Israel-Hezbollah Conflict 2024 Updates
Israel intensifies military strikes against Hezbollah, and regional war may be imminent
The military conflict between Israel and Lebanon has escalated sharply, with Israel launching extensive airstrikes targeting Hezbollah, while Lebanon retaliates with rocket and drone attacks on Israeli cities, resulting in significant casualties on both sides. Israeli operations have focused on eliminating Hezbollah leadership and military capabilities, amidst warnings of a potential ground invasion.
Despite calls for a ceasefire from the U.S. and France, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu remains committed to military actions. Analysts express concerns about the risk of a broader conflict, while discussions around international responses highlight divergent views on the roles of the U.S. and China in the ongoing crisis. The situation remains complex, with calls for negotiations and a focus on resolving the broader regional tensions.
Key Concepts
- The military conflict between Israel and Lebanon has escalated, with extensive air strikes and retaliatory attacks.
- Approximately 600 Lebanese casualties have been reported due to Israeli air strikes this week.
- Israel has targeted senior Hezbollah officials, resulting in significant leadership losses for the group.
- Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah has vowed retaliation against Israeli military operations.
- Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant has indicated a strategic shift towards the northern front in response to escalating tensions.
- Recent Israeli strikes on Hezbollah headquarters in Beirut have caused significant destruction and uncertainty regarding Nasrallah’s status.
- There are concerns about a potential ground invasion of Lebanon as Israeli troops mobilize towards the northern border.
- A proposed 21-day ceasefire by the U.S. and France has been rejected by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
- Analysts suggest that both Hezbollah and Iran prefer to avoid full-scale war despite ongoing provocations.
- Israel aims to dismantle the Iran-led alliance with Hamas and weaken Hezbollah’s military capabilities.
- The disarmament of Hezbollah, as called for in UN Security Council Resolution 1701, has not occurred since its establishment in 2006.
- Gershon Baskin argues that military operations against Hezbollah will not resolve the underlying Gaza conflict.
- There are contrasting views on the international response, with some criticizing the U.S. for its focus on Israel rather than Iran.
- A shift in U.S. strategy is deemed necessary by some analysts for a more effective resolution to the ongoing conflict.
The military conflict between Israel and Lebanon has escalated significantly in recent days, with Israel launching hundreds of military strikes on Lebanon in one day, while Lebanon has attacked population centers in northern, central, and southern Israel with rockets, drones, and missiles. According to the Lebanese Ministry of Health, 600 Lebanese have been killed and thousands injured in Israeli airstrikes this week.
Israel launches heavy attack on Hezbollah
Since October last year, Israel’s targeted strikes against senior Hezbollah military personnel have resulted in the deaths of 65 senior Hezbollah officials, in addition to the forced evacuation of 61,000 Israeli civilians from the Israel-Lebanon border.
Fighting has escalated significantly in recent weeks, particularly after a series of bombings targeting Iran-backed Hezbollah operatives and associates, detonated via personal pagers and walkie-talkies in Lebanon and Syria, killing 32 people and injuring thousands, in incidents widely linked to Israel, which has not claimed responsibility.
After the bombing, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah vowed to retaliate against Israel, while Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant announced a military deployment adjustment, saying, “We are turning our strength, resources, and energy to the north.” But on Friday (September 27), Nasrallah himself became the target of Israel’s targeted killing.
The Israeli army carried out a series of targeted strikes on the Hezbollah headquarters in Dahiyeh, a suburb of Beirut, flattening the building and causing huge smoke to rise from the city. However, it is not clear whether Nasrallah was killed in the explosion.
Israel plans ground invasion; Hezbollah may be frustrated at the negotiation table
This week, Israeli Chief of Staff Gen. Herzi Halevi revealed plans for a possible ground invasion of Lebanon, hours after the White House announced a 21-day ceasefire proposal put forward by France and the United States, but Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu quickly rejected the proposal, vowing to continue fighting at full force.
Calls for a ceasefire contrasted with images of troops and tanks moving toward Israel’s northern border in Lebanon, leading to speculation about whether a wider Israel-Hezbollah war or even a regional war, was imminent.
According to Chuck Freilich, former Israeli deputy national security adviser and senior fellow at Harvard’s Belfer Center, Iran, and Hezbollah, which it supports, have long adopted a strategy of “war of attrition until destruction,” aiming to eventually lead to international pressure and disintegrate Israel from within through constant wars and strikes. However, despite multiple opportunities to provoke war, Hezbollah and Iran have so far avoided large-scale wars, showing resistance to large-scale conflicts.
