Land swaps won’t solve the Israel

Hezbollah has been actively launching rockets into Israel, leading to casualties and escalating tensions in the region. Despite the presence of the Lebanese armed forces and the U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon, there has been a failure to effectively enforce peace and security measures. Israeli officials, including Foreign Minister Israel Katz, have expressed urgency in finding a diplomatic resolution, warning that Hezbollah's arsenal, which includes over 150,000 missiles, poses a significant threat. Recently, American officials suggested a land swap between Lebanon and Israel as a potential solution to the ongoing border conflicts. However, this proposal is based on misconceptions about Hezbollah's role and intentions. The group is not merely a national movement but rather a proxy for Iran, which complicates the situation further. The history of land-for-peace negotiations has shown that such offers have not yielded the desired outcomes, as Israel has not received peace in return for territorial concessions. The U.S. has historically treated Islamist groups as rational actors, mistakenly believing that they can be incentivized to negotiate. This approach has proven ineffective in the context of Hezbollah and similar organizations. To prevent further conflict, the U.S. should adopt a more supportive stance towards Israel, focusing on undermining Iran's influence rather than engaging in negotiations that may be perceived as weakness. The interconnected nature of Hezbollah and Iran suggests that addressing the broader Iranian threat is essential for achieving stability in the region.