The situation in Lebanon is increasingly tense, with converging pressures from Washington and Tel Aviv. The escalating dynamics along the southern border, characterized by both political maneuvering and military escalation, demand careful analysis. This article delves into the complexities of the current situation, focusing on the Lebanese-Israeli border tensions and the implications for regional stability.
تصاعد الضغوط: نظرة على التوترات اللبنانية الإسرائيلية
The Lebanese arena is witnessing a simultaneous increase in pressure from both Washington and Tel Aviv. The United States is wielding political leverage through threats related to aid and diplomatic relations, while Israel is expanding its military force projection to impose a new equation that forces Lebanon to confront a situation exceeding traditional skirmishes. This interplay between external political pressure and escalating on-the-ground strikes reflects a dual approach aimed at reshaping the security landscape in the South. Tel Aviv views the moment as an opportunity to solidify new realities, while Washington hopes to weaken Hezbollah’s military role through the Lebanese Army.
سباق مع الزمن: الغارات الإسرائيلية والمهلة الأمريكية
According to analytical readings based on the trajectory of Israeli raids, Israel appears to be in a race against time before the expiration of the American deadline for disarming Hezbollah. Benefiting from the cessation of fighting in Gaza, Israel is shifting its focus to the northern front, considering it a new priority arena. These strikes aren’t random; they’re a deliberate attempt to dictate terms.
Dr. Mohannad Mustafa, an academic and expert in Israeli affairs, stresses that this escalation is part of a gradual strategy designed to increase pressure. This is being achieved through intensified airstrikes south of the Litani River and the broadening of accusations regarding the rebuilding of resistance infrastructure. He points out that Israel’s narrative rests on three pillars: the rearmament of Hezbollah, the development of its infrastructure in southern Lebanon, and alleged cooperation between Hezbollah and the Lebanese Army. These are used to justify the escalation and link the Lebanese situation to the post-Gaza phase.
تحول في العقيدة الإسرائيلية بعد السابع من أكتوبر
These Israeli messages align with a broader shift in thinking, viewing the aftermath of October 7th, 2023, as a turning point in its approach to fronts. Lebanon has become the central arena where Israel intends to demonstrate its military strength, framing it as an extension of the Gaza ceasefire, not a violation of it. This demonstrates a clear intention to leverage the situation for broader regional gains.
حسابات معقدة وراء التصعيد
However, behind this escalation lie more complex calculations. According to Mustafa, Israel is acting as a party that considers itself victorious on this particular front and is therefore approaching any potential negotiations from a position of strength, raising the bar towards disarmament and establishing a buffer zone managed according to its direct interests. This ambition highlights the depth of Israel’s strategic goals.
On the other side, Washington appears keen on maintaining its pressure by canceling meetings with the Lebanese Army commander and linking aid to the level of “progress” in the disarmament file. Michael Mulroy, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for the Middle East, describes this as a reflection of American doubts about the state’s ability to enforce its sovereignty. The US is clearly signaling its expectations and concerns.
هشاشة الدولة اللبنانية وتداعيات وقف المساعدات
Mulroy believes that if the deadline passes without substantial change, Washington will adopt more stringent measures, potentially starting with a halt to security assistance and even withdrawing from its mediation role. This would further destabilize the Lebanese state and sever a crucial channel for de-escalation in the volatile South. The potential consequences for Lebanon are severe, emphasizing the importance of addressing the underlying issues.
سياسة الردع الإسرائيلية والاستنزاف المنظم
Brigadier General Elias Hanna, a military expert, characterizes the situation as a stalemate. He argues that Israel is relying on a policy of deterrence through prevention and raising the cost, as it is unable to achieve a comprehensive victory. Meanwhile, Hezbollah faces internal and regional considerations that dictate the level of its response. The response from Hezbollah is carefully calibrated, prioritizing a defensive strategy that minimizes the risk of a full-scale conflict while maintaining its deterrent capabilities.
Ayman Qamouriya, a journalist and political analyst, views Israel as implementing a pattern of organized attrition south of the Litani River, targeting fixed infrastructure to prevent the formation of a cohesive Hezbollah system. This puts Lebanon, Hezbollah, and Israel itself in a mutual predicament. Israel is operating outside the objectives of decisive victory, relying on a policy of raising the price for Lebanon and Hezbollah with broad American approval. The response from the resistance, however, is surrounded by political and social embarrassment, complicating the decision for a direct response and increasing pressure on the state.
انسحاب اليونيفيل وتصاعد المخاطر
This expansion of Israeli pressure coincides with the beginning of a gradual withdrawal of UNIFIL, which, according to Qamouriya, means exposing the southern regions to direct Israeli force and placing the Lebanese Army in a solitary confrontation that exceeds its capabilities and resources. The withdrawal of UNIFIL raises serious concerns about the security vacuum it will create.
Qamouriya warns that a halt to American aid could leave the army unable to continue its missions, opening the door to a collapse of the internal deterrence system and creating a security vacuum that would allow Israel to expand the scope of its operations without substantial obstacles. The potential for a complete breakdown of security is a real and present danger.
معادلة الردع المتبادل: الخطوط الحمراء
Despite all the escalation, the situation remains governed by the equation of mutual deterrence. Hezbollah understands the cost of an uncalculated response, and Israel recognizes that a full-scale war could reopen the northern front in a way that its social and economic repercussions are uncontrollable. This understanding of mutual consequences, while fragile, is currently preventing a wider conflict. The Lebanese-Israeli border tensions are therefore a complex interplay of strategic calculations, political pressures, and military posturing. Addressing these tensions requires a nuanced approach that acknowledges the legitimate concerns of all parties involved and prioritizes a sustainable path towards regional stability. The future of the Lebanese-Israeli border hinges on careful diplomacy and a commitment to de-escalation. The ongoing situation demands continued monitoring and analysis to prevent further deterioration and promote a peaceful resolution.
