Hezbollah’s plans, Israel’s threats – is either side ready for war? | News on the Israel-Palestine conflict

Beirut, Lebanon – Hezbollah is preparing for different scenarios as the conflict between it and Israel threatens to escalate into a larger one.

The idea that Israel might shift its military focus from the Gaza Strip to Lebanon has been fueled by statements from politicians such as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who said on Sunday that Israel was scaling back its operations in Rafah and would focus on Lebanon.

A serious military move by Israel against Lebanon would draw regional and possibly international actors into the matter.

Israel’s attacks have so far forced nearly 100,000 people to flee their homes in southern Lebanon and killed at least 435 people. About 349 of them have been named as members of Hezbollah.

Hezbollah appears to be sticking to its guns, keeping up with Israel’s rhetoric and intensifying its cross-border attacks – in which, according to Israel, 15 Israeli soldiers and 10 civilians have been killed so far.

The two sides have been carrying out attacks across the border since Israel launched its war on Gaza on October 7. According to the AFP news agency, 1,139 people were killed in a Hamas-led operation in Israel.

Ceasefire or bankruptcy

Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah has reiterated in speeches since October that his group will only stop its cross-border attacks on Israel if it agrees to a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip.

Even if Israel focuses most of its military attention on Lebanon, analysts expect Hezbollah to maintain its position.

“I don’t think Hezbollah will accept (negotiations) without a ceasefire (in Gaza),” said Amal Saad, author of two books on Hezbollah. “The war will continue.”

“Nasrallah has said they will continue fighting until Hamas is victorious, and if Hamas is weakened and undermined, Hezbollah will not stand idle,” she said.

“This is a strategic objective… Hezbollah will not leave Hamas alone.”

The idea of ​​a ceasefire appeared to have stalled as hardliners among Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s coalition partners demanded a “complete defeat of Hamas” before the war could end.

However, some Israeli politicians expressed doubts about the idea of ​​a complete defeat of Hamas, stressing that Hamas is an idea and ideas cannot be eradicated.

Military spokesman Daniel Hagari expressed such doubts on June 19, while National Security Council Chairman Tzachi Hanegbi said the same on Tuesday, less than a week later.

Whether due to tacit acceptance of the idea or other considerations, Israel is now talking about a phase of lower intensity. During this phase, Israel claims, its military will continue to target Hamas in the Gaza Strip while seeking a political alternative to the group in the enclave.

A lower-intensity war in Gaza would theoretically allow Israel to focus on Lebanon, but this would require the Israeli military to meet the challenge of a two-front war.

Radiate strength

Nasrallah, for his part, demonstrated the power and steadfastness of his group.

On June 19, he said his group had more than 100,000 fighters and that many leaders of regional armed groups had offered to provide more fighters to fight Israel. However, he rejected these offers, saying Hezbollah was already “overwhelmed” by cadres.

The day before his speech, Hezbollah released drone footage over the Israeli city of Haifa, implicitly threatening that the city could be a target.

Another recent Hezbollah video appears to show a number of targets in Israel and the Mediterranean.

“Hezbollah is demonstrating and simulating its options for expanding the war to Israel. This is making Israel realize that the consequences will be very costly,” said Imad Salamey, a political scientist at the Lebanese American University.

Nasrallah also threatened Cyprus, an island state that is a member of the European Union but not NATO, if it supported Israel in the war.

Cyprus responded that it would not cooperate militarily with Israel in any conflict.

“Since October 8, Cyprus has been a major base from which Israeli reservists fly in and then travel on to Israel,” Seth Krummrich, a former special forces officer who now works at risk management firm Global Guardian, told Al Jazeera.

Israel has used Cypriot territory for training exercises in the past.

With the threat, Nasrallah wanted to signal to the European Union that it should refrain from supporting Israel in any way that could burden its member states, said Salamey.

Emergency plans

As both sides escalate the situation and lay their cards on the table, Hezbollah will have some contingency plans.

“Hezbollah most likely has a strategy in place in the event of a limited, protracted war in southern Lebanon, and it has probably also prepared a strategy in the event of a large-scale war,” said Karim Emile Bitar, professor of international relations at Saint Joseph University in Beirut.

A limited war would be what Salamey called a “low-intensity, asymmetric war of attrition” in which “the enemy is bled dry through inexpensive, efficient and effective skirmishes” – essentially a continuation of the current conflict.

A full-scale war could lead to an intensification of attacks throughout Lebanon, including on infrastructure such as Beirut airport, as Israel did in 2006.

Some analysts believe a limited ground invasion of southern Lebanon is possible, but it would result in heavy losses on both sides.

Bitar believes Hezbollah probably does not want that option. “Hezbollah and the Iranian regime are aware that escalation would be extremely risky and devastating for Lebanon,” he said.

The increased threats and military actions run parallel to the diplomatic negotiations.

US special envoy Amos Hochstein recently visited Tel Aviv and Beirut, where he allegedly passed Hezbollah messages through Lebanese parliamentary speaker and Hezbollah ally Nabih Berri.

According to anonymous Western diplomats who spoke to Axios, Hochstein told Hezbollah that it would be a mistake to believe the U.S. could stop Israel from starting a major war.

At the same time, Hezbollah and Israel were sending messages through French diplomats, Bitar said, looking for “a face-saving way out or a face-saving strategy.”

If those negotiations could lead to “assurances to Israel that there are no Hezbollah allies within 6 to 10 kilometers (of the border) and that they have no intention of using the Radwan forces (Hezbollah’s elite troops) to attack Israel,” Hochstein’s efforts could bear fruit, Bitar said.

The parallel paths of diplomatic and military actions are interlinked.

Nevertheless, there is an often-expressed fear that a miscalculation could lead to an escalation, with neither side wanting to give their opponent the opportunity to declare a moral victory.

A war could possibly still be prevented if such a miscalculation did not occur or if Israel decided to continue advancing for domestic political reasons.

Hezbollah, for its part, insists on its demand for a ceasefire as the only precondition for stopping the fighting.

“We are in a situation where domestic political considerations are paramount on both sides,” Bitar said.

“Hezbollah is aware that most Lebanese, including a significant number of its own supporters, do not want a new war,” he added.

“Both parties are taking these factors into account. However, we are in a very unstable situation and any miscalculation by either side could lead to a new, full-blown (escalated) conflict in the region.”