Shafaq News
As tensions escalate along the southern border and political
divisions deepen internally, Lebanon finds itself entrenched in a broader
regional struggle pitting the so-called “Islamic Resistance” (Hezbollah’s
military wing) against the US–Israeli axis.
This dynamic is further complicated by mounting
international—particularly American—pressures aimed at disarming Hezbollah and
reconfiguring Lebanon’s internal power balances.
Many analysts and observers now agree that Lebanon has
effectively become a central battleground in a protracted regional conflict
defined by a lack of resolution and sustained attrition. In this volatile
landscape, domestic instability increasingly mirrors shifting geopolitical alignments.
Israeli Strikes and Eroding Sovereignty
Walid Hodroj, Director of the Beirut International Center
for Studies and Training, characterizes the repeated Israeli strikes on
southern Lebanon as “not mere military escalations, but acts of aggression
targeting national sovereignty and directly impacting domestic security.”
In an interview with Shafaq News, Hodroj emphasizes that
Lebanon’s internal stability now hinges on external military actions and
geopolitical pressures, set against the backdrop of a deepening economic crisis
that began before 2019 and has since been exacerbated by regional tensions.
On the contentious issue of Hezbollah’s armament, Hodroj
explains that Lebanon’s political division is profound, though not necessarily
reflected in popular consensus.
“The executive branch leans toward consolidating arms within
legitimate state institutions, while Parliament seeks to avoid internal
confrontation in order to preserve institutional stability,” he declares,
stressing that Iran’s backing of Hezbollah is not a recent development, but
rather a “natural extension of a relationship that began decades ago and
intensified following the Iranian Revolution.” This support, he adds, proved
decisive during key junctures, notably the Israeli withdrawal from southern
Lebanon in 2000 and the 2006 conflict.
Rejecting claims that Hezbollah’s weaponry is a trigger for
war, Hodroj argues, “So long as occupation persists, resistance arms remain
legitimate under international norms and conventions. The aggression originates
from Israel, not the resistance.”
Attritional Strategy
Lebanese political analyst Ghaleb Sarhan views the current
Israeli military posture as part of a broader historical continuum. “This
escalation is not new,” he remarks to Shafaq News. “It’s an extension of
Israeli policy since the occupation of Palestine in 1948.”
According to Sarhan, today’s hostilities along the border
are unilateral. “While the resistance adheres to UN Resolution 1701, Israel
violates it daily,” he affirms.
Sarhan argues that Israel lacks the capacity to wage a
full-scale war at present, constrained by its ongoing operations in Gaza and
various domestic and regional challenges. “Instead, it pursues a war of
attrition aimed at exhausting the resistance and intensifying pressure on the
Lebanese state.” The goal, he noted, is to “impose a new status quo through
calibrated violations without tipping into full-scale conflict.”
“The Resistance Will
Remain”
From Tehran, political analyst and writer Ali Akbar
Barzanouni echoed similar concerns, describing Israel’s actions in southern
Lebanon as “a continuation of the Zionist entity’s aggressive policies and its
failure to adhere to the ceasefire signed with Lebanon on November 27, 2024.”
That agreement reaffirmed Resolution 1701 and called for
mutual cessation of hostilities, Hezbollah’s disarmament south of the Litani
River, and Israeli withdrawal from remaining occupied Lebanese territory.
However, Lebanese authorities have since documented over 4,200 Israeli
violations, resulting in more than 230 Lebanese fatalities and daily airstrikes
on targets in southern Lebanon, aligned with drone assassinations targeting
alleged Hezbollah operatives have also intensified.
Barzanouni points out that Hezbollah is “the main obstacle
to Israel’s ambitions in southern Lebanon,” dismissing the feasibility of
disarmament without a comprehensive settlement. “Any discussion of disarmament
is unrealistic in the absence of a full political resolution.”
He further accuses the United States of acting solely in
Israel’s interest. “Washington is not facilitating dialogue—it is dismantling
the axis opposed to its own and Israel’s interests,” Barzanouni tells Shafaq
News, adding that Tehran “will not permit interference with Hezbollah’s arms,”
which he describes as “the first line of defense against occupation.”
Strategic Conflict with Regional Stakes
Mehdi Azizi, Director of the New Vision Center for Studies
and Media, emphasizes that developments in southern Lebanon are part of a
broader strategic conflict. “This is not a localized border skirmish; it is a
key front in the confrontation between the Islamic Resistance and a US–Israeli
agenda to redraw the region’s geopolitical map,” he tells Shafaq News.
Azizi links the situation in Lebanon to regional efforts
targeting allied resistance groups in Syria and Iraq. “Iran sees this as a
coordinated regional offensive aimed at dismantling the remaining pillars of
the Resistance Axis,” he explains, noting that any attack on Hezbollah
constitutes a direct blow to Iran’s regional defense strategy.
Commenting on growing calls for Hezbollah’s disarmament,
Azizi asserts, “This is not merely a Lebanese issue—these arms are a strategic
extension of Iran’s deterrence architecture,” noting that Iran has adopted a
diplomatic approach to counter this pressure, as evidenced by the recent visit
of Iranian National Security Council head Ali Larijani to Beirut.
Despite mounting tensions, Azizi believes a full-scale war
remains unlikely in the current phase. “Israel is not in a position to launch a
wide-ranging military campaign,” he comments, confirming that if the conflict
escalates, “Iran’s involvement is expected to remain limited to political and
logistical support rather than direct military engagement.”
A Prolonged and Complex Struggle
Dr. Haitham Hadi, Professor of Political Science at the
University of Exeter, contextualizes Lebanon’s crisis within a broader
geopolitical transition. “The Middle East is entering a new phase of instability
as major powers, particularly the United States, recalibrate their global
priorities,” he states to Shafaq News.
According to Hadi, Washington’s strategic focus is shifting
from Ukraine toward more volatile regions like Iran, Palestine, and Iraq—zones
he described as “potential flashpoints due to their geopolitical significance.”
Hadi argues that the regional conflict is unlikely to reach
a definitive conclusion. “Neither Iran can impose full regional dominance, nor
can Israel achieve decisive control,” he maintains.
Instead, he sees an evolving dynamic of reciprocal pressure:
“The US backs Israel, while Iran relies on precision missiles, drones, and its
regional networks.”
According to him, Lebanon and Iraq have emerged as “corearenas” in this indirect conflict, concluding that both are set to be drawn
deeper into what is effectively a long-term war of attrition, “driven by
unconventional means and likely to draw in international actors—though often
behind the scenes.”
Written and edited by Shafaq News staff.