“We can see something from the events of October 7,” he said. “October 7 was a turning point in Iran’s decades-long strategy of ‘war of attrition until destruction.'”
On October 7, 2023, Hamas militants infiltrated Israel, killing more than 1,300 people and holding hundreds hostage, prompting Israel to launch a military operation in Gaza that is still ongoing. In solidarity with Hamas, Iranian-backed Hezbollah militants launched drones, missiles, and rockets from Lebanon into Israel on October 8.
Iran, the Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen, and Shia militants in Iraq and Syria have also been firing at Israel over the past year.
The “war of attrition until destruction” strategy that Freilich referred to refers to launching repeated wars and attacks, including creating a “ring of fire” of enemy countries around Israel, which would eventually lead to international pressure and Israel’s internal division and collapse.
However, Freilich believes that despite multiple opportunities to provoke a major war, Hezbollah and Iran have so far avoided one, indicating their unwillingness to go to war. “I tend to think that the assessment that they don’t want to fight is probably correct,” Freilich noted.
A major escalation is avoidable but may be necessary to facilitate negotiations.
“Israel has three main objectives against Hezbollah: dismantle the so-called Iran-led Hezbollah-Hamas anti-Israel alliance, ensure Hezbollah is cleared from Lebanon’s southern border to the Litani River, and weaken Hezbollah’s military capabilities,” explained Kobi Michael, a senior fellow at the Misgav Institute and the Israel Institute for National Security Studies.
Michael said the current IDF attacks on Lebanon are a means of avoiding a larger conflict with Hezbollah and an attempt to bring it back to the negotiating table.
“That might make them more willing to go back to 1701,” he said.
UN Security Council Resolution 1701 was drafted in 2006 to resolve the then-Israeli-Lebanese war. The resolution called for a cessation of hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah, for Israel to withdraw its troops from Lebanon, and for the disarmament of armed groups, including Hezbollah, in the area south of the Litani River in Lebanon, about 30 kilometers from the Israeli-Lebanese border.
Disarmament has not materialized, and since 2006 Hezbollah has amassed an estimated 130,000 short- and medium-range rockets and missiles in southern Lebanon.
Michael continued, “If Hezbollah is not convinced now (to negotiate), Israel is preparing for a full-scale war that will not completely eliminate Hezbollah but will severely weaken it, drive it out of the zone leading to the Litani River, and allow Israel to remotely control the area through intelligence and prevent Hezbollah from regrouping in the territory.”
Gershon Baskin, a former Israeli hostage negotiator and co-chairman of the international community group, said the idea that the Gaza war could be ended by engaging in a major military operation with Hezbollah was delusional.
“Washington’s focus right now is Lebanon, but Lebanon will not influence the situation in Gaza, no matter what Netanyahu says,” Baskin insisted.
According to Baskin, Hamas has informally agreed to a deal to end the current war that would include a full Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, the release of 101 hostages and a number of Palestinian prisoners, and the transfer of governance of Gaza away from Hamas.
“Hamas agreed, but they lacked experience in how to negotiate and reach an agreement,” Baskin insisted. “Hamas also believed that any ‘can’ on their part weakened their negotiating position.”
“Our main focus now must be ending the war in Gaza and getting the hostages home,” Baskin said.
Kobi Michael, a senior fellow at Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies, disagrees. “As long as Hamas hopes and prays for a multi-front, expanded regional war to keep them in power, there will never be a negotiated deal. And they will never release the hostages because they are a safety net for them. That is the reality, unfortunately,” Michael said.
China’s Response and the Role of the United States
Regarding the participation of the international community in the current process, former Israeli Deputy National Security Advisor Freilich questioned China’s absent role after it publicly announced its support for Iran earlier this week. On the other hand, Michael was critical of the United States.
“China has been very pro-Hamas and pro-Palestinian since the war began, and now I guess pro-Lebanese as well. But they haven’t played a major diplomatic or military role in the past year,” Freilich noted. “I haven’t heard of any major economic development either.”
Michael believes that the United States should exert more pressure in the form of readjustment.
“As long as the United States is hesitant to threaten Iran or tighten economic sanctions on Iran or to present a credible military option, while at the same time pressuring Israel and tying its hands, everything will be longer and harder.
“The United States was wrong about this and continues to be wrong,” Michael concluded. “They put pressure on Israel instead of on the terrorists — on Iran and Qatar … They are wrong.”
Discover more from Meritnews24
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.