Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been stressing the fact that Israel has to be strong to survive in the Middle East. This isn’t a new theme or mantra, but rather one he has made into a consistent ideology over the last few decades.
The question is whether this kind of talk is enough to help Israel navigate the path forward in a complex region. While some believe that a new Middle East is being created, with the weakening of Iran and its axis of proxies, they question whether Israel will need to rely solely on strength to move forward.
Speaking to Channel 14, Netanyahu said that Israel’s wars are “never over” and that there is more work to do against Iran and its axis. “It’s never over. If you want to live in the Middle East – and in the world – you must be very strong.”
Speaking to soldiers in Lebanon this week, he said, “Our insistence is that we will not leave southern Lebanon until the threat is eliminated. And as long as Hezbollah is armed and present here, posing a threat to us – we will remain here.”
On June 25 at an IDF combat officers’ graduation, Netanyahu said he was recently asked: “‘Prime minister, where do you see the State of Israel in 30 years?’ And I told him: ‘I do not pretend to be a prophet, but I think I know what determines things in our region and increasingly in the whole world. The strong survive; there is no room for the weak – they are preyed upon and disappear.”
In the Middle East, 'the weak crumble'
In 2018, he wrote the same idea on X/Twitter: “The weak crumble, are slaughtered, and are erased from history, while the strong, for good or for ill, survive. The strong are respected, and alliances are made with the strong, and in the end, peace is made with the strong.”
This is clearly an ideology. It now goes hand in hand with Israel’s doctrine of tactical gains. Israel has taken over most of Gaza and has also expanded into Syria and Lebanon.
Israel’s leadership also continues to see a weakened Iran as an existential threat, and there is talk again of Iran’s military build-up. This comes despite two Israeli bombing campaigns where Israel achieved air superiority over Iran.
It is not clear what the strategy is for defeating Iran. One former official said this week that Israel would now need to “mow the grass” regarding the Islamic Republic.
This was the policy in Gaza before October 7. It’s essentially a tactic.
It was also the policy behind the Campaign Between the Wars in Syria against Iran before 2024.
There are other features of the “strong” doctrine. In a different speech, Netanyahu, who has been in power for a decade and a half, spoke about how Israel would become “super-Sparta.”
Sparta was one of the states in the Peloponnesian war. Known for its strength, primarily in infantry or hoplites, its king was actually quite conservative and urged Sparta to avoid war with Athens.
Instead, Athens plunged the Greeks into war and, in the end, was defeated by Sparta. Exhausted by the war, Sparta also declined. The war is often seen as a folly and a disaster for everyone involved.
It’s not clear why Israel would want to repeat this route.
Regional countries are taking notice of Israel’s more bellicose doctrine.
For instance, Turkey’s national public broadcaster TRT recently reported on comments by Diaspora Affairs Minister Amichai Chikli, in which he forecast the likelihood of conflict between Syria and Turkey.
These are not the only countries one hears about these days. There is growing talk in Jerusalem about how Israel will need to confront “Sunni” countries after fighting with Shi’ite Iran.
That would mean Turkey, Syria, and possibly Egypt and Qatar. All of these countries are US partners, friends, and allies at present. It seems unlikely Israel would really end up clashing with countries that are close partners of the United States. However, this kind of rhetoric is raising eyebrows in the US.
'Israel’s continuing aggressive operations in Syria are deeply disturbing, especially in recent days'
US Representative Joe Wilson wrote on X on July 2 that “the changes in Syria improve the security situation for Israel phenomenally. Rather than being a land bridge to Hezbollah, Syria now actively shuts down Hezbollah routes and networks in the country.
“The IRGC (Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps) has totally withdrawn from Syria. ISIS cells are being decimated by Syrian forces in cooperation with the United States. Under the new government, Syria has not launched a single attack against Israel and pledges to never allow Syrian land to be used against its neighbors.”
He noted that “President [Donald] Trump and Secretary [Marco] Rubio are right to seek a nonaggression agreement between Syria and Israel, which has the potential to stabilize the region, including for the Druze populations in both countries.”
Wilson also noted that “as the founder of the [House] Republican Israel Caucus, I have been a friend of Israel and Prime Minister Netanyahu throughout my career. Israel’s continuing aggressive operations in Syria are deeply disturbing, especially in recent days, including bombing and taking more Syrian cities.
“Israel’s actions in Syria are counterproductive and harmful to the interests of Israel. These actions are irresponsible and go against what President Trump, Secretary Rubio, and US Ambassador Tom Barrack have tried to do.
“They also make it more difficult to remove war criminal [President Vladimir] Putin’s malign influence in Syria. Taking Syrian land and attacking Syrian cities will hurt Israel in the long term and needs to end immediately.”
Wilson’s words are important because they reflect how Jerusalem’s drive for strength may be going too far.
One thing that Israel’s early leaders, such as David Ben-Gurion, understood was the need to be pragmatic and also speak about Jewish values, international law, and ethics.
Israel is not alone in the world. It faced harder struggles in the 1950s and 1960s. Yet, at the time, it didn’t become a Sparta. Instead, it did outreach to other countries, weathered the storm, and won decisive victories.
Today, Israel is involved in a 1,000-day war without a clear strategy or end goal on any front. This has led to a kind of Sparta doctrine of buffer zones and talk of a war that never ends.
If Israel is so strong, then it could stand to be more judicious and responsible and walk more quietly while carrying a big stick.