Israeli escalation in Lebanon, ‘buffer zone’ at the border, Hezbollah’s capabilities: Our co-editor-in-chief, Anthony Samrani, answers your questions

Thank you for joining us

That’s it for today. Our co-editor-in-chief is heading off to a meeting on managing field reporting.

Once again, we apologize for not being able to answer all your questions. But we will be launching another Q&A session soon. Thank you all, and see you soon!

What outcomes can be imagined that would be both satisfactory and realistic for Israel and the US?

"It is hard to see what scenario or scenarios would constitute a success for the Israeli-American offensive. The political objectives are vague and poorly defined. What outcomes could be both satisfactory and realistic for these two countries in their war against Iran?"

A.S.: In my view, the United States and Israel are not fully aligned in this offensive.

For Israel, the ideal scenario is regime change, with the installation of a leader aligned with Washington and Tel Aviv. Plan B would be a situation of chaos and civil war. Plan C would be finding a “NaIm Qassem” within the Iranian regime who would agree to sign a capitulation agreement.

For the United States, Israel’s Plan C appears to be Plan A.

How would you explain Hezbollah’s seemingly senseless decision to open fire?

"Hello, Mr. Samrani. First of all, thank you for the excellence of your work and that of your team.

How would you explain Hezbollah’s seemingly senseless decision to open fire in this context? Is it more likely a direct order from Iran, a (semi-)autonomous decision by the party’s leadership (for example in the name of unconditional loyalty to Iran or to keep its base mobilized despite the sinking ship), or perhaps the behavior of a wounded animal in its death throes that feels it has nothing left to lose?" - Christophe M.

A.S.: Hello Christophe, thank you for being with us.

Hezbollah’s choice is suicidal. But it had no choice. Iran’s Revolutionary Guards likely made that decision in order to demonstrate that Iran could further expand the conflict and still had other cards to play. It appears that Hezbollah’s political wing was not aligned with that vision.

In any case, the party knows it is incapable of reinventing itself and is therefore doomed. It is thus fighting its last battle rather than voluntarily laying down arms.

On this subject, we invite you to read or reread this article: War against Iran: Why Hezbollah joined the fight.

Is the American-Israeli axis also quick to declare fictitious victories, claiming to have crushed its enemy when that is not the case?

"After the 66-day war, many people claimed that Hezbollah had been considerably weakened and was no longer able to fight the Israeli army. Yet today we see it resuming operations as steadily as before, inflicting significant losses on the Israeli army.

Similarly, the Americans and Israelis regularly announce that they have destroyed Iran’s ballistic capabilities, while in reality, the pace of Iranian missile barrages has not slowed. Is the American-Israeli axis also quick to declare fictitious and imaginary victories, claiming to have crushed its enemy when that is not the case?" - Gabriel Abou Adal

A.S.: Hello Gabriel, thank you for your question.

For now, Hezbollah’s attacks do not have the scale and reach that you describe.

Iran, for its part, had prepared for this war, but its means remain limited. In my view, the imbalance of forces is such that there is no real military standoff.

The two central questions, in my opinion, are these: Will the American-Israeli offensive be sustainable over time, which is the only way to inflict substantial losses on the Iranian regime? And even if they prevail militarily, what will they do with their victory?

For more than a year, Hezbollah has complied with the cease-fire agreement, while Israel continued striking and killing in Lebanon. Patience has its limits, doesn’t it?

"For more than a year, Hezbollah has complied with the cease-fire agreement, while Israel continued bombing and killing. Patience has its limits, doesn’t it?" - Arlette Hitti

A.S.: Hello Arlette, thank you for your question.

Israel has indeed been violating the cease-fire by striking Lebanon daily since November 2024. However, I would add two nuances to your point.

First, the cease-fire in question entails the disarmament of Hezbollah throughout Lebanese territory — not only south of the Litani River — which the party has refused to do. In that sense, it is inaccurate to say that it has respected the agreement.

Second, the party never responded to those strikes. And it is only doing so today because Iran decided otherwise. How does its response help stop Israeli strikes? It only reinforces them.

With hindsight, one might even wonder whether Hezbollah accepted the cease-fire in November 2024 solely because Iran wanted to keep that card for the moment of the final battle.

Do you believe a schism within the Shiite community and Hezbollah is possible?

