It’s hard to count the threats the Prime Minister, the Defense Minister, and the top military brass have made toward Hezbollah in the current war. Lately, even they have stopped. Those threats are too embarrassing when you examine the situation in the north. The impasse is real, and no senior official has a true solution. The IDF insists: we can defeat Hezbollah, we’re conserving ammunition and forces, there are plans. After one maneuver, I asked a senior officer: do you see Hassan Nasrallah pulling his forces back beyond the Litani River? “Who said Nasrallah will even be there at the end of the maneuver?” the officer replied. He added that, unlike Gaza, Lebanon is a country important to many nations worldwide, and Beirut is a vibrant city despite all difficulties. Those countries won’t want Lebanon to be completely destroyed in such a war.
Israel declared long ago that in the next war Lebanon would be a legitimate target for attacks on power stations, airports, and infrastructure. The country’s lights would be extinguished permanently. But regarding the ability to carry out the threat, healthy skepticism is warranted. Immediately after operations begin, a call from the U.S. President will arrive, and we all know our capacity to fight in Lebanon without a superpower’s backing.
The IDF Chief of Staff during the Second Lebanon War, Dan Halutz, complained in his memoirs that he was not allowed to attack Lebanese targets. The Prime Minister at the time, Ehud Olmert, takes responsibility for it even today. But it’s clear the Americans played a decisive role then, and if we try it now, they will intervene again.
Even if we destroy Lebanese infrastructure, will it push Hezbollah 40 km from the border? Highly doubtful. Would a ground maneuver achieve that, while the IDF has to hold Gaza and deploy extensively across areas? Unpleasant to admit, but it’s beyond us. In the minds of some fantasists, the IDF can fight all these fronts simultaneously for months. There’s enough ammunition, manpower, reservists. In reality, we’re far from that.
And we haven’t even begun to talk about what the Israeli home front would endure. The National Emergency Authority insists on a blackout scenario. The Electric Company is unprepared, claiming a sudden shutdown would paralyze the system, requiring time to restore it. Without electricity, cellular infrastructure would fail after two hours. The Communications Minister is busy harassing “leftist” media outlets and removing the Post Office chairman. Regarding truly critical issues, attention came far too late.
The conclusion from this analysis is that Israel has very few options. A hostage deal that brings a ceasefire in Gaza is essential, and it must be leveraged to achieve an arrangement in the north. In the best-case scenario, such an arrangement would include pushing Redwan force operatives several kilometers from the border, so residents don’t see them and any incursion attempts are delayed. Hezbollah’s positions that the IDF destroys will not be rebuilt. Israel may have to compromise on the precise border line with Lebanon.
Would residents in the north return home in such a scenario, when some are still within Hezbollah’s anti-tank range and fear penetrating tunnels? Probably not all. It’s not ideal, but it’s reality. For decades, residents in various parts of Israel lived exposed to threats of terrorist infiltration. The entire Israeli home front was exposed for decades, with no protection, to Syrian chemical missiles. It’s not encouraging that this has always been the case, but leadership’s role is to present the situation to the public as it truly is. Right now, this is the best the state can offer northern residents. It’s misleading to suggest some military magic could suddenly remove Hezbollah’s threat from our lives.