top of page
Search

On the Brink: Could Israel Ignite a New War with Lebanon?

Writer's picture: Omar ibrahimOmar ibrahim

In the volatile and ever-changing landscape of the Middle East, the question of whether Israel might invade Lebanon looms large. With tensions along the Israel-Lebanon border simmering, the specter of conflict between these two nations has once again captured global attention. The rise of Hezbollah, backed by Iran, and its growing military capabilities have added fuel to the fire, raising fears of a renewed confrontation. As regional alliances shift and the geopolitical chessboard becomes increasingly complex, the possibility of an Israeli invasion is no longer a distant threat but a potential reality. What would drive Israel to take such drastic action? And what would the consequences be for Lebanon, the region, and the world? These pressing questions demand our attention as we explore the fragile balance of power in this deeply contested area.


Let’s analyze each of the critical factors that could drive Israel toward a full-scale invasion of Lebanon in detail. From Hezbollah’s expanding military capabilities to Israel’s internal political dynamics and the broader regional context, these elements together create a complex and potentially explosive situation. Once we have explored these factors, we will forecast what might unfold in this tense and uncertain environment.


A Geopolitical Chessboard: Israel (Black) vs. the Axis of Resistance (White)

Imagine the Middle East as a chessboard where Israel, represented by the black forces, makes a bold move by entirely invading southern Lebanon. The Axis of Resistance, comprising Hezbollah, Hamas, Iran, and their regional allies, counters the white forces, carefully plotting their response to this aggressive maneuver.





Black Move 1: The High Cost of an Israeli Invasion of Lebanon:


First: the missiles and drones arsenal:

An Israeli invasion of Lebanon would be exceedingly costly due to Hezbollah's formidable missile and drone capabilities. Hezbollah is estimated to possess between 100,000 to 150,000 rockets and missiles, including long-range missiles like the Fajr-5, Zelzal-2, and M-600, capable of striking every major city in Israel, including Tel Aviv and Haifa. This missile arsenal could overwhelm Israel's missile defense systems, inflicting significant damage on civilian and military infrastructure. Additionally, Hezbollah's drone capabilities, bolstered by Iranian support, include advanced UAVs like the Shahed-129 and kamikaze drones that could be used to target critical Israeli assets.


Second: the Sophisticated Tunnel System:

Hezbollah's sophisticated tunnel network in southern Lebanon poses a significant obstacle to the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) by neutralizing much of Israel's air superiority and complicating ground operations. These tunnels are fortified, concealed deep underground, and often integrated into civilian areas, making them difficult to detect and destroy from the air. They allow Hezbollah to move fighters and weapons undetected, launch surprise attacks, and sustain resistance even during heavy bombardment. Forcing the IDF into complex urban warfare, these tunnels could lead to a protracted and costly conflict, with high casualties and limited strategic gains for Israel.​


Third: Domestic politics:

An Israeli invasion of Lebanon would likely lead to significant domestic political consequences within Israel, exacerbating political polarization, straining public support, and challenging government stability. The initial support for military action could quickly wane if the conflict becomes protracted and casualties rise, leading to public discontent and potential protests. This could put immense pressure on the ruling government, possibly resulting in political instability, early elections, or shifts in power dynamics within the Israeli political landscape. The long-term impact could see changes in voter preferences and political alignments, depending on the perceived success or failure of the invasion.


Fourth: The Economic Costs:

An Israeli invasion of Lebanon would likely result in severe economic repercussions for Israel, including significant costs associated with military operations and potential damage to critical infrastructure. The conflict could disrupt key sectors like tourism and technology, deter foreign investment, and impose long-term financial burdens on the Israeli economy. Additionally, sources from the Axis of Resistance emphasize that Hezbollah's robust missile arsenal and sophisticated tunnel networks would lead to a protracted conflict, increasing the costs and complicating Israel's ability to achieve its objectives. This could also trigger broader regional instability, potentially drawing in other members of the Axis of Resistance and escalating into a wider conflict with severe economic consequences for both Israel and the region.


White Move 2: If Israel Invades Lebanon, the Axis of Resistance Could Open Multiple Fronts



If Israel were to make the strategic move of fully invading southern Lebanon, it would likely trigger a calculated response from the Axis of Resistance, whose best counter-move would be to open multiple fronts against Israel. This would severely stretch Israel's military capabilities as it deals with Hezbollah's entrenched defenses in Lebanon, including a vast arsenal of rockets and a sophisticated tunnel network. At the same time, Israel would have to contend with ongoing rocket fire and incursions from Hamas in Gaza, potential Iranian support to its proxies, and missile threats from the Houthis in Yemen. Additionally, managing internal unrest in the West Bank would further strain Israel's resources and could lead to domestic instability. This multi-front approach would push Israel's military and strategic capabilities to their limits, making it challenging to achieve its objectives without facing severe consequences.


Two Case Scenarios: U.S. Intervention in Response to Israeli Conflict:


Black Move 3 A: Israel Manages to Defend Itself Against the Multiple Front Scenario(white move 2):


If Israel were to invade southern Lebanon and the Axis of Resistance responded by opening multiple fronts, the United States would likely take a comprehensive approach to support Israel and maintain regional stability.

  • The U.S. could provide direct military assistance by deploying advanced weaponry, additional missile defense systems like THAAD and Iron Dome, and naval and air assets to the Eastern Mediterranean to deter further escalation.

  • Enhanced intelligence sharing and cyber operations would help Israel target and neutralize threats effectively while disrupting the Axis of Resistance’s communications and operational capabilities.

