The Israeli army said on Tuesday morning that in recent days, the 36th Division forces had begun carrying out concentrated ground activity towards an additional target in southern Lebanon to expand the forward defense zone, alongside the 91st Division forces.
The military spokesman also said that the army began launching airstrikes and artillery bombardments prior to the ground forces' entry. This appears to be an attempt to prepare the Israelis for potential casualties during a ground confrontation with Hezbollah.
Officially, Israel claims that its limited ground campaign up to the Litani River and its open-ended war against Hezbollah aim to eliminate threats and defend the residents of the north, according to statements by Defense Minister Yisrael Katz and IDF Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir. However, there are official and unofficial Israeli sources, including Minister and Cabinet member Ze'ev Elkin, who acknowledge that the occupation of southern Lebanon and the construction of a new "security zone" will not stop the rocket fire toward the Galilee.
Speaking to the official Hebrew radio station this morning, Elkin said that the ground campaign launched yesterday aims to prevent ground attacks on the Galilee and to keep Hezbollah away from the border areas, but he admitted that the invasion campaign will not solve the problem of rocket fire.
Haaretz military analyst Amos Harel also asserts that occupying Lebanese territory will not stop the rocket fire toward northern Israel. Harel explains that despite Katz's statements, Hezbollah's presence south of the Litani River is limited, warning that an Israeli military deployment in the south would likely lead to a prolonged and ineffective conflict.
Unstated goals
Although the fate of the war on the Lebanese front is largely linked to the end of the war on Iran, there are undeclared Israeli ambitions behind this escalation, represented by a ground campaign, including putting pressure on the Beirut government and paving the way for possible negotiations under fire to impose more sanctions against Hezbollah, putting pressure on the Lebanese people and fueling internal conflict among its components by producing a major humanitarian crisis throughout Lebanon, and trying to push it towards an agreement that goes beyond security and enters the circle of normalization.
There are other considerations and calculations related to the Israeli interior, and to Netanyahu’s inflated ego, who is experiencing moments of intoxication with power, and seeks to invest them in strengthening his image as “Mr. Security” and in increasing the chances of his remaining in power and in history.
According to Israeli media sources since yesterday, Israel will complete the demolition of Lebanese border villages and plans to subsequently initiate negotiations with the Beirut government during these demolitions in order to pressure it to exert more pressure on Hezbollah and deter it. The official Hebrew channel reported that the occupation government has authorized the army to demolish Lebanese homes along the border with the Galilee, and quoted a Western diplomat as saying that the Lebanese government is serious this time but finds itself caught between conflicting pressures.
Four possibilities
For his part, former Israeli National Security Advisor, Reserve General Giora Eiland, believes that this time Israel must distinguish between Lebanon and Hezbollah, contrary to what he called for in the previous war with the party.
In an interview with the official Israeli radio station today, Eiland said that during the previous war, he had called for punishing the state of Lebanon, not just Hezbollah, as the entire country was the enemy after Iran gained control over it. Eiland explained his change of heart by saying that the situation has now changed; the Beirut government is genuinely working to contain Hezbollah, and therefore a distinction must be made between Lebanon and the party.
However, he calls for more pressure on Beirut: “We must put more pressure on the Lebanese government so that it, in turn, will exert more pressure to sever Lebanon’s ties with Tehran.”
In response to a question, Eiland argued that Israel had made a mistake in the past by keeping pro-resistance Shiite Lebanese towns within the historic security zone. He believes that the lesson from the past and from the experience of the war on Gaza now is to destroy the border area and displace its inhabitants to prevent the Radwan Force from attacking us and to eliminate the sources of rocket fire towards the north.
He continued: “We must build Israeli military bases in this Lebanese strip after its evacuation so that the direct threat to the residents of the Galilee ends, and this will create pressure on the Beirut government to take actual steps against Hezbollah.”
Regarding the idea of negotiations with Lebanon, Eiland believethere is no justification for rejecting them, calling for their acceptance and the presentation of our demands and conditions. When asked if the war would continue in this manner, Eiland replied, “There are four possible scenarios in this war. We must be careful not to become embroiled in the first two, although we can coexist with the third.”
He indicates that the first possibility is that the war will continue for months or years, a dangerous war of attrition. The second possibility is that Trump will declare victory and end the war without an agreement with Iran, which will then be able to rebuild itself despite its weakened state. The third possibility, according to the Israeli general, is that the war will end after a ceasefire agreement and its conditions are met after about two weeks. The fourth possibility is unrealistic: the collapse of the regime, which seems unlikely. The Iranians have not and will not take to the streets in response to an external call, it seems. And the Americans have not succeeded in building a strong, armed opposition capable of overthrowing the regime in Iran.
Tags:
asiawest