"Thank you, Anthony, and thank you to the entire team for your excellent work. If Hezbollah’s DNA does not allow it to prioritize Lebanon’s interests and, according to some polls, the majority of the public wants the decision of war and peace to rest with the state, do you think a schism within the Shiite community — and potentially within the militia — is possible? What scenarios could then unfold?" - Yaan Charaoui

A.S.: Hello Yaan, thank you for following along with us.

Something unprecedented happened overnight on Sunday: a large part of the Shiite community openly expressed its anger at Hezbollah. There was an opportunity there to act, and to do so quickly.

But that opinion may redirect its anger toward Israel as the invasion continues and the attacks intensify. Hezbollah’s strength still rests on two pillars, Iranian support and its popular base. For the first time since its creation, both are seriously threatened.

We invite you to read or reread this report by our journalists: 'God damn them': Hezbollah faces the wrath of its own community

Is there a risk of internal confrontation in Lebanon?

"Hello,

The rhetoric (about disarming Hezbollah) seems bold and imprudent; actual implementation appears highly risky and uncertain without a diplomatic miracle or a deeper collapse of Hezbollah. There is a real risk of failure or internal escalation. Are the few arrests merely symbolic and illusory, or could they degenerate into internal confrontation?" - C

A.S.: Hello C, thank you for your question. It has been at the heart of Lebanese debates for the past year.

Yes, disarming Hezbollah is no small matter — that is obvious. Yes, it will provoke internal tensions and clashes between the Lebanese Army and the militia. But that is easy to say from my desk, much harder to carry out on the ground.

What saddens me — and this is very personal — is that we did not try harder. We continued to act as if we had the luxury of time and as if Hezbollah would eventually hand over its weapons through negotiations. Today, we are paying the price for that policy.

The attack on Comfort Hotel in Baabda: What information do you have on it?

"Hello, L'Orient-Le Jour, I'm intrigued by the attack on the famous Comfort Hotel in Baabda. What information do you have on it?" - J-M Z

A.S.: Hello, J-M-Z, thank you for your question.

We sent two journalists to the scene. Here is what they reported: a woman was seriously injured. She was 34 years old and had been working as a receptionist at the hotel for about 10 years.

The hotel was open and had provided refuge to displaced persons from southern Lebanon and the southern suburbs of Beirut. But no one knows yet why the hotel was targeted.

A soldier at the scene denies that an Iranian diplomat was there, despite rumors to that effect circulating since this morning. At the hospital where those injured in the strike are being treated, a medical source said that all those injured were Lebanese.

But stay tuned to our website, as our journalists continue to gather information and we will soon publish their report.

What impact are the Iranian strikes having on Gulf relations?

"What impact are the Iranian strikes having on relations among Gulf countries? Are they pushing them to unite despite their differences, or are they opting for individual responses?" - Tymothée

A.S.: Hello Tymothée, thank you for being with us today!

At first, the Iranian strikes created a form of unity among Gulf countries, including between Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, which had been at odds for weeks.

However, divisions are beginning to emerge between countries that want to get involved and bring an end to the Iranian regime (with the UAE at the forefront) and those that would prefer the war to end as quickly as possible (notably Qatar).

What do we know about the arsenal and military equipment Hezbollah still has?

"Hello,

I’m writing to you from Switzerland. What do we know about the arsenal and military equipment Hezbollah still has? Is it capable of holding out over time?" - Louis-Justin

A.S.: Hello Louis-Justin — greetings to Switzerland, the Lebanon of Europe (just kidding)!

It seems to me that Hezbollah is not capable of carrying out militarily significant attacks against Israel or preventing a ground invasion south of the Litani River.

So it all depends on what we mean by “holding out.” Did Hamas hold out in Gaza? Is refusing to admit defeat while everything around you is destroyed a form of resistance? If so, then I believe Hezbollah has staying power.

Could Syrian troops occupy Lebanon as they did in 1976?

"Could Syrian troops occupy Lebanon as they did in 1976, presenting themselves as a deterrent or interposition force?" - RC

A.S.: Hello RC, thank you for your question. It reflects what many of you are thinking today.

Damascus has reinforced its forces along the Lebanese border. This has raised fears that Ahmad al-Sharaa's troops could enter Lebanese territory, seeking revenge against Hezbollah after its intervention in Syria's civil war.

It is even causing deep anxiety within Lebanon’s Shiite community. We are receiving many testimonies from people who say they are far more afraid of Syrian soldiers and sectarian massacres than of the Israeli army.

I may be wrong — it would not be the first time — but this scenario seems completely unrealistic to me.

We are preparing an article on this issue to be published today. So stay tuned, RC!