  • Diplomatically, the U.S. would exert pressure on regional actors, such as Lebanon, Syria, and Iran, to de-escalate the situation, potentially through UN resolutions and tightened economic sanctions on Iran and its allies. The U.S. might also offer military and economic support to regional allies like Jordan and Egypt to ensure they remain stable and not drawn into the conflict.

  • Additionally, to prevent the conflict from spreading beyond Israel and Lebanon, the U.S. could engage in backchannel diplomacy with Iran to establish red lines and avoid a broader war.

  • Domestically, the U.S. administration would likely seek to secure public and Congressional support for its actions, presenting the conflict as a critical front in the fight against terrorism and defense of a key ally.

Ultimately, the U.S. would aim to ensure that Israel can manage the conflict without being overwhelmed while working to prevent the situation from spiraling into a broader regional war.


Black Move 3 B: Existential Threat Scenario:

If Israel were to face a serious existential threat, the United States would likely respond with decisive and comprehensive support to ensure Israel's survival.

  • This could include direct military intervention, with the deployment of U.S. forces, air, and naval assets to the region to assist Israel in repelling the threat. The U.S. might also extend its nuclear deterrence to protect Israel, signaling that any attack threatening Israel’s existence could trigger a nuclear response.

  • In addition to military actions, the U.S. would provide strategic and tactical support, including enhanced intelligence sharing, logistics, and cyber operations to disrupt enemy communications and operations. Diplomatically, the U.S. would rally its allies and partners to isolate the aggressor, impose severe international sanctions, and potentially lead a coalition to exert maximum pressure on those threatening Israel. Domestically, the U.S. administration would seek public and Congressional support for these actions, framing the conflict as vital to U.S. national security and the defense of a key ally.

This comprehensive response reflects the deep strategic ties between the U.S. and Israel, demonstrating the U.S.’s commitment to ensuring Israel’s security in the face of any existential threat.


Russia and China's Potential Involvement in the Middle East: Responses to Israeli Conflict Scenarios (white moves)




Option One: Israel manages to defend itself: white move 4 A:

In this scenario, where Israel invades southern Lebanon and faces a multi-front conflict from the Axis of Resistance, Russia and China are likely to be cautious in their involvement. Both nations would likely avoid direct military intervention, as their strategic interests lie in maintaining regional stability and avoiding confrontation with the United States.

Russia’s Role:

  • Diplomatic Support: Russia might offer diplomatic support to Syria and Iran, advocating for de-escalation while condemning U.S. and Israeli actions in international forums. Moscow could also provide intelligence and logistical support to its allies, but it would likely avoid direct military engagement to prevent escalating tensions with the U.S.

  • Arms Supply: Russia could increase arms sales to Syria, Iran, and potentially Hezbollah, supplying advanced defensive weapons to bolster their capabilities without direct involvement.

China’s Role:

  • Economic and Diplomatic Influence: China would likely use its economic and diplomatic influence to call for restraint and a negotiated settlement. Beijing would avoid military involvement, prioritizing the stability of its investments in the region and its broader geopolitical interests.

  • UN Diplomacy: China might work through the United Nations to push for ceasefires and peace talks to prevent a broader conflict that could disrupt global markets and trade routes.


Option Two: white move 4 B: Existential Threat Scenario

If Israel faces an existential threat, the likelihood of Russia and China becoming more actively involved increases, though direct military intervention remains unlikely.

Russia’s Role:

  • Strategic Balancing: Russia might intensify its support for Iran and Syria, providing advanced weaponry and intelligence to counterbalance U.S. intervention. However, Moscow would carefully calibrate its involvement to avoid a confrontation with the U.S.

  • Regional Power Broker: Russia could position itself as a key power broker, attempting to mediate between the U.S. and Iran, leveraging its influence in the region to prevent a full-scale war.

China’s Role:

  • Economic Leverage: China would likely use its economic leverage to protect its regional interests, possibly offering to mediate or provide economic incentives for de-escalation. Beijing would be concerned about the impact of a broader conflict on global markets, particularly energy supplies.

  • Strategic Partnerships: While avoiding direct military involvement, China might deepen its strategic partnerships with Iran and other regional players, offering technological and economic support in exchange for regional influence and stability.

In both scenarios, Russia and China would seek to protect their strategic interests through diplomatic and economic means, avoiding direct military conflict with the United States while supporting their regional allies. Their involvement would focus on maintaining stability and preventing a wider war that could threaten their broader geopolitical goals.


Final Thoughts:

If Israel were to invade southern Lebanon, leading to a multi-front conflict with the Axis of Resistance, the Middle East would face significant military, political, economic, and social consequences.

  • Militarily, the region would likely see widespread conflict, with Israel's forces stretched thin across multiple fronts, including Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, and potential threats from Iran and the Houthis. Politically, the conflict could realign regional alliances, with countries like Saudi Arabia and the UAE potentially deepening ties with Israel, while Iran strengthens its influence over its proxies.

  • Economically, the region would suffer from severe disruptions, including potential spikes in global oil prices and intensified sanctions on Iran, leading to further destabilization.

  • Socially, the conflict would exacerbate humanitarian crises, with large-scale displacement and civil unrest likely in several countries.

  • Long-term, the power balance in the Middle East could shift, with global implications as the U.S., Russia, and China navigate their involvement in the region. This scenario highlights the profound and lasting impact that such a conflict could have on the Middle East and beyond.




71 views0 comments

Comments


© 2023 by The Book Lover. Proudly created with Wix.com

  • Grey Facebook Icon
  • Grey Twitter Icon
  • Grey Google+ Icon
bottom of page