Caroline Glick: Biden Proposing ‘Israeli Defeat’ in War Against Hezbollah Terrorists in Lebanon

The Biden administration is proposing an “Israeli defeat” in the country’s north and effectively “standing with Hezbollah against Israel,” according to Middle East analyst and commentator Caroline Glick, who slammed a newly proposed resolution to the Israel-Lebanon conflict, warning it could strengthen the Hezbollah terrorist group and threaten both Israel and the U.S.

She also suggested that such a push puts U.S.-Israel relations on a “collision course” which can only be avoided if the U.S. administration abandons its “delusions” about Lebanon. 

In a recent essay, titled “Israel’s survival clashes with America’s Lebanon delusions,” Glick critiques the reportedly controversial U.S. proposal to mitigate tensions along Israel’s northern border.

Israel is currently preparing for war against Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, after the Iranian-backed terror group attacked Israel repeatedly over the last several weeks, forcing the evacuation of Israel’s northern towns.

The proposal, she writes, entails Israel “surrendering sovereign territory” in exchange for “symbolic concessions” from the U.S.-designated terror group Hezbollah, which is responsible for the deaths of several Israeli civilians along Israel’s border in recent weeks.

Here's Lebanon's leader Hezbollah terrormaster Hassan Nasrallah today.
Biden's envoy @amoshochstein wants Israel to give him our sovereign lands to keep "peace" for the next 30 seconds.https://t.co/l2376GkZL5 https://t.co/3PlEDi8tgI

— Caroline Glick (@CarolineGlick) December 11, 2023

The concept of “land for peace” in the context of Israel’s geopolitics is contingent on the reliability of the parties involved. In the instances of Israeli withdrawal from South Lebanon and the Gaza Strip, the strategy not only did not yield a desired peace, but instead led to increased hostilities and war, as exemplified by the rise of Hezbollah in South Lebanon and ongoing conflicts with Hamas in Gaza, including the recent massacre on October 7 — the deadliest against Jewish people since the Nazi Holocaust — which saw the torture, rape, execution, immolation, mutilation, and abduction of hundreds of innocent civilians.

The suggested strategy has been met with much critical scrutiny, with the conservative American Israeli columnist arguing that such a move could further empower Hezbollah — an organization that poses a direct threat to Israeli civilians.

Having emerged amidst escalating missile and drone assaults against Israel by Hezbollah, the proposal is perceived as being detrimental to both Israeli and American interests, with a concession potentially leading to a strategic loss for the Jewish State and a weakening of its position against Hezbollah’s formidable arsenal.

According to Glick, in order for Israeli communities to live securely, the “balance of forces” between Israel and Hezbollah must be “radically transformed in Israel’s favor.” 

She explains that the group’s “terror army” comprises a “combination of 150,000 missiles of all ranges” and consists of “fanatical, armed-to-the-teeth veterans of the wars in Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq.” 

“This combined force is capable of invading and occupying large swaths of the Western and Upper Galilee and destroying strategic installations throughout Israel while causing tens of thousands of civilian and military casualties,” she adds. 

The essay further suggests a critical view of the Biden administration’s handling of the situation, an apparent result of a long-standing misjudgment of Lebanon’s political reality. 

Glick argues that the approach, which dates back to at least 2006, erroneously considers Lebanon an independent state rather than acknowledging it as “Iran’s forward terror base in its war to annihilate Israel.”

She also blames former President Barack Obama’s support for Iran and Hezbollah as having “provided effective immunity to both from Israeli aggression,” with President Biden “reinstat[ing] and expand[ing] Obama’s policies.”

Calling for a reevaluation of U.S. policy, Glick suggests that the “delusion” of failing to recognize Hezbollah’s control over Lebanon could result in dire consequences, with the Biden administration’s strategy compromising Israel’s security and, by extension, undermining broader American interests in the region. 

Arguing that the offer “makes clear that the United States is willing to empower Hezbollah still more and give it an Israeli defeat,” she insists that the U.S. policy of avoiding war against the terror group is “actually a policy of standing with Hezbollah against Israel.” 

Glick concludes by noting that while Israel is not “eager” to open another front in the conflict, it is “obvious” that the Jewish State “cannot end the war without doing so” — something she argues places U.S.-Israel relations on a “collision course” whose only hope of being averted is if the United States chooses to abandon its “delusions” about Lebanon. 

The essay comes after the Lebanese newspaper Al Akhbar reported on complex negotiations led by Amos Hochstein, a senior advisor to President Biden, and Western actors to avert the Israel-Hamas conflict’s spread to Lebanon.

Discussions hinge on contentious border demarcation points, including Lebanon’s claims to the Israeli northern city of Rosh Hanikra and disputes over the “Blue Line” border, Ghajar village, and the Shebaa Farms area. Despite the geopolitical stakes; Lebanon’s political paralysis and economic crisis, coupled with Hezbollah’s refusal to separate discussions from the Gaza situation, have hindered progress towards an agreement.

Hezbollah, a Lebanese Shia Islamist political party and terrorist group, poses significant security concerns to Israel and has contentious relations with the United States.

Hezbollah’s military strength has grown considerably, at times surpassing the capabilities of the Lebanese Army. With support from Iran and political backing from Syria, the group has expanded its activities beyond Lebanon, notably participating in the Syrian Civil War alongside the Assad regime. 

The United States, along with several other countries and international organizations, designates Hezbollah as a terrorist organization due to its involvement in terrorist activities, including attacks against American, French, Israeli, and other targets.

In 1983, Hezbollah bombed the Beirut Marine barracks in Lebanon, killing 241 American servicemen in what was one of the deadliest pre-9/11 attacks against the U.S.

Speaking at a White House event marking the 35th anniversary of the attack in 2018, then President Donald Trump stated that, “No terrorist group other than al Qaeda has more American blood on its hands.”

Last month, Glick accused President Biden of being the “primary obstacle to Israeli victory” against Hamas in Gaza.

She has also argued that Israel should stop taking U.S. military aid because it has corrupted the leadership and policy choices of her country.

Instead of being a client state vulnerable to changes in U.S. leadership, Glick writes, Israel needs to move the relationship to that of a “strategic partnership” that preserves the alliance and boosts Israeli independence.

In May, Glick warned of the existential threat to Israel posed by Hamas and Hezbollah, presenting a calculated strategy to defeat the two.