With the region on the brink of all-out war, rhetorical moderation is required.
No American who keeps score can mourn the demise of Hassan Nasrallah – or lament the disarray into which the Israelis have thrown Hezbollah. But it’s one thing to bid good riddance to Nasrallah and cheer the weakening of his Iranian-backed Lebanese militia. It’s quite another to welcome this as a prelude to a full-on war with Iran, as Jared Kushner, one of the architects of Trumpian foreign policy, did on Saturday.
“This is significant because Iran is now fully exposed,” tweeted Kushner, Donald Trump’s son-in-law and a key mover behind the Abraham Accords that normalized relations between Israel and several Arab states. “The reason why their nuclear facilities have not been destroyed, despite weak air defense systems, is because Hezbollah has been a loaded gun pointed at Israel.” The implication is that the loaded gun has now been removed, and that a military intervention against the Tehran-backed regime can be launched more safely.
Such rhetoric is dangerous at this time. With the region already vulnerable to conflict, comments like these risk further escalation and misinterpretation, possibly leading to a war that is not yet inevitable. The last thing the Middle East needs is a provocation that pushes it closer to all-out war.
In this tense moment, moderation in speech and action is crucial. While the removal of Hezbollah’s influence might seem like a victory, assuming that it sets the stage for broader military action against Iran overlooks the catastrophic consequences of such a decision. It is a perilous path that could destabilize the entire region, leading to unintended consequences.
Kushner’s statements highlight the importance of using diplomatic means rather than inflammatory rhetoric. The U.S. should carefully consider the long-term consequences of its actions and rhetoric in the Middle East.
