Israel concludes the war against Hezbollah, achieving clear tactical military success, yet there is no guarantee these will translate into a sustainable and long-term victory. Following the Second Lebanon War (2006), the “achievement” embodied in UN Resolution 1701, which was supposed to ensure Hezbollah's presence only north of the Litani River, quickly eroded, turning the resolution into a dead letter. Are we facing a rerun of history?
Israel’s goal in the war was to restore security to its northern residents and push Hezbollah operatives north of the Litani River. The emerging agreement provides these achievements. Hezbollah’s tactical goal was singular: to continue wearing down Israel as it fights in Gaza. In this, Hezbollah failed and paid a steep price: Israel destroyed most of Hezbollah’s missile stockpiles, eliminated much of its leadership, dismantled strongholds near the border, and regularly bombed its bases in Beirut. Israel has unraveled Hezbollah’s military doctrine, and the apocalyptic scenarios of Tel Aviv skyscrapers collapsing did not materialize.
Although Israel’s endpoint in this war is stronger than after the Second Lebanon War, the results will ultimately be measured in the long term. Victory in war is not defined by the immediate results of battles but by the processes, narratives, and trends that emerge afterward. In this context, Islamist resistance groups (the muqawama) have a built-in advantage over open democracies in shaping compelling narratives. It is unlikely that Shiites will openly oppose Hezbollah’s narrative. Conversely, in Israel, there are already many voices, some substantive and others politically motivated, arguing that the emerging agreement means Israel has not won the war.
What trends does Israel wish to promote?
The ultimate achievement of the war would be accelerating trends that lead to the disarmament of Hezbollah, as stipulated by UN Resolution 1559 from 2004. However, this goal is likely too ambitious and beyond Israel’s decisive influence, as it depends mainly on internal Lebanese dynamics. Therefore, aside from the immediate achievements of returning northern residents to their homes and removing Hezbollah forces north of the Litani, what could constitute a "sustainable absolute Israeli victory" in the long term includes accelerating the following trends:
Effective Implementation of Resolution 1701:
Strengthened enforcement by the Lebanese army and international forces.
Establishing a long-term monitoring mechanism to prevent Hezbollah from rebuilding its military infrastructure.
Ensuring the area south of the Litani River remains free of Hezbollah forces.
Undermining Hezbollah’s Status as Lebanon’s Hegemon:
Political and social challenges by Hezbollah's opponents from other sects, and possibly even within the Shiite community itself.
Economic damage to Hezbollah's financial infrastructure, which funds its operations.
Stripping Hezbollah of its veto power in selecting Lebanon's president.
Deepening Regional Cooperation and Reducing Iran’s Influence in Lebanon:
Preventing Iranian dominance in Lebanon’s reconstruction process, with regional or Western leadership taking the reins instead.
Building Social and Economic Resilience in Northern Israel:
Rapid rehabilitation of northern communities and preparing them for the future.
Investments in education, infrastructure, and healthcare to demonstrate internal strength and encourage residents to return.
Providing economic incentives to strengthen civilian presence and national resilience in border regions.
Strengthening Israel’s Narrative on the International Stage:
Creating widespread global support for Israeli actions by emphasizing the right to self-defense and the harm Hezbollah inflicts not only on Israel but also on Lebanon and the broader Arab world.
Policy Options
Life is not a Hollywood movie, and the current war will not have a perfectly good and definitive ending. Defeat on the battlefield will not lead Hezbollah or Iran to abandon their vision or jihadist goals against Israel. Israel must already prepare for the next confrontation using diplomatic, political, and civilian tools to advance the processes and objectives outlined above. Among other measures, Israel should consider promoting:
An International 'Non-Agreement-Based' Enforcement Mechanism for Resolution 1701: This mechanism would involve American and Arab partners to oversee the resolution’s implementation, providing an external framework to complement UNIFIL’s weak enforcement.
'Leading from Behind' a Regional and International Coalition: Such a coalition would provide funding and civil reconstruction for Lebanon as an alternative to Iranian support. The reconstruction of Lebanon poses a major risk of restoring Hezbollah’s and Iran’s status in the country. A regional coalition would also facilitate expanded security, economic, and diplomatic cooperation with moderate Arab states.
Renewing Connections with 'Lebanese Proxies': Israel should support Lebanese actors from various sects who recognize an opportunity to weaken Hezbollah’s influence in Lebanon, which has undermined the country’s sovereignty and turned it into a failed state. While Israel’s involvement in Lebanon’s internal dynamics during the First Lebanon War led to complications, failing to act now may lead to further entanglement in a potential - fourth Lebanon War.
Updating the Spatial Defense Doctrine for Northern Communities: Border communities should be prepared to serve as the first line of defense against incursions. The spatial defense doctrine, a cornerstone of Israel’s early security strategy, historically contributed to national and community resilience by aligning the security responsibilities of border residents with their living and economic environment (we wrote more about this issue here).
Preventing Threats and Preemptive Actions: Hezbollah identified Israel’s aversion to the burdens of war and its dependency on calm as indications of societal weakness. This perception enabled Hezbollah to establish a massive missile infrastructure in Lebanon. Israel’s security in the north hinges on its operational resolve to preempt and neutralize emerging threats.
The Moment of Truth for Iran’s Nuclear Program: With the removal of Iran’s “second-strike” threat—intended to deter Israel from attacking its nuclear facilities—Israel faces a critical juncture. This moment could enable a strike on Iran’s nuclear installations or, alternatively, position Israel from a place of strength to secure a more favorable nuclear agreement
Comentários