Military and strategic expert, Brigadier Elias Hanna, said that the Israeli strikes on Beirut’s southern suburb represented an unprecedented escalation since the ceasefire agreement, and aims to impose new rules of engagement legitimizing their frequent intervention and gives them the freedom to move without accountability.
Israel had launched 23 air strikes through coordinates and fighters targeting several sites in the suburb, after it had issued orders to evacuate buildings in the event, Haret Hreik and Burj Al -Barajneh, saying that Hezbollah is using it to manufacture coordinates, which led to a widespread displacement of the population.
Hanna explained – in an analysis of the military scene in Lebanon – that the current escalation is the fourth of its kind since the ceasefire agreement, but it is the most violent and most comprehensive in terms of targets, which indicates that Israel’s attempt to prevent Hezbollah from restoring its combat organization and its humanitarian and operational structure that it recently rebuilt.
He added that the strikes are a direct violation of the mechanisms stipulated in the armistice agreement and international resolution 1701, especially in terms of bypassing the five -year committee that is supposed to coordinate with the Lebanese army before any targeting, noting that Israel refused to allow an inspection visit to the threatened sites.
Brigadier Hanna considered that Israel is behaving as if the international agreement includes secret items that give it freedom of air, sea and land movement in Lebanon, considering that this trend appears through the concentration of attacks on areas that are a popular incubator for Hezbollah, in the suburb, the south and the Bekaa.
End the mission of UNIFIL
The strategic expert emphasized that this military approach intersects with leaks on Washington’s endeavor to end the UNIFIL mission in southern Lebanon, which may open the door to a field vacuum that Israel may use to impose a new intervention equation, in light of reports of its partial satisfaction with the performance of the Lebanese army.
He pointed out that the Israeli allegations regarding the targeting of the factories of marches are not certain, pointing out that the manufacture of marches does not require huge facilities and can be accomplished in small workshops, which means that the raids aim to strike the social and economic structure more than actual military targets.
He pointed out that Hezbollah has had experience in manufacturing misfortunes for years, citing the assassination of the head of the march unit in the party, Hassan Al -Lakis, in 2013, stressing that the attacks seek to paralyze the party’s capabilities before their development more than targeting ready -made structures.
He stressed that the raids in which highly destructive bombs were used to target underground sites, pointing to the use of miracle bombs such as “MK84” (MK84), “GBU” and “BL 109” (BLU109), which reflects the intention to destroy deep fortifications and explain the evacuation orders that preceded the strikes in areas such as Ain Qana.
Brigadier Hanna explained that these measures have already been used in Gaza, such as throwing warning bombs or ranging surfaces before the implementation of the strikes, while giving a brief deadline for the residents to leave, in what indicates a pre -preparation for targeting infrastructure that is believed to be of a military nature.
Hezbollah responded
Regarding the possibility of a response by Hezbollah, Brigadier Hanna considered that the worst scenario is what is always taken into account militarily, suggesting that any response would be localized in border areas such as Galilee, excluding in return, opening a comprehensive front for the party’s lack of preparedness for this type of confrontation.
He pointed out that Hezbollah is still actually committed to Resolution 1701 despite the implicit amendments that occurred to it, as it officially adopts a speech confirming the exclusive arms in the hands of the Lebanese army, which means that it is not in the purpose of slipping into an open war with Israel at this stage.
The military expert considered that Israel is seeking to devote an operational pattern that allows it to strike whoever wants an hour, under a weak or absent international cover, pointing out that the stalemate in the American position towards Lebanon allows Netanyahu a broader move on the northern front.
He explained that this American relaxation was manifested in the absence of political delegates from the Lebanese scene, which leaves the scene open to Israeli interference, in parallel with Netanyahu’s attempts to distract attention from its internal crises and stumble in the management of the war on Gaza.
Brigadier Hanna considered that the escalation in Lebanon may be a means of Netanyahu’s hand to escape from the Haridim crisis and the possibilities of his government’s collapse, noting that directing attention to the North Front finds Israeli internal support and does not face great reluctance within the security or political institution.
He believes that this escalation will not be the last, and that Israel wants to impose new facts that go beyond the existing agreements, and opens the way for repeated military interventions to legislate on the pretext of preventing the threat, even at the expense of Lebanese sovereignty.