Published on 4/25/2026
|
Last update: 22:27 (Mecca time)
An article in the Israeli magazine +972 states that the continued Israeli pursuit of “complete victory” has plunged Israel into a spiral of open wars, most notably the confrontation with Iran, leading to the erosion of international legitimacy and deepening the moral decline within Israeli society.
The article’s authors, Amir Fakhoury, a lawyer, sociologist, and academic director of the Nissan Center at the Van Leer Institute in Jerusalem, in partnership with journalist Meron Rappaport, point out that the naming of recent Israeli military operations reflects a shift in combat doctrine.
The doctrine of permanent security does not limit itself to removing threats, but rather seeks to prevent future threats through the widespread destruction of civilian life and the displacement of the population, while ruling out any political solution in favor of a continuing military solution.
Towards total destruction
While Israel had previously chosen names that reduced the severity of violence or enhanced the image of steadfastness, such as “Defensive Shield” in 2014 and “Iron Swords” after the October 7, 2023 attack, the name of the latest operation in Lebanon, “Eternal Darkness,” reflects, according to the authors, a more direct trend toward mass destruction.
Read also
list of 2 itemsend of list
They cite a bombing campaign that resulted in hundreds of deaths and thousands of injuries in Lebanon, considering that the goal is no longer just military, but rather closer to annihilation or erasing existence.
The writers add that Israel, despite the current ceasefire, continues to destroy villages and infrastructure in southern Lebanon with the aim of creating a permanent buffer zone and preventing the return of residents, in a context similar to what is happening in Gaza.
They quote Israeli Defense Minister Yisrael Katz as saying that hundreds of thousands of Lebanese south of the Litani River will not be allowed to return and that their homes will be demolished.
Permanent military solution
Fakhoury and Rapaport believe that these policies reflect Israel’s adoption of what Israeli political sociologist Yagil Levy calls the “permanent security doctrine.”
It is a doctrine that does not limit itself to removing current threats, but rather seeks to prevent future threats through the widespread destruction of civilian life and the displacement of the population, while ruling out any political solution in favor of a permanent military solution.
They confirm that this approach clearly appeared in the Gaza War after October 7, 2023, when Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu adopted the slogan “complete victory,” which, according to the authors, turned into a policy based on the widespread destruction of cities and infrastructure, and the authors considered it part of a comprehensive trend within the Israeli political and military establishment.
The article points out that what was previously known as the policy of “conflict management” in Gaza, through the siege, periodic bombing, and balancing with the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas), collapsed with the Al-Aqsa flood.
Fakhoury and Rapaport:
While Israel had previously chosen names that downplayed the violence or enhanced the image of “steadfastness,” the name of the latest operation in Lebanon, “Eternal Darkness,” reflects a more direct drive toward mass destruction.
A war without a legal ceiling
But instead of searching for a political settlement, Israel, according to Fakhoury and Rapaport, has tended to expand the scope of military power to include Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, and Iran, within the framework of what they call “a permanent war without a legal or political ceiling.”
The authors argue that the attack on Iran in June 2025 represented a new escalation in the concept of “permanent security,” as the goal was not limited to striking military or nuclear facilities, but rather extended to an attempt to change the political system itself in a major country with a deep civilization and population.
The two writers pointed out that this path revealed the limits of Israeli power, as the goal of overthrowing the Iranian regime was not achieved, but rather the war ended in a strategic impasse.
They quoted a statement by Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan in which he said that “Israel cannot live without an enemy,” warning that countries like Türkiye may be portrayed as new enemies in the next stage.
In a broader analysis, the two authors believe that the recent war did not produce a “permanent security system” as was supposed, but rather revealed a fundamental contradiction: every threat that is dealt with generates a new threat, which makes security itself a state that cannot be permanently achieved.
Rising political cost
The authors add that the decline in popular support for Israel in the United States, especially within the Democratic Party, reflects an increasing political shift, which may limit its ability to continue this military approach without escalating political costs.
Fakhoury and Rapaport believe that the collapse of both “conflict management” and the “permanent security doctrine” leaves Israel in a strategic and moral vacuum, as military force continues to operate without a clear political goal, and public discourse is filled with the language of extermination.
The article pointed out that the Israeli public has begun to see the cracks. Despite commentators and politicians boasting about the “tremendous achievements” in the war between Israel and America with Iran, a Channel 13 poll showed that only 33% believe that Israel and Washington won the war, while 28% believed that Iran was the one who prevailed.
The authors conclude that this situation may open the door to the possibility of the emergence of a new approach based on settlement and recognition of borders instead of the illusion of control by force, but this, as they say, will not happen automatically, but rather requires international pressure and an internal change in Israeli political consciousness.
