Israel falls short of war objectives, while Hezbollah claims success

Even though the resistance movement suffered severe losses in the most recent round of fighting, Hezbollah has once again shown itself to be a challenge for Israel. After more than two months of full-scale fighting on the Lebanese-Israeli front, a ceasefire agreement has been reached, but it falls well short of what Israel had planned to accomplish when the war was just getting underway and the odds appeared to be in its favor. The Lebanese movement, for its part, has survived what was unquestionably the most intense and expertly planned attack in the history of war. The UN Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 1701, which ended Israel’s 2006 assault on Lebanon, is at the heart of the ceasefire agreement, notwithstanding its thirteen stipulations. When compared to its list of early demands, this alone indicates that Israel has failed. 

Overview of Israel’s war objectives

The implementation of UNSC Resolution 1559, which essentially calls for the disarmament of Hezbollah (the resolution’s actual wording calls for the disarmament of “militias,” an implicit reference to Hezbollah), was one of those early demands made by Tel Aviv during a UN session last month. However, the wording implemented eighteen years ago seems to be considerably different from the enforcement mechanism of 1701 based on the current agreement. The creation of an international committee to supervise its implementation and ensure that both parties fulfill their obligations under the terms of the new agreement is one of its clauses. Given that the UN peacekeeping troops in South Lebanon (UNIFIL) have been in charge of overseeing the implementation of this resolution since 2006 without the assistance of other foreign parties, this essentially translates into more improved oversight of the commitment of both parties to 1701. According to the current deal, the United States would lead an international committee, with France playing a significant role as well. Crucially, though, its mandate excludes real enforcement authority; the Lebanese army will continue to play a major role in that regard. When US President Joe Biden announced the ceasefire agreement had been achieved from the White House, he attempted to highlight this fact.  

Hezbollah’s strategic gains in the conflict

However, this still falls well short of Israel’s long-standing goal of having foreign soldiers stationed in Lebanon with the authority to use force to eradicate Hezbollah’s military presence in the south. Under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter, Israel has been trying in vain for years to give UNIFIL soldiers a more powerful enforcement function that would allow them to use force to carry out Resolution 1701. The US and other Western allies have likewise fallen short of this objective. The balance of deterrence with Israel would not necessarily change much even if the new agreement eliminated Hezbollah’s weapons position south of the Litani River. In Shehadeh’s words: It is evident that missiles were fired from the valleys in the Eastern, Central, and Western strips south of the Litani. It won’t lessen ‌resistance; it will only have an operational influence. I think these weapons will be moved from the south to the north of the Litani if the opposition is compelled to do so. It is also true that the establishment of the international committee would result in a deeper examination of Israeli breaches. For years, Israel has broken this resolution almost every day, primarily by illegally entering Lebanese airspace. Other Israeli goals, in the meantime, also seem to have fallen short. In a speech to the Lebanese people, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu specifically called for a domestic revolt against Hezbollah.

Hezbollah’s tactical successes and influence

Additionally, while officially announcing in September that this was a new target in its war objectives, Tel Aviv did not repatriate by force the tens of thousands of northern settlers who had been “displaced” by Hezbollah rocket fire. Most significantly, Israel has not been able to seriously impair Hezbollah’s ability to fight. Days before the truce, on Sunday, the Lebanese resistance conducted one of its most powerful and heavy missile assaults against Israel since the start of the most recent round of fighting. Hezbollah claims that in addition to the Ashdod naval facility, which is located even further south, several military installations in Tel Aviv were attacked. Israeli data and video footage also revealed previously unheard-of damage to cars and buildings in major northern and central towns, including Tel Aviv, Petah Tikva, Haifa, and Nahariya, which are the state’s most significant economic, industrial, financial, and technology hubs. 

Implications for regional power dynamics

Around four million people, or nearly half of Israel’s entire population, were compelled to seek shelter that day as air sirens went off in the suburbs of Tel Aviv, according to confirmation from the Israeli military and media. Simultaneously, Hezbollah troops in southern Lebanon were fiercely resisting Israeli ground forces, preventing them from penetrating far into Lebanese territory or capturing any substantial land.