Editorial Education Helpful Tips International International Policy Justice News Politics Science Uncategorized

ANALYSIS: Why Is Israel Bombing Lebanon and Not Iran? The Strategy of Geopolitical Circumvention

Jacques Pj Provost

2026-06-20 18:41:09

A Failed State: An Ideal Playground for Hezbollah

Lebanon is not a state like any other. For years, it has been torn apart by political, economic, and social crises that have made it fertile ground for armed militias. Hezbollah, founded in the 1980s with Iran’s support, has thrived there, becoming a major political and military force. Today, it controls part of the government, possesses an arsenal of 150,000 missiles (according to Israeli estimates), and enjoys popular support in Shiite regions.

For Israel, striking Lebanon offers several advantages:

A weakened stateA legitimate targetA terrorist organizationCounterterrorism operationsA deterrent effect“We can strike your allies—and thus weaken you—without attacking you directly.”

Iran, an enemy too dangerous for a direct strike

Unlike Lebanon, Iran is a regional power with a conventional military, a developed defense industry, and, above all, a nuclear program that deeply concerns Israel. A direct attack on Tehran would have catastrophic consequences:

A massive retaliation Diplomatic isolation A nuclear risk

Striking Iran means risking all-out war. Striking Lebanon means weakening Iran without paying a heavy price.

2. The Israeli Doctrine: Strike Proxies to Avoid War

The “Circumvention” Strategy

Since the 1980s, Israel has developed a military doctrine based on proxy warfare. Rather than confronting its enemies directly, Tel Aviv prefers to target their allies and infrastructure in third countries. This strategy, known as the “Begin Doctrine” (named after former Prime Minister Menachem Begin), rests on several pillars:

Weakening proxies, Avoiding escalation, Limited operations, Testing reactions

This doctrine has been applied on several occasions:

1981, 2007, 2018

Hezbollah: A Priority Target, but Not the Only One

Hezbollah is Iran’s most powerful ally in the Middle East. Founded in 1982 in response to Israel’s invasion of Lebanon, it is now an army within an army, with tens of thousands of fighters and an arsenal of missiles capable of striking anywhere in Israel. For Tel Aviv, weakening Hezbollah means weakening Iran.

But Israel does not limit itself to striking Lebanon. For years, its warplanes have regularly bombed Syria, where Iran has established military bases and weapons factories. In 2020, Israel even carried out strikes in Iraq, targeting pro-Iranian militias. Every strike sends a message: “We know where you are, and we can reach you.”

3. The risk of an uncontrollable escalation

Why Israel Is Avoiding (For Now) Striking Iran

Despite the bellicose rhetoric of Israeli leaders, a direct attack on Iran remains unlikely. Several factors explain this restraint:

Nuclear deterrence, an advanced nuclear program, U.S. support, political suicide, and a devastating Iranian retaliation

Lebanon: A Wild Card in a Broader Conflict

By striking Lebanon, Israel is playing with fire. Hezbollah, though weakened by Lebanon’s economic and political crises, remains a formidable force. A major escalation could lead to:

A border war that would paralyze the country; a humanitarian crisis; the internationalization of the conflict—turning a regional war into a global crisis

Israel knows that striking Lebanon is like walking a tightrope. But for now, it’s the only way to weaken Iran without triggering an apocalypse.

4. The Shadow War: Cyberattacks, Assassinations, and Sabotage

When Israel Strikes Iran Without Bombing It

While Israel avoids airstrikes against Iran, it is waging a covert war against Tehran. For years, Tel Aviv has been suspected of being behind:

Cyberattacks (2010–2020) Targeted assassinations (Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, 2020) Acts of sabotage (2021)

These operations allow Israel to slow down Iran’s nuclear program without triggering an open war. But how long will this strategy remain effective?

