'No longer a safe place': Lebanon fractures under Hezbollah's war

Now the already fractured country’s latest nightmare is on track to get much worse.

“There is no longer a safe place,” declared one journalist on MTV News Lebanon, using a phrase that echoed Palestinian descriptions of Gaza early in that war.

With evacuees from the south and Beirut’s Dahiya area flooding parks, the seaside corniche, and anywhere they could pitch a tent, the IDF deployed the Gaza analogy that same day, dropping leaflets over Beirut announcing: “In light of its success in Gaza, the new reality is coming to Lebanon.”

Israel then began expanding its targeting of Hezbollah leaders and infrastructure, as well as establishing more positions in southern Lebanon, while Hezbollah kept up daily barrages on Israel’s northern communities.

Meanwhile, the Hezbollah fire, though less devastating, was spreading fear and disruption, including a hit Monday that set a house in Nahariya on fire, lightly wounding 15 people, according to Magen David Adom.

The IDF, meanwhile, said its troops were conducting “limited and targeted” ground operations that appeared ready to morph into a major offensive to push back Hezbollah and significantly reduce its ability to strike across the border.

It’s classic asymmetrical warfare, but the Middle East’s most powerful army will need a decisive win to claim victory, while for Hezbollah, mere survival will be enough.

It would be a pyrrhic victory if Israel devastates Hezbollah while undermining its potential peace partners in Lebanon’s cabinet by rebuffing them and razing Lebanon.

“I think we’ll continue acting against Hezbollah, and we’ll threaten Lebanon. I want to hope the threat is a fading face because this government may not like us, but it hates Hezbollah and Iran more, and that’s a win.”

Eisin stressed the importance of concluding the operation swiftly. “Right now, the people of Lebanon still blame Hezbollah, but there is going to be a tipping point when we accidentally kill a lot of civilians,” she said, referencing artillery shelling during a 1996 operation in southern Lebanon that caused 106 fatalities among civilians sheltering at a UN compound. A UN commission said it was a deliberate strike, while Israel disputed that finding.

“When that happens, we lose all the capability to say we’re acting against Hezbollah and the Lebanese government will lose its credibility,” Eisin said.

For now, that does not seem to be an Israeli concern. During the first week of fighting, the Khardali bridge across the Litani River in the south was destroyed by the IAF. The act not only prevented Hezbollah from using the crossing but also served as a warning to the Lebanese government.

Along with the air strikes and rocket fire, a battle over narrative has already begun, with Hezbollah trying to convince its support base that it was right to open a new round with Israel and that their suffering is for a worthy cause. Even though it started the war, Hezbollah seeks to cast it as a defensive battle.

Thus, in line with its resistance ethos, Hezbollah named its war effort al-Aasf al-Ma’koul (eaten straw), which refers to a Quranic story of repelling an invading army with God’s intervention.

Traditionally, Hezbollah had drawn its legitimacy by asserting that its arms protected Lebanon from Israel. But after its defeat by Israel in the war that followed Hamas’s October 7, 2023, attack, the group emerged weakened and on the defensive. Its charismatic leader and the voice of the resistance, Hassan Nasrallah, had been assassinated.

But given that Hezbollah’s militia is clearly stronger, better trained, and more motivated than the Lebanese army, this commitment has not materialized on the ground despite the government saying – without basis– that the militia had been disarmed in the area south of the Litani River.

Still, when it attacked Israel in early March, Hezbollah found itself isolated as never before, with even fellow Shi’ite leader Nabih Berri, the speaker of parliament, criticizing its decision.

Much of the media also opened fire on Hezbollah. Anthony Samrani, co-editor-in-chief of Beirut’s L’Orient Today, flayed the terrorist group in a commentary on March 2.

“All we know is that the split between Hezbollah and the rest of Lebanon is now final… Hezbollah has decided to drag Lebanon into a new war, already forcing thousands of Lebanese to flee their homes.”

“This time, there must be no excuses for it, whatever the Israeli response may be. This time Lebanese authorities need to treat the militia for what it is: a growth of the Islamic Republic that must be done away with, before it ends up wiping out what is left of Lebanon.”

Additionally, the Lebanese cabinet announced an immediate ban on all Hezbollah security and military activities, an unprecedented step. It stressed that Hezbollah was required to relinquish its weapons. And it ordered the army to begin implementation of plans to confiscate Hezbollah weapons north of the Litani River.

President Joseph Aoun then proposed an initiative for talks with Israel, according to Lebanese media, which called for a one-month ceasefire during which negotiators would confer on how to advance the disarmament.

But to many Israeli ears, including key decision makers, the declarations lacked credibility. Only the IDF could be trusted to do the job, they reasoned. Perhaps Israel would be willing to negotiate with Lebanon, but it would be while the IDF proceeded militarily, Israeli officials said, according to Israeli media reports.

Moreover, Israel seems to have backing from Washington for a broader military push. Late last year, Tom Barrack, the US ambassador to Turkey who was also responsible for Lebanon, said Washington would support Israel if it “becomes more aggressive towards Lebanon,” according to the London-based Arab Weekly website. He termed Lebanon a “failed state” with a “paralyzed government.”

Jacques Neriah, a Lebanese-born and raised former foreign policy advisor to assassinated prime minister Yitzhak Rabin, dismissed Lebanese government statements.

“What they say is worth nothing as long as they don’t take steps 1,2,3 against Hezbollah. There is a need for a ground operation to clean out Hezbollah to the Litani at least,” he told the Report.

But then Israel should withdraw, he added: “There is no need to stay sitting in Lebanon.”

“We want a Lebanese government that will sign a non-aggression or peace agreement that will bring an end to the hostility,” said Neriah, now a special analyst for the Middle East at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. “In the way of that is a big obstacle: Hezbollah. This is an obstacle that the Lebanese government is not capable of dealing with and doesn’t want to deal with. We are the only ones who can deal with it.”

“If we do not dramatically weaken Hezbollah so that it has only a remnant of its power and can remain [only] as a political movement, we will not be able to free the Lebanese government from the suffocating hug of Hezbollah. Therefore, we won’t be able to reach any settlement with the Lebanese government.” Neriah said.