Israel’s determination in its current conflicts with Hamas and Hezb’allah is vexing to Western political classes.  Whereas Israel asserts that it is attending to its immediate security and long-term survival, Western diplomats and heads of government have their own focus, perceiving that they are engaged in a sophisticated and nuanced Great Game campaign.

One way to think about Israel’s present conflicts — certainly not the exclusive way but a reasonable one, is to consider it as a war between Israel and Iran, with battles in Gaza and Lebanon.  Such consideration suggests two interrelated concepts that hint at the possibilities and perils of the present crisis.

The first such consideration is the Decisive Battle.  Throughout history, many wars ended as the result of a single engagement.  The Battle of Aegospotami ended the Peloponnesian War, the Battle of Zama ended the Second Punic War, the Battle of Tsushima ended the Russo-Japanese War, the battle of Waterloo ended the Napoleonic Wars, etc.  The pre–World War II Japanese war strategy was called Kantai Kessen, which means “decisive naval battle.”

There are some characteristics of decisive battle doctrine that may be useful in analyzing the position in which Israel presently finds itself.  In this regard, the experiences of Republican and Imperial Rome provide useful examples.