Harshad Patel
Israel’s assassination of Hezbollah’s top military commander, Fuad Shukr, in a rare airstrike in Beirut last month marked the highest-level loss for Hezbollah since 2008. The strike was part of Israel’s long-standing strategy to disrupt its enemies through targeted killings and came amidst escalating cross-border clashes between Israel and Lebanon.
Shortly after Shukr’s death, Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh was also killed in Tehran, with Israel widely suspected of orchestrating the attack.
Israel’s assassination campaign against Hezbollah intensified in the fall after Hezbollah began launching thousands of rockets into northern Israel. This was part of Hezbollah’s support for Hamas, which has been engaged in a 10-month war with Israel since Hamas’ Oct. 7 offensive that killed 1,200 Israelis and led to the capture of 250 hostages.
In retaliation, Israel invaded Gaza, killing nearly 40,000 Palestinians according to Gaza authorities, while also targeting Hezbollah to the north through airstrikes and assassinations.
Over the past months, Israel has killed more than 400 Hezbollah fighters and several commanders, including members of Hezbollah’s elite Radwan Force.
Israeli officials assert that these strikes have weakened Hezbollah’s leadership and fighting capability, even as the two sides remain on the brink of direct conflict. They claim that those targeted by the strikes, including Shukr, had significant roles in past attacks against Israel.
Fuad Shukr had been a key figure in Hezbollah since the 1980s and was wanted by the U.S. for his alleged involvement in the 1983 Marine barracks bombing in Beirut. Israel also held him responsible for a recent rocket attack that killed 12 children in the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, though Hezbollah denied this claim. Following his assassination, Israeli officials celebrated it as a significant blow to Hezbollah.
Despite these losses, analysts suggest that Hezbollah’s overall strength remains largely intact. With a fighting force estimated at 100,000 and support from Iran, Hezbollah is able to replace fallen commanders and fighters.
Furthermore, its decentralized military structure allows it to operate autonomously, minimizing the impact of leadership losses on its overall effectiveness. Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah acknowledged Shukr’s death as a major loss but downplayed the strategic significance for the group.
Israel’s assassinations have dealt an immediate blow to Hezbollah, according to some analysts. Removing a significant number of top commanders could have operational consequences if a regional war breaks out soon. The assassinations also indicate that Israel has penetrated Hezbollah’s communications, which could create paranoia within the group’s leadership.
However, the long-term effectiveness of these strikes is uncertain. Some experts argue that targeted killings can backfire by rejuvenating militant groups or leading to the rise of more radical leaders. For instance, Hamas replaced the more moderate Ismail Haniyeh with Yahya Sinwar, one of the architects of the Oct. 7 attack. Thus, while the assassinations might placate the Israeli public, the long-term strategic gains remain in question.
Ultimately, the history of assassinations in conflicts such as this suggests mixed outcomes. While they may provide short-term victories, there is little evidence that they serve as an effective long-term deterrent. With Hezbollah being a highly motivated and ideologically driven group, decapitation strikes are unlikely to achieve lasting strategic success and could even result in unintended consequences.
GIPHY App Key not set. Please check settings