How Iran war will shape the future of Hezbollah and Israeli expansionism
The US-Israeli war on Iran has led to a regional conflagration, with Lebanon becoming one of its hot spots.
Two days after the attack on Iran, Hezbollah launched rockets across the border towards Haifa. Israel swiftly responded with large-scale bombings, targeted assassination attempts and ground incursions.
This new round of fighting on the Lebanese front is unlikely to impact the war on Iran in a significant manner. But it will have serious consequences for the future of armed resistance in Lebanon and Israel’s expansionist plans, including the occupation of larger swathes of southern Lebanese territory.
Shortly after the outbreak of hostilities, the Lebanese government voted to outlaw Hezbollah’s military and security activities, instead of taking concrete measures to fend off Israeli aggression.
In effect, this was a political and legal coup against the right to resistance. The decision is the culmination of a series of government decrees issued since the November 2024 ceasefire, all aimed at rolling back the state sanctioning of armed resistance that had been in place since the mid-1990s.
Prior to its recent rocket attacks, Hezbollah had fully abided by the ceasefire agreement, while Israeli violations continued unabated. During the declared period of the cessation of hostilities, Israel’s attacks on Lebanon have killed close to 400 people and injured more than 1,100.
Israeli forces have also refused to withdraw from five military positions inside Lebanon, while conducting regular incursions to destroy property or abduct citizens.
Lebanese fuel to Israeli fire
The Lebanese government has added fuel to the fire by tightening the economic siege on the resistance community in southern Lebanon. Reconstruction efforts have been stalled under the pretext of disarming Hezbollah and cutting off financial flows from sympathetic states like Iran or parts of Iraq.
On the military front, Lebanon’s army was deployed in the south as part of efforts to assert state sovereignty. But its operations were restricted to seizing Hezbollah weapons in line with US and Israeli demands, rather than defending Lebanese sovereignty against Israeli threats.
During this period, President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam sought to apply diplomatic pressure to force Israeli compliance, with no results. Their bet on improving the army’s military capabilities has also reached a dead end.
Political forces aligned with the US-Israeli agenda are demanding that the army crack down with force on Hezbollah. This is a recipe for civil war
The much-touted Paris conference to support the army, initially scheduled for 5 March, was shelved after the outbreak of this war. The cancellation notwithstanding, previous aid packages suggest that any future funding of the army will likely be geared towards the salaries of soldiers and acting against non-state actors, rather than confronting foreign threats.
Amid the current war, the army finds itself at the crosshairs of competing demands.
On one hand, political forces aligned with the US-Israeli agenda are demanding that the army crack down with force on Hezbollah. This is a recipe for civil war. So far, the army’s chief commander, Rodolphe Haykal, has resisted this path.
On the other hand, the army’s reported withdrawal from several positions in the south once the fighting began, and its impotence in the face of Israeli attacks, have reinforced claims that it is too weak to protect the country’s sovereignty.
Interconnected fronts
If the army can’t be used as leverage against Hezbollah, the remaining card for its opponents is to drive a wedge between Hezbollah and its social base and its closest ally, the Amal Movement, by blaming Hezbollah rather than Israel for their plight.
The timing and circumstances of displacement might appear favourable for this strategy. The government estimates that over 517,000 people have been forced to flee in the last week alone - the second mass displacement in less than two years. It is winter, and the state’s ability to provide shelter and food is limited, while rent has skyrocketed.
The success of this strategy, however, depends in part on the military performance of Hezbollah in the short run, and the outcome of the war in the long run. Many displaced people might be frustrated or critical of Hezbollah’s decision to launch rockets, regardless of signs that Israel could be planning a large-scale invasion after calling in 100,000 reserve soldiers.
But the resistance community, including those who are displaced, are equally aware that the trigger is not the cause. They have vivid memories of decades of Israeli aggression, and lived experiences of the more recent and ongoing Israeli attacks. They are also fully aware of Israel’s longstanding settler-colonial ambitions south of the Litani River.
If the war leads to a renegotiation of ceasefire terms - ending Israeli violations and occupation, while leading to a safe return of Lebanese civilians and reconstruction - any criticism of Hezbollah’s tactics will evaporate, and the population’s trust in its ability to protect them will be restored after two years of doubt. A return to the status quo, or more Israeli gains, would have the opposite effect.
The likelihood of either scenario is not a strictly domestic affair. It will be impacted by the outcome of the regional war and Iran’s ability to withstand this latest US-Israeli onslaught.
The interconnectedness of the two fronts is a reminder that the current conflict in the Middle East is not a domestic or national affair, but a broader crisis that could shape the future of US imperialism and Zionist settler-colonialism for decades to come.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.
This article was sourced from Middle East Eye.
Read Full Article on Middle East Eye →