Last month, after rejecting offers of military aid and arms sales from Moscow for nearly a decade, Beirut agreed to accept $5 million in support, channeled indirectly so as not to require a formal reneging on its commitments to the U.S. In addition, Russia has increased trade with Lebanon, discussed helping the country exploit its offshore gas reserves, and encouraged connections between the Russian Orthodox Church and Lebanese Orthodox Christians. Anna Borshchevskaya and Hanin Ghaddar parse Vladimir Putin’s motives:

Putin has . . . sought to cultivate his image as a peacemaker in Lebanon, whether between the pro- and anti-Syria camps or with Israel. This includes working with Hizballah at times; Russia does not consider it a terrorist organization and has hosted the group’s officials in the past. Yet Hizballah and its Iranian patron have reservations about Moscow’s activities inside Lebanon. . . .

Moscow’s interest [in Lebanon] is rooted in a strategy of portraying itself as the most credible broker for regional conflict resolution, particularly regarding Iranian-Israeli tensions. Many [Lebanese] officials are growing more concerned about the prospect of Israel attacking Hizballah targets in their country, since the group is reportedly moving its precision missile-development efforts back home from Syria. Russia apparently hopes to mediate an agreement like the one reached in southern Syria, this time managing escalation between Israel and Hizballah in Lebanon. To do so, it needs greater [influence] in Lebanon. . . .

Moscow [also] remains persistent in its quest to establish a military presence inside Lebanon. [Putin, moreover] has repeatedly showed an eagerness to assume a leading role there, and a willingness to invest the time and resources necessary for reaching that objective. In doing so, he is more interested in gaining leverage than in finding genuine resolutions to the refugee issue or other pressing problems. . . . Beirut and its Western allies should therefore be wary of the Kremlin’s gifts.

More broadly, Putin has long expressed hope that the United States will withdraw from the affairs of Lebanon and the rest of the Middle East. For now, Washington still has leverage via its aid to the Lebanese Armed Forces, and this relationship has helped convince Beirut to reject past security agreements with Russia. But Moscow is steadily filling the gaps wherever Washington is absent.

For some time, opponents of U.S support for Israel have been urging the White House to end the war in Gaza, or simply calling for a ceasefire. Douglas Feith and Lewis Libby consider what such a result would actually entail:

Ending the war immediately would allow Hamas to survive and retain military and governing power. Leaving it in the area containing the Sinai-Gaza smuggling routes would ensure that Hamas can rearm. This is why Hamas leaders now plead for a ceasefire. A ceasefire will provide some relief for Gazans today, but a prolonged ceasefire will preserve Hamas’s bloody oppression of Gaza and make future wars with Israel inevitable.

For most Gazans, even when there is no hot war, Hamas’s dictatorship is a nightmarish tyranny. Hamas rule features the torture and murder of regime opponents, official corruption, extremist indoctrination of children, and misery for the population in general. Hamas diverts foreign aid and other resources from proper uses; instead of improving life for the mass of the people, it uses the funds to fight against Palestinians and Israelis.

Moreover, a Hamas-affiliated website warned Gazans last month against cooperating with Israel in securing and delivering the truckloads of aid flowing into the Strip. It promised to deal with those who do with “an iron fist.” In other words, if Hamas remains in power, it will begin torturing, imprisoning, or murdering those it deems collaborators the moment the war ends. Thereafter, Hamas will begin planning its next attack on Israel:

Hamas’s goals are to overshadow the Palestinian Authority, win control of the West Bank, and establish Hamas leadership over the Palestinian revolution. Hamas’s ultimate aim is to spark a regional war to obliterate Israel and, as Hamas leaders steadfastly maintain, fulfill a Quranic vision of killing all Jews.

Hamas planned for corpses of Palestinian babies and mothers to serve as the mainspring of its October 7 war plan. Hamas calculated it could survive a war against a superior Israeli force and energize enemies of Israel around the world. The key to both aims was arranging for grievous Palestinian civilian losses. . . . That element of Hamas’s war plan is working impressively.