The Unfolding Crisis in Southern Lebanon

The conflict in Lebanon persists, marked by continuous military and security operations. Recent events include the targeted killing of a Hezbollah member, along with two Syrian workers, in the Marj Ayoun district. These actions occur against the backdrop of a perceived inaction by the five-member commission tasked with monitoring the ceasefire and enforcing UN Resolution 1701.

This apparent silence from the commission has fueled criticism, suggesting a tacit endorsement of Israeli activities. Lebanon’s demand for Israel to withdraw from occupied territories in the south has seemingly failed to garner international attention or prompt action from Washington, which leads the commission.

Adding to the diplomatic shuffle,General Jasper Jeffers concluded his term,bidding farewell to Lebanese officials and the UNIFIL command in Beirut. He introduced his successor, General michael Laheny, who now assumes leadership of the monitoring commission.

International Apathy and Lebanese Vulnerability

The perceived indifference of the monitoring commission towards Israeli actions is compounded by a growing sentiment within Western diplomatic circles. Ther’s a prevailing belief that the Lebanese state and its institutions are weakened, hindering their ability to exert full authority across the nation. This vulnerability stems from a combination of factors, including financial constraints, internal political instability, and the complexities of the country’s sectarian political system.

the Lebanese state and its institutions are in a position of weakness, which prevents them from fully extending their authority over all of lebanon.

Hezbollah: The Core of the Dispute

While the Lebanese army’s deployment south of the Litani river has been met with approval from US officials,the situation north of the river remains unresolved.President joseph Aoun’s assertion that the state should be the sole holder of arms is tempered by his acknowledgment of “Lebanese culture,” leaving the door open for certain groups to maintain their weapons.

However, Israel’s stance is far more rigid. According to an American source cited by Al-Janoubia, Israel’s presence in Lebanon will only cease upon the complete “dismantling” of Hezbollah. This dismantling, according to the source, could occur either through a direct order from Iran as part of a commitment to Washington, or through a comprehensive military campaign launched by Israel, targeting the Bekaa Valley, Beirut, and its suburbs.

Hezbollah, despite the crucial losses it has undergone at all levels – direction, security, army – still preserves a military and political nucleus capable of strengthening if the current situation continues. If Israel does not strike this nucleus, no one can reach and dismantle it.
american Source via Al-Janoubia

This hardline position, the source suggests, is driven by the belief that Hezbollah retains a military and political core capable of resurgence. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, determined to prevent Hezbollah from rebuilding its military capabilities, may authorize an escalation of the conflict, perhaps leading to a large-scale land invasion of Beirut and its southern suburbs, supported by air and sea operations.

As of today, tensions remain high, with both sides seemingly entrenched in their positions. The international community’s role in de-escalation is crucial, yet the current silence and perceived inaction raise serious concerns about the future stability of Lebanon and the wider region. According to the Council on Foreign Relations’ data, the last major conflict between Israel and Hezbollah in 2006 resulted in over 1,000 deaths and widespread destruction, highlighting the potential consequences of a full-scale war.

Weapons of Hezbollah and Israel