Netanyahu’s Hubris Shapes the Adversaries of Tomorrow
- Anthony Trad
- Apr 12
- 4 min read
Updated: Aug 19

By Anthony Trad, MSc Conflict Studies, London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE). Originally published in L’Orient-Le Jour, October 18, 2024
“He who sows violence reaps vengeance.”
This maxim could well define the Netanyahu era. Not that Hezbollah and Hamas should be absolved of their role in regional violence, but Israel’s Prime Minister has crossed a dangerous line. By carrying out strikes across multiple foreign territories with no clear vision for the future, Benjamin Netanyahu is fueling an endless cycle of retaliation. Under his leadership, Israel has cast itself as a bulwark against the so-called “Shiite Crescent” stretching from Tehran to Beirut via Baghdad, Damascus, and Sanaa. Yet each airstrike, every military incursion, only feeds the spiral of hatred, pushing Israel further from the lasting security it claims to seek.
From War-Torn Children to Tomorrow’s Fighters
Netanyahu seems blind to a stark reality: his policy of systematic reprisals is backfiring. Every act of destruction plants seeds of hatred in the minds of young Palestinians and Lebanese who grow up among rubble and mourning. He is forging the future fighters of tomorrow: young people who have helplessly witnessed violence tear apart their families and homes. Conditioned for revenge, impervious to the notion of a ceasefire, they are set to become Israel’s next adversaries.
It is unthinkable that territories as compact as Lebanon or Gaza could endure over 1,000 daily strikes without provoking a radical reaction. Each missile seals the fate of a new generation—transforming youth into determined opponents, ready to bear arms in the name of vengeance. This fertile ground could spawn new militias, in the image of Hezbollah or Hamas, ready to challenge Israel again. These groups regenerate like thistles, cut them down, and they return, thornier and tougher, defying any effort to uproot them.
A Transgenerational Cycle of Revenge
But the chain of consequences doesn’t end there. The children who grow up watching their homes destroyed and their families devastated will inherit this conflict. Netanyahu is also shaping tomorrow’s activists; those who will carry on the struggle their parents could not win. This rage, however, is no longer confined to the bombed zones. It ripples across diasporas, where powerlessness is channeled into global militancy. These “long-distance fighters” will transform anger into organized, international resistance.
Meanwhile, Lebanon is bracing for an unprecedented demographic upheaval. Nearly a million Shiites are fleeing the bombarded South, swelling the ranks of the two million Syrian and Palestinian refugees already living in the country, even if the original number of Syrians, once making up nearly a quarter of the population, has likely shrunk considerably since the Israeli offensive began. This mass displacement of war refugees and internally displaced persons is triggering a “great uprooting,” one that threatens to upend Lebanon’s fragile sectarian balance. These displaced individuals will resist in various ways: some by joining armed groups, others through diplomacy, social work, or humanitarian efforts, fighting back against the injustice that uprooted them.
The thirst for vengeance born in the ruins of Gaza, Beirut, or Nabatieh will eventually transcend the region. It will extend to Jewish diasporas worldwide, now seen by some extremists as accomplices of an oppressive state. Through his unchecked hubris, Netanyahu is inadvertently shaping new, vulnerable targets, opening the door to a spike in antisemitic attacks in Europe, driven by rage. His stubborn bid to reshape the Middle East through force echoes the strategic blunder of post-9/11 America, which led only to chaos and the rise of terrorism.
The Economic Battleground
Beyond human lives, Netanyahu is also sealing Israel’s economic fate. With 46,000 businesses shuttered and a growing reluctance among global companies to invest in a country increasingly synonymous with permanent conflict, the dream of making Israel the “Silicon Valley” of the Middle East is fading fast. In this new reality, Netanyahu is unwittingly creating “economic fighters”: investors, multinationals, and trading partners who will retaliate through divestments and embargoes - starving Israel of the vital resources it needs to survive.
The Political Catastrophe of Arrogance
Finally, Netanyahu’s hubris has reached new heights with his demand that the UN Secretary-General immediately withdraw the 11,000 UNIFIL peacekeepers stationed in Lebanon, even declaring him persona non grata. This request is emblematic of a leader who believes he can unilaterally rewrite the rules of international diplomacy - deciding who belongs on the global stage and who doesn’t. His cynicism peaks when he insists that “UNIFIL forces must be kept out of harm’s way,” even as it is his army that places them in danger. This arrogance is shaping tomorrow’s diplomatic opposition: Western governments, pressured by electorates increasingly attuned to human rights and the Palestinian cause, may soon find continued support for Israel politically untenable.
Across elite campuses in Europe and North America, a new generation of future decision-makers and “intellectual fighters” is already rising (not Palestinian, not Lebanese), but deeply committed to defending human rights. The notion of Israel becoming a global pariah is no longer theoretical; it is materialising through these future leaders, who may shape foreign policies in direct opposition to the Israeli state.
If Israel continues down this path, it condemns itself to a never-ending cycle of violence and rebellion, trapped in a vortex it cannot escape. Vengeance will dictate its relations with neighbors for decades to come. Ultimately, Israel will face successive waves of opposition, forged in the flames of hubris that, instead of bringing security, leaves behind only devastation, hatred, and a future from which no one, neither in Tel Aviv nor beyond, will emerge unscathed.
Comments