From which part of Lebanon is Hezbollah launching its attacks on Israel?

"From which part of Lebanon is Hezbollah launching its attacks on Israel, since, in principle, it is no longer present south of the Litani River? Could it be from north of the Litani, from the Bekaa? What about the weapons it possesses and its manpower?" - Nada

A.S.: Hello Nada, thank you for your question.

I will remain extremely cautious in my response, since we do not have all the information. I do not know for sure if Hezbollah is firing from south of the Litani. What we do know, however, is that a significant portion of Israeli strikes is targeting areas south of the Litani that are supposed to have been completely demilitarized.

It seems — again, we must remain cautious — that Hezbollah is very limited in its weaponry. How else can one explain that its attacks have been so militarily insignificant since it entered the war [on Sunday night]?

As for its manpower, the party is believed to still be able to rely on several tens of thousands of men (between 20,000 and 30,000), but once again, these figures may be greatly overestimated.

To explore this issue further, we suggest this article: Two days of Israeli offensive in Lebanon: Intense strikes and an already heavy toll.

How could the Lebanese Army disarm Hezbollah without triggering a civil war?

"Hello, Mr. Samrani. First of all, I would like to congratulate you and your entire team for your commitment to keeping us informed. Thank you for all that you sacrifice for us.

Clearly, Hezbollah missed the greatest opportunity of its existence. It simply needed to stay out of this. Apparently, that was too much to ask.

After the Lebanese government’s decision on Monday to ban any military activity by non-state institutions (which should have been self-evident), and Hezbollah’s resounding contempt for that decision, how do you think the Lebanese Army can rein in Hezbollah?

In other words, how could the Lebanese Army disarm Hezbollah without triggering a civil war?" - Dominique

A.S.: Hello Dominique, thank you for your question, support and kind words. Knowing that you are all standing with us honors and strengthens us.

Hezbollah could have agreed to disarm and asked for political concessions in return. It could have reinvented itself as the most influential political party in Lebanon. But it was incapable of doing so.

Its DNA is that of a militia serving Iran; everything else exists, but remains secondary at the most critical moments.

Lebanese authorities also missed a historic opportunity. They did much more than in the past, but far less than the situation required. A tougher policy might have created serious internal tensions and clashes between the militia and the army. But that seems to me far preferable to what we are likely to experience in the coming weeks.

The army is beginning to wake up, but I fear it may already be too late. A race against the clock is underway between the Lebanese state and Israel. The longer the former hesitates in its disarmament policy toward the party, the further the latter will go.

The Israeli army has not managed to disarm Hamas for several months. Do you think it will be able to disarm Hezbollah, which appears to be much stronger?

We'll start with a question from Gabriel:

"Hello Mr. Samrani,

The Israeli army has not managed to disarm Hamas for several months. Do you think it will be able to disarm Hezbollah, which appears to be much stronger?"

Anthony Samrani: Hello Gabriel, thank you for your question.

I will try to answer your question and all others', but first, I want to be completely honest: events are unfolding very quickly, and we are all overwhelmed, so my answers may be partial or imperfect.

Hezbollah’s suicidal entry into the war allows Israel to carry out its plan of putting an end to the militia. At least that has been its official rhetoric for the past 48 hours. Is it capable of doing so? Several factors must be taken into account.

Hezbollah is indeed very weakened, as shown by the very short-range attacks it has been carrying out against Israel since Monday.

The party would be even further weakened in the event of a collapse or fall of the Iranian regime. The evolution of the war in Lebanon is therefore intrinsically linked to what is unfolding in Iran, even though two different dynamics are at work.

Israel can strike Lebanon massively, destroy Hezbollah’s infrastructure and invade the south of the country. But will it go further? Will it apply the “Dahieh doctrine,” carpetbombing and destroying entire neighborhoods where civilian populations live? Can it replicate in Lebanon what it has done in Gaza? I do not believe so, but it is still early.

Will it also try to dismantle Hezbollah on the ground as it did with the Palestinian Liberation Organization in 1982?

That too seems rather unlikely to me — but so did, in my view, Hezbollah’s intervention in a war where it has everything to lose and nothing to gain.

Our co-editor-in-chief, Anthony Samrani, will be answering your questions here regarding Hezbollah's attacks, the Israeli escalation in Lebanon, and the ongoing regional developments with a focus on the U.S.-Israeli campaign in Iran.

You can ask send him questions, or even just a comment, at livechatolj@lorientlejour.com