the one hand, it remains a committed member of the “Axis of Resistance” dedicated to opposing Israel. The group possesses the military capability to strike deep into Israeli territory with its precision-guided missiles. However, it has opted for a more measured approach, limiting its attacks to sporadic rocket fire. This restraint is likely the result of a careful balancing act. Hezbollah is acutely aware of the devastation that a prolonged war could inflict on Lebanon, as evidenced by the 2006 war, which, while a victory for Hezbollah in some ways, brought catastrophic damage to Lebanon’s civilian infrastructure. However, Hezbollah’s restraint approach can not last long if Israel continues with its strategy of mass killing.

Lebanese society, already strained by years of political instability and economic collapse, may not be able to endure the consequences of a full-scale conflict with Israel. Hezbollah’s leadership is likely keenly aware of the limits of its domestic support and is calibrating its military actions to avoid triggering widespread discontent. Furthermore, Hezbollah’s decision to hold back its advanced weaponry is likely influenced by its primary backer, Iran. Tehran, which provides Hezbollah with financial and military aid, is also involved in delicate negotiations over its nuclear programme and broader geopolitical goals. An escalation of the conflict could complicate Iran’s efforts to balance its regional goals with its desire to avoid a direct confrontation with the United States and Israel.

At the same time, Israel’s aggressive military posture is exacerbating its internal vulnerabilities.

The continued rocket attacks by Hezbollah, despite the destruction wrought by Israeli air strikes in Lebanon, have created a deep sense of insecurity within Israeli society. The psychological toll of these attacks is significant, as they disrupt daily life and undermine the sense of safety that Israeli citizens expect from their government and military. This ongoing sense of vulnerability is compounded by political polarisation within Israel itself, as factions within the government and society disagree on the best course of action in dealing with Hezbollah and Hamas.

Economically, the conflict is also taking a toll. Israel’s military expenditure has risen significantly, while the broader economic impact of the war is becoming more apparent. Key sectors of the Israeli economy, including tourism and high-tech industries, are suffering from the instability. The cost of maintaining a constant state of military readiness is immense, and the longer the conflict drags on, the more it strains Israel’s resources. The economic impact is also being felt in terms of the displacement of Israeli citizens from areas affected by rocket attacks, as well as the broader disruption to everyday life.

READ: Israel rejects US-backed Lebanon ceasefire proposal

Hezbollah’s strategy of restraint may be part of a broader calculation aimed at exhausting Israel in a war of attrition. By keeping the “ring of fire” around Israel alive, the “Axis of Resistance” aims to gradually wear down Israeli society and its military forces. While this strategy has come at a high cost to Hezbollah and its allies, particularly in terms of civilian casualties in Gaza and Lebanon, it is designed to achieve long-term gains. The goal is not to defeat Israel militarily in the short term but to impose enough pressure over time so that Israel is forced to reconsider its strategic posture.

Despite Israel’s tactical successes, the long-term strategic picture remains bleak. The assassinations of key Hezbollah commanders and the destruction of Hezbollah’s military infrastructure are significant achievements, but they have not led to the collapse of the movement. Instead, it continues to operate, and its resilience has become a source of frustration for Israel. The same holds true for Hamas in Gaza. Israel’s reliance on military force to achieve its objectives has led to mass civilian casualties, which in turn have eroded Israel’s credibility on the international stage. Human rights organisations and foreign governments have condemned Israel’s actions, further isolating the country diplomatically.

In the long run, Israel’s reliance on military force may prove to be a losing strategy.

While it can achieve tactical victories and eliminate key figures within Hezbollah and Hamas, it has not been able to secure lasting peace or stability. Hezbollah and Hamas continue to operate, and the broader “Axis of Resistance” remains intact. The failure to achieve a decisive victory risks undermining Israel’s long-term security, as the constant state of conflict wears down its society and economy. The perception that Israel is stuck in a “security black hole” could embolden its adversaries, who may believe that they can outlast Israel in a prolonged war of attrition.

OPINION: Erdogan calls for UN military action to stop Israel’s genocide in Gaza

Ultimately, Israel faces a stark choice: continue down the path of military confrontation, with all the costs and risks that entails, or seek a different approach to security challenges. For now, the tactical gains achieved on the battlefield are overshadowed by the growing strategic losses that threaten Israel’s future.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.