Hezbollah, the Visible Target of an Invisible War

Unlike Iran, Hezbollah is a visible target. Its bases in Lebanon, its weapons depots, and its fighters are easy prey for the Israeli Air Force. By striking Lebanon, Israel can:

Destroy weapons stockpilesEliminate commandersTest enemy defenses

Lebanon serves as Israel’s training ground for a potential war against Iran.

5. The Limits of Israel's Strategy

A dangerous game that could go wrong

Israel’s strategy of striking Lebanon rather than Iran rests on a precarious balance. Several risks could tip the scales:

A miscalculation, a strengthened alliance, a humanitarian crisis

Iran: An Enemy That Won’t Stand Idly By

Iran is not a passive player. Tehran has several ways to retaliate without entering into open war:

CyberattacksAttacks via proxiesAn acceleration of its nuclear program

Israel is playing with fire, and Iran has the means to set it ablaze.

6. What would happen if Israel attacked Iran?

A worst-case scenario

If Israel decided to launch a direct strike against Iran, the consequences would be devastating:

A regional war, an oil crisis, 20% of the world’s oil supply, U.S. intervention, a nuclear risk, and an arms race

Why Israel (probably) won’t dare

Despite the threats, an Israeli attack on Iran remains unlikely for several reasons:

U.S. oppositionThe risk of isolationIranian deterrence

Striking Iran would be like playing Russian roulette. Israel therefore prefers to strike Lebanon, hoping that Iran will not retaliate.

Conclusion: Lebanon, a collateral victim of a war that has not yet taken place

A Double-Edged Strategy

By bombing Lebanon rather than Iran, Israel is pursuing a strategy of circumvention: weakening its enemy without paying a heavy price. This approach has allowed Tel Aviv to limit the risks of escalation while maintaining constant pressure on Tehran. But it has also turned Lebanon into a permanent battlefield, where civilians and infrastructure are paying the price for this proxy conflict.

Yet this strategy has its limits. Hezbollah, though weakened, remains a formidable force. One miscalculation, one strike that goes too far, and the war could spread far beyond Lebanon. Israel is playing with fire, and the entire Middle East could get burned.

What about tomorrow?

Several scenarios are emerging for the coming months:

A controlled escalationAn all-out warA precarious status quo

One thing is certain: as long as Iran and Israel do not clash directly, Lebanon will remain the battleground for their proxy war. And as long as this war continues, Lebanese civilians will pay the price.

Signed, Jacques Pj Provost

Columnist’s Transparency Box

Editorial Stance

I am not a journalist, but a columnist and geopolitical analyst. My work consists of deciphering the strategies of states, analyzing power dynamics, and offering insights into the conflicts that shape our world. I do not claim to be absolutely objective, but I do strive for rigorous and well-researched analysis, informed by years of observing Middle Eastern dynamics.

My approach rests on three pillars:

Analysis of power dynamics
: Who holds the power? Who has the weapons? Who has the allies?

Historical context
: Today’s conflicts are rooted in decades of history. To understand the present is to understand the past.

Strategic foresight
: What are the possible scenarios? What are the risks? What are the likely outcomes?

Methodology and Sources

This article draws on verifiable primary and secondary sources, as well as analyses by recognized experts. Here are the main sources used:

Primary sources:

Official statements from the Israeli, Iranian, and Lebanese governments.
Reports from international organizations (UN, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch).
News agency dispatches (Reuters, AFP, AP).

Secondary sources:

Analyses by specialized think tanks (International Crisis Group, Carnegie Endowment, RAND Corporation).
Articles from international media outlets (The New York Times, The Guardian, Le Monde, Haaretz, Al Jazeera).
Reference works on the Israeli-Iranian conflict and Hezbollah.

Statistical and military data come from official sources (ministries of defense, UN reports) or from estimates by independent experts.

Nature of the Analysis

The interpretations and perspectives presented in this article are the result of a critical synthesis of available information. They reflect expertise developed through the study of conflicts in the Middle East and an understanding of the geopolitical mechanisms driving them.

This article will be updated if significant new information emerges, thereby ensuring the relevance and timeliness of the analysis presented.