On the evening of July 30, an Israeli drone targeted a residential building in South Beirut, killing a woman and two children, and injuring 74 civilians. Israel claimed the attack was aimed at an officer of the Lebanese resistance. Targeting residential infrastructures outside a war zone is part of the Israeli army’s Artificial Intelligence (AI) program, known as “Lavender.” The AI Lavender program, as we have seen in Gaza, koshers the killing of up to 100 civilians, or entire families in order to assassinate a single commander.

Less than 24 hours later, Israeli agents violated Iran’s sovereignty and assassinated Palestinian leader Ismail Haniyeh during his official visit to Tehran. As in a similar case when Israel bombed the Iranian embassy complex in Damascus last April killing 8 military advisers and an equal number of Syrian civilians and Iranian consular staff.

Rather than condemning the Israeli aggression, Western capitals called on the victims (Iran and the Lebanese resistance) to de-escalate and exercise restraint. “No one should escalate this conflict,” Blinken told reporters on August 6. “We’ve been engaged in intense diplomacy with allies and partners, communicating that message directly to Iran.”

German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock took to X calling on “especially #Iran, to exercise restraint and de-escalate for the sake of the people in the region.”

Britain and France, doubled down on the foreign violation of Iran’s sovereignty during the emergency U.N. Security Council meeting on July 31st, blaming Iran, the victim in this case, for the dangerous escalation in the region. According to various resources, French president Emmanuel Macron told his new Iranian counterpart to end the “logic of reprisals” and for the “protection of civilian populations.”

Western powers called for de-escalation in response to the Israeli aggression against Iran and Lebanon. On the other hand, they defended Israel’s right of “self-defense” following the Palestinian revolt against the Israeli siege on October 7. Leaders from more than 14 countries, 8, including heads of state paid homage to declare solidarity with Israel. Yet, Not a single Western leader, called on Israel to de-escalate.

If Israel is perceived as the target of an attack, Western leaders kosher Israeli “logic of reprisals” under the pretext of “self-defense.” Meanwhile, when others are targeted by Israel, then and only then, de-escalation is deemed necessary for the “protection of civilian populations.”

Returning to the German foreign minister’s recent post on X, when Israel was targeted on October 7, Germany saw no need to de-escalate “for the sake of the (Palestinian) people in the region.” De-escalation was necessary though, “for the sake of the (Israeli) people” . . .” following Israeli attack on Iran and Beirut.

Ironically, the call by Western leaders to “de-escalate” is not a genuine endeavor to avoid a wider conflict, but rather their proclivity to sanction Israeli wars. They sanctioned Israel’s war of genocide when they excused its aggression as self-defense, and then refused to call for a ceasefire for more than six months. They empowered Israel by waging a proxy war against Yemen on its behalf. They enabled Israel’s defiance by continuing to supply the armament used to kill and maim the children of Gaza. They enabled Israeli-induced famine against 2.3 million people by refusing to accept the findings of the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court. More importantly, they enabled Israeli intransigence when, following the Israeli murder in Tehran and Beirut, U.S. president ordered U.S. military deployments in the Middle East to defend Israel “against all threats from Iran.”

The above is not merely a double standard but congenital Western racism toward the perceived “lesser” than equal people. For the U.S. Administration, Canada, Britain and the European Union’s unadulterated racism has for decades enabled Israel’s arrogance, both materially and diplomatically.

By the same Western definition of the right to self-defense, the Iranian government, the Lebanese resistance and Yemen have every right to exercise their right according to international law following Israeli attacks on Tehran, Beirut, and Hudaydah in Yemen. This is more so than what Western leaders erroneously bestowed on an occupying power following October 7.

The resistance is undoubtedly aware of Western powers’ efforts to delay and or diffuse the response to Israeli extrajudicial assassinations. European leaders, for instance, have sent direct and indirect equivocal messages to Iran expressing a willingness to open a new chapter after the election of the new reformist president.

Arab and Western leaders have also cautioned the resistance in Lebanon against taking any action that could jeopardize the “progress” in the ceasefire talks, when in reality the opposite is true. The Palestinians are in a stronger negotiating position with support from the Lebanese and the Yemeni fronts, not by the groveling of Arab regimes to Israeli enablers.

In fact, as it became clear that retaliation against Israel was imminent, the U.S., Qatar and Egypt scrambled a statement on August 8 calling for a new round of ceasefire negotiations. This announcement was almost certainly coordinated in advance with Israel, as evidenced by Netanyahu’s unusually swift agreement to send a delegation “in order to finalize the details and implement the framework agreement.”

It is almost certain that the resistance understands that all this is a ruse and outright prevarication by the Biden administration and two vassal Arab countries, to muddy the waters, allowing Israel to literally get away with new murders. The aggrieved parties are expected to respond because allowing Israel to cross this redline would embolden Israeli intransigence and afford it a new opportunity to cross more dangerous redlines that could lead to a more destructive war in the future.

In the last decade, Israel has murdered at least five Iranian scientists, including its top civilian nuclear program Mohsen Fakhrizadeh in 2020. (link). These assassinations came at a very little cost, if any, for Israel.  However, the recent case of murdering an invited guest, crosses a different redline, Israel and the West are unable to comprehend. In the East, protecting your guest is an honor that must be defended at all cost.

It’s implausible that the forces of resistance would be dissuaded by the new American/Israeli gambit, nor the misplaced racist “de-escalation” rhetoric from the other Israeli enablers. According to public pronouncements from Iran, Yemen, and Hezbollah in Lebanon, a proportional retaliation against apartheid Israel is inevitable.

Patience is a virtue, and as some have suggested that the ambiguity, and waiting it out are part of that broader strategy. While that might be true, there is, however, a cost-benefit dynamic related to the time taken to make a decision. The resistance is likely aware that further vacillation would decrease the benefits and fetter the momentum for an in-kind reprisal against Israel.

---

---