The recent cease-fire in Lebanon only serves as a stopgap to cover the impending likelihood of a more overwhelming conflict within the region. Israel and the Iranian-supported radical group Hezbollah, situated in Lebanon, have reluctantly agreed to halt military actions. This resolution, albeit temporary, is held up as an achievement by President Joe Biden’s administration, whose policies in the Middle East have been a series of unmitigated disasters, particularly within this year riddled with calamity.
Following an attack on Israel by Hamas on October 7, 2023, circular debates and ineffective strategizing were the chosen methods of the Biden administration to mediate the Middle East crisis. Against their frantic hopes, the conflict spilled over into Lebanon with exchanges of fire escalating to involve even Israel and Iran. Meanwhile, the U.S. offered a free hand for Israel to act upon in Gaza which continued for months resulting in a costly war affecting not only Hamas but innocent civilians in Gaza.
In the ongoing chaos, Israel’s onslaught claimed the lives of over 44,000 Palestinians, primarily civilians, while forcing nearly 2.2 million inhabitants out of their homes. Reports estimate that approximately 66 percent of the region’s infrastructure has been damaged beyond repair or completely obliterated. Interestingly, Israel continued to dictate the extent and method of the conflict, not just to adversaries but even to Washington, exacerbating tension to the cusp of a total war with Iran.
In this mess of a situation, the U.S. stepped in to arrange a cease-fire, intriguingly not in Gaza, but between Lebanon and northern Israel. Should it last, Biden might flaunt this as enough justification that his administration halted a possible regional war involving the U.S. and others from taking place.
The agreement stands on wobbly legs, stemming mainly from the collective interests of the entities involved. The cease-fire is most crucial for Hezbollah, which is in dire need of time to recover and regroup. Israeli forces have managed to eliminate most of Hezbollah’s political leaders and ground commanders, including Hassan Nasrallah, while depleting the group’s armory almost completely.
The resultant impact on the organization’s command-and-control structure is drastic, with a significant number of the group’s top fighters either being killed or severely injured. Moreover, Iran, facing a similar situation, might seize this pause to reassess its national security strategy, especially given that Hezbollah, initially Iran’s primary defense mechanism, proved less effective against or in combat with Israel.
The Lebanese armed group either couldn’t or didn’t launch a substantial counterattack on Israeli cities like Haifa or strategic targets such as the Dimona nuclear reactor. This cease-fire is as vital for Israel as it is for Hezbollah, given its depleted ammunition and overstretched military amidst heightening insurgency in Gaza.
Israel, running out of resources and manpower, sees little benefit in prolonging the conflict with Lebanon. Lingering could potentially rejuvenate Hezbollah, mirroring the Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon from 1982 to 2000 that led to the inception of the organization initially.
Both sides saw a viable solution to scale down the conflict, leading to subsequent negotiations. However, the stark difference of this conflict to the war in Gaza is clear. There, both involved parties, the Israeli government and the remnants of Hamas’ leadership, believed that further combat would bolster their political stance.
On the contrary, both the Israeli public and military were keen on quelling the conflict with Hezbollah, particularly under beneficial terms. Given the massive blow to Hezbollah’s forces and capabilities, the group agreed to the conditions, which, at one point, would have been deemed as derogatory.
Reeling from the damage, Hezbollah will withdraw its personnel and heavy equipment from southern Lebanon to around the Litani River, almost 15 miles north of the Israeli border, in adherence to a United Nations resolution dating back to 2006. The displaced void will be filled by the Lebanese military with the assistance of U.N. peacekeepers to maintain order and keep a check on Hezbollah’s attempts to return.
As part of the agreement, Israel has agreed to a planned withdrawal from Lebanon. However, the provision allows Israel and Lebanon to exercise their ‘inherent right of self-defense’. Israeli authorities consider this to imply they can act against Hezbollah if the group is believed to be contravening the cease-fire terms.
This recent resolution shows the extent of Israel’s military edge and the crushing victory of this round of combat. Though the Biden administration attributes this to their efforts, the Middle East is still far from stable and no longer on the brink of explosion. It seems the Biden administration’s policy did a subpar job preventing the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, and yet they count the cease-fire as a triumph, regardless of the looming large-scale, multifront, regional war in the Middle East.