The Israeli assaults on Lebanese Hezbollah reached their peak with the aggressive strike on September 28 in the southern suburb of Beirut, where Hezbollah’s Secretary-General, Hassan Nasrallah, and several party leaders were assassinated. The significance of this operation stems from two main aspects, namely the nature of the target, which included Hezbollah’s top leadership and its historic figurehead, and the timing, which coincided with an overall Israeli inclination toward heightened escalation on the Lebanese front, including the possibility of a ground invasion in southern Lebanon.
The Southern Suburb Offensive: A Closer Look
The Israeli Air Force unleashed a wave of airstrikes on the southern suburb of Beirut, marking the fiercest escalation between Hezbollah and Israel since confrontations erupted on October 8, 2023. These strikes were notable not only for their intensity but also for their objective, which Israeli officials identified as the assassination of Hezbollah’s Secretary-General, Hassan Nasrallah. The gravity and peculiarity of Israel’s operations against Hezbollah on September 28, can be understood in light of the following key factors:
1. The Heaviest Raids on Beirut’s Southern Suburb: The Israeli air raids on Beirut’s southern suburb, which continue to this day, represent the most severe escalation between the two sides. These airstrikes have been the most violent since Israel initiated its attacks on the suburb. Notably, Israel broke from its previously established rules of engagement with Hezbollah when it first targeted the southern suburb of Beirut in January, assassinating Hamas deputy political bureau chief, Saleh al-Arouri. However, since early September, the frequency of strikes on the suburb—Hezbollah’s main stronghold in Lebanon—has intensified, culminating in the recent, most intense operation.
According to information released by both Israeli and Lebanese sources, including Hezbollah, the violent strikes targeted Hezbollah’s central headquarters near the Burj al-Barajneh Palestinian refugee camp. The area was hit by a series of successive raids, leveling the buildings at the heart of the suburb. The operation coincided with the presence of Hassan Nasrallah and several Hezbollah leaders in the area. Moreover, Israel created a fire belt between the airport road and Haret Hreik municipality, indicating an escalation marked by unprecedented violent bombing and intelligence breakthroughs. The key objectives were to destroy Hezbollah’s central headquarters, extend the assassination campaign to reach the party’s top leadership by killing Nasrallah, increase internal displacement from the suburb, and reinforce Israel’s “long arm” policy by demonstrating that no significant Hezbollah target is beyond its reach.
2. Israel’s Refusal of Ceasefire Proposals: A notable aspect of Israel’s escalation was its timing, aligning with a new initiative led by the United States and France and put forward during the UN General Assembly in New York. This initiative sought to prevent further conflict in Lebanon, establish a temporary truce, and restart ceasefire talks in Gaza. French Minister for Europe and Foreign Affairs Jean-Noel Barrot, speaking at a UN Security Council session on Lebanon, revealed that Paris and Washington were working on a 21-day ceasefire plan to create space for negotiations. He emphasized that the US-French proposal would be announced shortly, calling on both sides to agree to the ceasefire without delay. Barrot also cautioned that “Lebanon, which is already considerably weakened, would not recover from such a war.”
In effect, this Israeli escalation, coinciding with the US-French diplomatic efforts, carries several crucial implications. First, the extreme right in Israel, under Benjamin Netanyahu, is effectively signaling that it has no interest in any peace initiatives. Second, this action is part of a broader Israeli strategy to undermine any ceasefire efforts, as seen in past events, most notably the recent flare-up in the southern suburbs and the assassination of Ismail Haniyeh during high-level ceasefire negotiations spearheaded by the United States, Egypt, and Qatar concerning Gaza. Third, Israel is conveying its intention to pursue a military resolution for the northern front of the occupied territories.
3. Netanyahu’s Messages at the United Nations: Another key observation regarding the recent escalation in the southern suburb of Beirut is its coincidence with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York. In a striking display, Netanyahu posted a picture subtly suggesting his departure from the UN meetings to ‘issue orders for the strikes on the southern suburb of Beirut.’ His speech at the UN was filled with distortions and fabrications. First, he pushed the narrative that “Israel is open to peace,” even though his government, the most extremist in Israel’s history, has systematically blocked any pathways to peace by intensifying aggression in Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon, while implementing policies that thwart the establishment of an independent Palestinian state. Second, he falsely claimed that the October 7 operation hindered Saudi-Israeli normalization, despite the fact that Saudi officials have repeatedly stated that normalization can only be achieved through the creation of a Palestinian state. Third, he propagated allegations concerning the Lebanese front, claiming that Hezbollah uses civilians as human shields, turning hospitals into weapon depots and missile launch sites, asserting that Israel’s conflict is not with the Lebanese people. However, the reality on the ground reveals that these claims serve as a pretext for justifying Israeli actions, with the true victims being unarmed Lebanese civilians rather than Hezbollah fighters. Fourth, he declared that Israel is concentrating all its efforts on retrieving Israeli hostages held by Hamas, while the issue of hostages has clearly slipped down Netanyahu’s list of priorities, becoming a central point of contention between him and various influential factions within Israel, including the Israeli security establishment.
