Israel’s Invasion of Southern Lebanon: How Bad Can It Get?
The rocket fire started on the night of September 30, with the land invasion beginning some hours later in the morning of Tuesday, October 1. While the fighting and subsequent invasion of Gaza has been a complex and ever-developing conflict occurring towards the south of Israel, the security forces of the small Middle Eastern country identified a growing threat towards the north in the form of the militant group Hezbollah.
Hezbollah is a Shia militant group and political party that, much like Hamas, is backed by the state of Iran. The political influence of Hezbollah is a factor that is highly important to keep in mind, as it means that it has a larger number of resources and is involved with states apart from Lebanon. After the start of the invasion, the Iranian Foreign Affairs office informed Al-Jazeera of their continued support towards the group while also maintaining contact with the surrounding nations in case further conflicts arose.
On the ground, the 146th division, along with select artillery brigades, have been sent to the northwest of Israel to carry out select missions dismantling infrastructure that could aid in further attacks onto bordering Israeli villages. Statements by Rear Admiral Daniel Hagari, the Israel Defense Forces’ (IDF) chief spokesman, reinforce the purpose of the missions to be ones geared towards dismantling tunnels and future attacks. The IDF could face a lot of advance issues if more divisions are sent into Lebanon as the terrain would work against them. Unlike in Gaza, which is plains, southern Lebanon is hilly and mountainous, creating many opportunities for ambushes to occur on tanks that would have to traverse slowly. The IDF has also ordered the Lebanese people who are located in some of the villages to evacuate north of the Awali River. This is following the claims that there will not be any physical presence anywhere north of the river. Apart from initiating land operations in Lebanon, the IDF has been conducting missile strikes as far north as southern Beirut, where they are targeting Hezbollah officials. These strikes have already destroyed various residential buildings, killing the residents.
This is reminiscent of the 2006 conflict between Israel and Lebanon, which resulted in both militant and civilian casualties on both sides. The previous conflict started when Hezbollah agents fired upon an IDF outpost and killed three IDF soldiers. The subsequent military action was in retaliation for their actions. While one cannot say explicitly that it is not right for there to be action in retaliation for militant action in the name of security, the current invasion is being done in the name of a possible future action. The dismantling of Hezbollah’s infrastructure that faces the Israeli border could be understood to be a security measure by the IDF. After the October 7 attacks from Hamas militants, the Israeli intelligence forces seem to be investigating every possible security weakness.
As was previously mentioned, the bordering Arab states have initiated talks on how to proceed in their diplomatic relations with Israel, as they fear an escalation of violence. Not only are the neighboring countries meeting to condemn the actions of violence taken, but they are preparing their populations for future action as a missile campaign commences between Lebanon and Israel. Currently, the IDF is fighting a two-border land war against Hamas and Hezbollah militants, but the missile campaign can force the country into a fight against six different opponents.
The UN General Council and the Security Council have both made statements against the conflict continuing in the area, but now Netanyahu has recalled the presence of peacekeepers in areas near IDF activity. This brings into question why he does not want international representatives present for his military actions, as they claim to target fellow combatants and infrastructure. Israel does have a history of preemptive military actions, as seen by the air strikes conducted against Egypt during the Six-Day War in 1967. Regardless, there have been changes in the security capabilities of all of the militaries that could become involved in combat, which includes the current combatants Israel, Hezbollah, and Hamas and future combatants like Iran. Iran’s nuclear capabilities should currently be disregarded as it is against their interest to threaten nuclear activity because they have been threatened by proxy through their alliances with Hezbollah and through missile action.
The final effects of this conflict are yet to be seen, as the extent to which any of the states or organizations involved will diverge into violence is yet unknown. For the international community, the focus is on the non-combatants who are needlessly being affected on either side.
Image courtesy of IDF Spokesperson’s Unit via Wikimedia Commons, ©2024. Some rights reserved.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the wider St. Andrews Foreign Affairs Review team.
