Alan Dershowitz certainly thinks so. And the signs coming not just from Beirut but also Tehran suggest that Israel has successfully reset the disincentives to war that the October 7 massacres undermined. 

We'll get to Dersh's arguments in a moment. Reporting today from the Times of Israel shows just how ineffective the retaliation attack from Hezbollah turned out to be. They didn't hit any of their intended targets, even accounting for the destruction of the pre-emptive strike conducted by the IDF. And yet Hassan Nasrallah seemed very eager on Sunday to declare himself satisfied that they had paid back Israel for the strike that took out Fuad Shukr:

Some would define his speech as apologetic – designed to explain to his domestic audience in Lebanon that Hezbollah had not permitted the assassination by Israel of its military leader, Faud Shukr, to pass unavenged, and that it had thus exacted a price from Israel. (Israel killed Shukr in a strike in Beirut on July 30, three days after a Hezbollah rocket killed 12 Israeli children in Majdal Shams on the Golan Heights, in an attack for which Israel held Shukr responsible.)

Hezbollah’s ostensible attack on the Glilot base — which was not in fact impacted — was depicted by Nasrallah as the main achievement of its revenge assault, but with a very specific stress on that base being north of Tel Aviv. His point, and this was for outside consumption, was that Hezbollah had been careful not to fire directly on Tel Aviv, lest the symmetry Nasrallah has himself previously drawn, whereby a strike on Beirut is considered equivalent to a strike on Tel Aviv, would be used against him.

But that was not the only cautious choice made by Nasrallah. It appears that the organization considered firing precision missiles at Glilot, home to the IDF’s Unit 8200 intelligence unit and to the Mossad’s HQ.

The Hezbollah chief ultimately decided not to use this strategic weapon for fear that the Israeli retaliation would be so forceful as to start a far longer and more devastating conflict than the past 10 months have seen.

In other words, Nasrallah ordered a larger-scale but relatively easy-to-parry volley of missiles out of fear of a full-scale war with Israel. That at least speaks to a restoral of deterrence to some extent, even before Israel stopped much of the volley with its pre-emptive attack. The precise hits on leaders of Hezbollah, Hamas, and the IRGC sent enough of a signal about intel and capabilities that both Hezbollah and Iran now worry about escalation as much as the West, if not perhaps more.

However, the pre-emptive attack may have done the most to restore that deterrence. According to an analysis in Maariv yesterday and reported by the Jerusalem Post today, the scale of the IDF attack went farther and broader than anyone has yet reported. The Israelis did so much damage to Hezbollah that Nasrallah still hasn't been able to calculate it, or so the IDF claims:

"We attacked thousands of launchers and crippled Hezbollah’s capabilities, and our operations [haven't finished yet]. It appears Hezbollah is still in shock. They're trying to comprehend the extent of the damage inflicted on them, and they’ll fully understand it in the coming days. Right now, they’re just beginning to grasp what happened and how it unfolded," Abbas explained.

Earlier in the week, the IDF emphasized that while the operation was primarily tactical, it sent powerful signals to Hezbollah—messages that could potentially lead to broader strategic shifts.

"It seems Hezbollah was genuinely surprised," noted Abbas. "Their shock comes from the sheer number of planes we deployed simultaneously, striking an overwhelming number of targets in a very short time. They're also astonished by the precision of our strikes—how we managed to accurately hit so many targets, neutralize their assets, and do so without harming civilians or causing collateral damage."

Is this just IDF bravado, or has Hezbollah really been set back on its heels? That remains to be seen, but since the attack, talk of returning evacuees to the northern towns and villages has picked up somewhat. The IDF feels confident enough to launch a new "large scale" anti-terror military operation this week in the West Bank, too:

At least nine Palestinian gunmen were killed in a series of drone strikes and clashes with the Israel Defense Forces in the northern West Bank early Wednesday, as the Israeli military said it had launched a large-scale counterterrorism operation.

According to the IDF, the raid was largely focused on the Tulkarem area, but troops were also carrying out activities in Jenin and the Far’a camp near Tubas.

The operation, involving the Kfir Brigade, the Duvdevan Commando Unit, combat engineers, and Border Police, was expected to last at least several days, military sources said.

And yet, even with Israel clearly proceeding to wage this war to win, even the Iranians seems to be softening their positions. The hit on Ismail Haniyeh provoked them into threats of massive retaliatory attacks, but those have yet to materialize. Instead, now they want to see if a rapprochement with the West is possible:

Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei hinted toward a possible shift to a softer foreign policy that includes a willingness to cooperate with the West in a meeting on Tuesday, according to the Iranian news outlet Iran International.

According to the report, during a meeting with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and the Iranian cabinet, Khamenei said, "We should not pin our hopes on the enemy, nor should we wait for their approval of our plans. This does not prevent communication with them when necessary, as it does no harm. However, we should not rely on them or place trust in them."

It's amazing what a couple of American carrier groups within easy reach of Iran can do, eh? But perhaps even more to the point, the willingness of Israel to go to a full-scale war, as well as their effective defenses and pre-emptions, seem to have had a salutary effect on Iran's terror ambitions in the region. 

Because, as Dersh argues, they know what's coming next:

By preemptively attacking Hezbollah’s rocket launchers, the Israel Defence Forces thwarted much of Hezbollah’s attack and precluded it from reaching its intended targets in central Israel. This may not bring about peace but it is likely to forestall the kind of regional war that Hamas desperately wants.

Israel has used preemption as a military tactic throughout its history, most dramatically in 1967 when it took out the air forces of Egypt and Syria while the planes were still on the ground. Prime Minister Begin preemptively destroyed Iraq’s nuclear program and Prime Minister Olmert preemptively destroyed Syria’s nuclear program. These actions were not only militarily and legally justified, but they saved numerous lives and helped prevent wider wars.

The hard question now is whether Israel should engage in a preemptive attack on Iran’s imminent nuclear arsenal. Such an attack would be far more difficult than any previous ones and carries with it considerable risks. But it also carries great potential benefits. ... 

If Iran were again to attack Israel directly as it did in April, that might provide the occasion for an Israeli attack that would be both reactive and preemptive. Perhaps that is why Iran is delaying its promised attack.

Iran had already begun hesitating after the Haniyeh hit. The pre-emptive attack on Hezbollah likely reinforced the need to step back. As I've often noted, the mullahs rule over an unhappy and restive population that would rise up at the first sign of weakness to strip them of power. They've already come close a couple of times. A wipeout of the IRGC in a pre-emptive or retaliatory attack by Israel would likely be the death knell of their regime. 

The best way to get to peace, as Ronald Reagan made clear, is to prepare for war -- and not just a proportional-response war, but a massively disproportionate response war that makes your enemies fear the outcome. That's what the Israelis appear to have accomplished this month.