War or deal: Lebanon at a turning point

What’s really happening in South Lebanon? No one can claim to hold the truth. It is quite the contrary. The situation is complex and open to all possibilities; two opposing readings emerged from the military and diplomatic developments of the past few days.

According to the first reading, the clashes between Israel and Hezbollah will continue — with neither party crossing the red lines — until a cease-fire is reached in Gaza, as it would have repercussions for Lebanon.

The second interpretation considers that Israel would not have waged an expanded war in Gaza to remain prisoner of Hezbollah’s calculations in south Lebanon. Consequently, Israel would seek to change military circumstances to ensure its long-term security, without having to re-evacuate northern localities. In other words, Benjamin Netanyahu’s cabinet would consider a wider war to change the equation on the ground.

Cross-border clashes have been increasingly intense. Recently, Hezbollah stepped up its operations and widened the scope of its targets. Israel continues to form vast fire belts in south Lebanon and to adopt a scorched-earth policy. At the same time, it is pursuing assassination operations against Hezbollah’s members.

The advocates of the first reading believe that Israel’s military strategy is aimed at destroying all living conditions within five to 10 kilometers of the south. This would displace the population and create a fragile environment for Hezbollah’s fighters (who will no longer be able to position themselves there), destroy all military facilities and eliminate as many of Hezbollah’s high-ranking members as possible. The objective is to make gains while the war continues, before moving towards a settlement once the war in Gaza is over.

The advocates of the second reading believe that the Israeli strikes are intended to prepare the ground for a wider, more significant operation. In their view, the deliberate destruction, the isolation of villages from one another and the targeting of main roads and supply routes that Hezbollah uses are a prelude to wider fighting or a ground incursion.

Hezbollah gets ready

Some major developments were witnessed in the past few days. Once again, Hezbollah shot down one of Israel’s drones and continues to launch its drones despite the Israeli attempts to target the officials involved in these operations and the related sites and control centers.

Hezbollah also claimed responsibility for a drone attack on two Israeli military positions north of the city of Acre, well beyond the border area it usually strikes. This attack is a clear message about Hezbollah’s ability to escalate and inflict heavy damage on the Israelis.

“We are preparing to enter a new phase in the fighting and perhaps use new weapons,” said a source close to Hezbollah. “The Hezb has so far fired around 5,000 missiles and shells at Israel, and is still capable of firing 150,000 more.”

The Israelis stepped up their strikes, especially against Aita al-Shaab, where they carried out simultaneous violent raids on Wednesday, intending to cause as much damage as possible. This is because the Israelis consider Aita al-Shaab as one of the main villages where Hezbollah has significant military infrastructure, including tunnels, and they aim to destroy them.

Israel could use the presence of tunnels as an argument to put pressure on the US in a bid to obtain a green light to expand their military operations against Hezbollah.

What chance does diplomacy still have?

These developments came at a time when Western diplomatic sources indicated that Israel is negotiating with Washington to carry out wider operations against Hezbollah, especially after limiting retaliation to Iran, in response to Tehran sending hundreds of drones toward Israeli territory on April 14.

“Tel Aviv has stopped the confrontation with the Iranians at this level. In return, the Israelis will concentrate in the next phase on Rafah and Lebanon, and to this end, they are trying to provide all the reasons justifying an escalation,” said a Western diplomatic source.

Here too, the two readings clash. The first suggests that, after the Gaza battle, Lebanon will be in the Israelis’ sights. In this vein, the Israeli ministers continued to speak of a decisive phase over the past few days.

The second reading, however, propounds that once the Rafah battle is over and a cease-fire agreement is reached, a solution will be in sight in Lebanon, especially if Hezbollah and the Lebanese state accept the proposals that US envoy Amos Hochstein put forward, and which the French adopted.

Diplomatic contacts resumed in any case. Against this backdrop, French Foreign Minister Stéphane Séjourné arrived in Beirut this weekend.

“The minister will convey a clear message about Paris’ serious concern to Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri. He will ask him to convey it, in turn, to Hezbollah and to stress [to the party] the need to separate the Lebanon front from Gaza and to move towards implementing UN Resolution 1701,” said a Western diplomat.

Hezbollah’s position remains unchanged, however. “As soon as the war in Gaza ends, the fighting in south Lebanon will cease,” said a source close to Hezbollah.

Nevertheless, according to diplomatic sources, Israel no longer sees things that way, and will not accept a return to the status quo that prevailed before Oct. 7. “Tel Aviv is demanding a broader and more comprehensive agreement, which will force Hezbollah to make concessions,” said the above-mentioned Western diplomat.

In this vein, official Lebanese sources, closely following Hochstein’s efforts, said that Beirut consented to the US-proposed solution, adding however that the conditions for its implementation will only be discussed after the end of the war in Gaza.

This proposal mainly includes a cessation of hostilities and the return of civilians on both sides of the border, followed by a halt to Hezbollah’s military activities, in parallel with a massive deployment of the Lebanese Army in the south and the reinforcement of the United Nations Interim Force’s presence.

It should be noted that Hochstein’s proposal does not explicitly mention “Hezbollah’s withdrawal.” But as soon as the presence of the army and UNIFIL is reinforced, the Iran-aligned militia will de facto have to cease all military activity in the area. The US proposal also involves resuming the land border demarcation negotiations.

However, as long as Hezbollah insists on correlating Lebanon’s fate to that of Gaza, no settlement can be reached. Currently, efforts aim to reduce tensions and keep the situation under control.

But will this diplomatic pressure be enough to save Lebanon from a devastating war? Nothing is certain, particularly since no one can predict what the Israelis might do to ensure the return of the residents of its north before the start of the academic year in September.

This article was originally published in L'Orient-Le Jour. Translated by Joelle El Khoury.