TABNAK– Professor Paul Pillar, who was CIA intelligence analyst for 28 years, says one possible interpretation of the pager operation is that it was Israel's way of striking a major blow against Hezbollah without resorting to an open military invasion of Lebanon, with all of the considerable costs that would entail.
“But another possible interpretation is that it was a way to weaken Hezbollah's ability to defend itself from an invasion that Israel is about to launch,” Pillar told Tabnak News Agency.
Following is the full text of the interview.
Q: What was the purpose of the pager attack on Lebanese Hezbollah forces by Israel?
A: It probably had multiple purposes. It was a way to intimidate Hezbollah. It bolstered the reputation of Mossad as an agency to be feared by Israel's adversaries. It made not just Hezbollah but also other groups opposed to Israel more wary of their methods of operation and communication. It caused significant damage to Hezbollah's ability to communicate with its members, and to coordinate any military operations.
Q: Hezbollah is a legal party in Lebanon and some of the victims of this attack were civilians. Lawyers believe that this method of attack, in which neither the principle of separation nor the principle of caution is observed, is an example of a war crime. What is your assessment?
A: I would call it an instance of terrorism. It took place outside battlefields, and involved a clandestine operation by government agents that was aimed at, among others, noncombatants.
Q: The United States has announced that it was not aware of this Israeli action and had no role in it. On the other hand, some news sources have announced that American military aircraft used in electronic warfare and war operations related to telecommunications and signals have been seen on the shores of Lebanon in the eastern Mediterranean. According to this issue, was America unaware?
A: It is unlikely that the U.S. government had any advance awareness of this operation. Israel is unlikely to have shared such information with the United States, partly because it knows that if the United States were aware of the planned operation, it would have actively discouraged Israel from implementing it.
Q: This attack by Israel will probably lead to a regional war. What is your assessment?
A: The risk of escalation into a regional war has been high for some time. Events such as this one raise the risk, but it is impossible to predict that any one incident will make the difference between war or no war.
Q: It seems that by changing the way of war, Israel is announcing to the ‘resistance front’ that it is capable of large-scale killing to create deterrence without creating an all-out military war. On the other hand, the Yemeni forces also targeted the depth of Israel with hypersonic missiles. Will these developments change the equations of war in the future?
A: The Middle East has already been seeing a mixture of open and covert violent operations. This is apt to continue. One possible interpretation of the pager operation is that it was Israel's way of striking a major blow against Hezbollah without resorting to an open military invasion of Lebanon, with all of the considerable costs that would entail. But another possible interpretation is that it was a way to weaken Hezbollah's ability to defend itself from an invasion that Israel is about to launch.
