Israel is witnessing a potential shift in its relationship with Lebanon, following Hezbollah’s military defeats and changes in regional dynamics. The Lebanese government is asserting more sovereignty, largely influenced by war fatigue, reduced Iranian support, and new Syrian leadership. Despite recent ceasefires and Israeli cooperation with Lebanese factions, Hezbollah’s military identity remains intact, posing ongoing challenges to stability.
Israel’s relationship with Lebanon appears to be undergoing significant changes, particularly following Hezbollah’s recent setbacks. Unit 8200, Israel’s elite intelligence unit, has intercepted communications from top Hezbollah leaders revealing their concerns about declining morale after military encounters with Israel. Orna Mizrahi, a researcher at the Institute for National Security Studies, notes that Lebanon is attempting to reclaim sovereignty, a positive sign after years of Hezbollah’s dominance.
Three primary factors contribute to this shift: First, war fatigue among Lebanese citizens, including many of Hezbollah’s Shiite supporters, has increased due to the destruction and displacement caused by ongoing conflicts. Second, Iran’s influence has waned following the loss of its key proxy in the region, weakening Hezbollah’s position. Lastly, regime change in Syria has disrupted Hezbollah’s access to critical resources, as the new Sunni leadership is opposed to Iranian-backed groups.
Mizrahi continues to highlight new developments, including the Lebanese government’s block on Iranian supply flights aimed at resupplying Hezbollah. Concurrently, the Syrian regime under Ahmad al-Shara has increased surveillance against arms smuggling to Hezbollah, limiting the group’s operational capacity. Following their military defeats, Hezbollah accepted a US-brokered ceasefire allowing Israel to retain strategic military positions along the border, facilitating the return of displaced citizens.
The election of General Joseph Aoun as the new Lebanese president, who has connections with the US, has further diminished Hezbollah’s influence in government. Aoun’s leadership has resulted in a loss of veto power for Hezbollah. This evolving political landscape has permitted Israeli intelligence to engage discreetly with a variety of Lebanese factions, notably the Christian Maronites, crucial for any shift in Lebanon’s political dynamics.
Historically, Israel has partnered with the Maronites to counteract Palestinian militant groups, a strategy that mirrors current engagements. Despite Hezbollah’s military defeats, its overarching vision remains unchanged. Dror Doron, an expert on Lebanon and Iran, emphasizes the group’s robust identity rooted in its military capabilities, suggesting that any moves toward disarmament would fundamentally alter its nature.
While Hezbollah may temporarily adjust its domestic strategies, potential threats to its interests could incite renewed conflict. Recent riots showcase the group’s capacity to mobilize and signal resistance to Israeli actions, underlining the fragile nature of the ceasefire. Israel, cognizant of these possibilities, maintains a military presence and aerial patrols over Lebanon, supported by US foreign policy that, albeit uncertain, endorses Israel’s strategy.
Current diplomatic discussions between the US and Lebanon regarding border agreements evoke concern that Hezbollah may react negatively, igniting political instability within Lebanon. Aoun’s government presently prioritizes addressing the nation’s economic crises rather than engaging in complex foreign policy negotiations. Mizrahi concludes that Hezbollah will likely maintain its posture of restraint, setting the stage for a tenuous but ongoing ceasefire with Israel in the near future.
In summary, Israel’s relationship with Lebanon is navigating through a transformative stage, influenced by Hezbollah’s diminished power and changing regional dynamics. While the ceasefire offers a temporary peace, the underlying factors, including Hezbollah’s identity linked to military resistance, point towards a continued cautious approach. Diplomatic negotiations may pose further complications, yet the overall intelligence assessment indicates a maintenance of the status quo, albeit with persistent challenges and potential for conflict.
Original Source: www.thejc.com
