Hezbollah vs Israel: back from the brink

Hundreds of drones and Katyusha rockets were fired from southern Lebanon on 11 Israeli military bases on Sunday in the strongest attack on the north in months. All were intercepted and no major casualties were reported.

Israel said the attack would have been much worse had it not launched a pre-emptive strike hours earlier, destroying “thousands” of Hezbollah rockets that had been “aimed toward northern Israel and some were aimed toward central Israel”. 

Hezbollah said three Lebanese fighters were killed in those attacks, which chief Hassan Nasrallah characterised as “aggression not pre-emptive action”.

No-one was surprised by Sunday’s exchange of fire. Since the deaths of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran and Hezbollah top commander Fuad Shukr in Beirut at the end of July, Israel has been bracing for retaliation, either directly from Iran or through its proxy Hezbollah.

The question is whether Iran's stated intention to punish Israel can now be considered satisfied or whether the northern front remains likely to be the catalyst for a regional war.

The Middle East may have backed off from the brink of a regional war – for now  (Tamara Qiblawi, CNN)

The cross-border fire on Sunday morning marked a significant escalation after nearly 11 months of hostilities between Hezbollah and Israel. But it appears to have dampened fears of a wider war, for now.

In Israel, authorities soon lifted security restrictions in the country’s northern-most territory, known as the upper Galilee. In Lebanon, Hezbollah said it had concluded attacks on Israel for the day. Nasrallah declared the group’s retaliation for Shukr’s killing “meticulously” completed.–

With both sides declaring victory, the region appears to once again have walked back from the brink of all-out war.

But while Hezbollah’s promised response appears to be largely out of the way, Israel must continue to wait for another threat to transpire: Iran’s vowed “revenge” for the killing of Hamas chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, which it blamed on Israel.

The low-intensity conflict at the Lebanon-Israel border is set to resume. Netanyahu said on Sunday that “what happened today is not the end”. Nasrallah meanwhile struck a similar tone, reinforcing a widely held view that the fighting on the border is a war of attrition, where each side aims to wear down the other.

Israel and Hezbollah say they don't want war – but they are both ready for it (Jon Donnison, BBC)

Israel’s military says it is ready to fight a war on two fronts: in Gaza and on its northern border with Lebanon.

But Hezbollah is a far more formidable force than Hamas. It’s estimated it has around 150,000 rockets, some capable of reaching targets across Israel. Its fighters, some of whom have fought in the war in Syria, are well trained and better equipped than those of Hamas.

Almost a year into the conflict in Gaza, some question whether there is appetite in Israel for another war.

Hundreds of thousands of Israeli army reservists have been called up to fight in Gaza, often serving several tours.

But many Israelis, especially those from the north, say Hezbollah needs to be dealt with.

Neither side seems prepared for realities of land warfare, but a small mistake may have deadly consequences (Julian Borger, Guardian)

Just because neither Israel nor Hezbollah wants all-out war now, does not mean it is not going to happen. Both sides are using very crude tools – high explosives mainly – to send each other messages, and the room for miscalculation is always high.

The IDF was reportedly on the brink of going to war in Lebanon immediately after October 7, on the strength of faulty intelligence suggesting that Hezbollah was involved in the attack and its fighters were about to pour over the northern border.

The potential for unintended consequences was also high on Sunday. If the IDF account of events was accurate, its warplanes blew up dozens of launch sites and thwarted planned Hezbollah strikes against strategic targets in central Israel. If one of those strikes had caused substantial casualties, the political pressure on the Netanyahu government to clear Hezbollah out of southern Lebanon could easily have become irresistible.

The room for error is likely to be greatest when each of the parties try to guess the other’s internal political dynamics. For example, when Israel killed the Hezbollah commander, Fuad Shukr, in an airstrike on south Beirut last month, there was no way of knowing how many rockets or missiles Hezbollah would deem sufficient to avenge him, or where they should be aimed. If Netanyahu extends the bombing campaign, he runs the risk of triggering Iranian involvement in support of its proxy.

Similarly, while driving more than 80,000 Israelis from their homes with its cross-border bombardment, Hezbollah could not possibly gauge the political pressure it would put on the Netanyahu coalition to take over southern Lebanon so that the displaced residents could return.

Israel's pre-emptive strike Lebanon leaves it sinking in the same strategic mud (Noa Landau, Haaretz)

The prevention of the planned attack on targets in central Israel was ultimately an impressive but limited tactical military achievement for Israel. To pull itself from the wider, strategic, regional mud, Israel will still need the help of a comprehensive diplomatic deal: one that will return the Israeli hostages and end the war in the Gaza Strip.

That is why it is important that the Israeli delegation, led by Mossad chief David Barnea, departed as planned for talks in Cairo. Despite Sunday morning's escalation, the negotiations still hold the main key to regional calm.

When it comes to regaining calm on the northern border, the talks on a ceasefire deal in Gaza are only the first step of the solution. After which, a diplomatic route will be required also vis-à-vis Hezbollah, whether it's acknowledged publicly or not.

As Haaretz commentator Zvi Barel has reported in recent weeks, even after a deal is reached in the Gaza Strip, Hezbollah does not intend to immediately disarm or retreat beyond the Litani River. In that case, Israel will still need to make a move, either practical or symbolic, to allow the return of its citizens to the threatened north. 

The pre-emptive strike may have averted a larger disaster (Yonah Jeremy Bob, Jerusalem Post)

Hezbollah may now be deciding how much more of a wave of attacks it can manage without exposing its capabilities to more hits by Israel.

It may also be trying to convince Iran to join the fight, which would make the situation even more dangerous.

But both Iran and Hezbollah know that the US could also still intervene on Israel's behalf.

Also, a Gaza ceasefire may still be possible if a larger war does not break out, possibly pitting Iran and Hezbollah against Hamas since they do not want to take larger losses. However, the Gaza terror group would like its more powerful allies to expand the war to help it get better terms from Jerusalem.

The future is highly uncertain, but round one has gone to Israel.