4. A Subtle Declaration of War on Lebanon: The strikes on Beirut’s southern suburb on Friday marked a quiet yet clear signal of the start of a broader conflict on Lebanese soil. This conclusion is supported by several factors. First, the operations coincided with Netanyahu’s messages at the UN General Assembly, where he expressed a firm commitment to intensifying military actions against Hezbollah. Second, the strikes followed a significant Israeli military buildup on the northern front, including the mobilization of reserve brigades. Third, the operations were accompanied by continued heavy bombardment of southern Lebanon and its surrounding villages, which effectively lays the groundwork for a potential ground invasion. Fourth, Israeli officials have stated through Hebrew media that “a ground operation in the south is imminent, even if it is anticipated to be brief,” which speaks volumes of the strategic intentions of Israeli actions regarding the Lebanese front in the coming period. Fifth, the current situation closely resembles the beginning of the 2006 war between Hezbollah and Israel, which also commenced with fierce bombardments of the southern suburb, focusing at the time on the Imam Hassan complex, followed by a ground invasion of southern Lebanon. However, today’s circumstances may see an expanded target list, bolstered by a prevailing sense of euphoria within Israel after the assassination of Nasrallah and other top Hezbollah leaders, coupled with the lack of effective international pressure to deter Israel and halt this escalation. Notably, Israel has shifted from intelligence-based targeted strikes to three alarming levels: intensifying air raids on the southern suburb, threatening the Lebanese state by claiming that Beirut airport serves as a weapons storage site, and bombing residential areas following evacuation demands.
5. Disrupting Hezbollah’s Core Strengths: Israel is employing a multi-prong shock strategy aimed at undermining Hezbollah’s core capabilities on multiple fronts. The first prong involves a concentrated effort to eliminate the party’s senior leadership through assassinations. The second prong focuses on spreading the narrative of deep infiltration, by targeting Hezbollah’s information networks and spreading claims of tracking the party’s leaders’ movements and gatherings. The third prong consists of systematically striking Hezbollah’s military infrastructure, especially missile platforms positioned near southern Lebanon, which pose the greatest threat to Israeli territory, thus diminishing Hezbollah’s operational strength amid the rising tensions. Finally, the fourth prong relates to reports indicating that the recent strikes on the southern suburb of Beirut coincided with attacks on concentrations of Syrian army forces along the Lebanese border, particularly near Kfeir Yabous in the Damascus countryside as well as an assault on a site belonging to an infantry company from the 18th Brigade, close to the 10th Division of the Syrian Army. This suggests that Israel seeks to sever Hezbollah’s potential supply routes through Syrian territory and preemptively address any threats that could arise from the occupied Golan Heights. Hence, the overarching goal of this Israeli strategy is to encircle Hezbollah and strip it of its vital sources of strength.
6. The Iconic Image of Hassan Nasrallah for Hezbollah: The peculiarity of the September 28 assault on the southern suburbs of Beirut can be closely tied to its target, the Secretary-General of Lebanese Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah. With the Israeli military proclaiming the success of the assassination attempt on Nasrallah, and Hezbollah mourning its leader, this operation stands out as one of the significant operations undertaken by Israel against the resistance axis, given the weight of Nasrallah’s symbolism and his pivotal role within this axis. Perhaps this has been echoed in statements from Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Galant, who remarked that “Nasrallah’s killing was one of the most important assassinations in Israel’s history,” along with Netanyahu’s assertions that that operation will fundamentally alter the balance of power in the Middle East.
Nasrallah’s symbolism is rooted in the fact that, within the resistance axis, he is credited with being the key figure behind most of Hezbollah’s accomplishments in the last three decades since he assumed the leadership of tha party in 1992 at the age of thirty-five, regarding both the significant battles against Israel in 1993, 1996, 2000, and 2006 and the enhancement of the party’s combat and military capabilities, which have reached impressive levels in recent years, alongside his unwavering support for the Palestinian cause. Additionally, the loss of his son Hadi during the 1997 conflicts further elevated his symbolic stature. These factors contribute to the heightened stakes and distinct nature of the recent Israeli operation. With the assassination of Nasrallah and Ali Karaki, Israel has effectively eliminated most of Hezbollah’s Jihad Council and Shura Council leadership, which could result in significant organizational crises for Hezbollah. Of the Jihad Council leadership, only Talal Hamieh, who oversees external operations, and Khalil Harb, also known as Abu Mustafa Harb (who served as Nasrallah’s military advisor for years), still stand, and within the Shura Council, (the body responsible for selecting the Secretary-General), two figures are also left, namely Mohammad Yazbek and Hashim Safi al-Din, the most likely successor to Nasrallah.
7. Encircling Hezbollah’s Popular Base: When examining the ongoing Israeli assaults on Beirut’s southern suburb, which continue relentlessly as of the writing of this piece, several crucial points must be considered. First, the Southern Suburb stands as Hezbollah’s primary base in Lebanon, particularly on political and civil fronts. Second, it is home to the party’s popular support base, predominantly from the Shiite community. Third, the area houses nearly one million residents, the majority of whom are Shiite. The impact of Israeli strikes and the constant targeting of the Southern Suburb is especially significant when weighed against Lebanon’s current economic, social, and political crises, particularly regarding Hezbollah’s support base. Israel’s strategy is to erode this base through these relentless strikes that have surpassed all expectations, while actively spreading narratives claiming, “it is not at war with the Lebanese; it is Hezbollah that brings disaster upon the Lebanese people.”
8. Psychological Warfare Tactics: Israel’s approach blends aggressive military escalation, verging on war crimes not only against Hezbollah but against Lebanon, with psychological warfare designed to instill fear among the Lebanese population. This war is waged through multiple channels and tactics, including the mass dissemination of information and claims by Israeli media, heightened warnings over the past days about evacuating residential zones in Beirut’s southern suburbs, the showcasing of Israeli hacking technology as part of the escalation with Hezbollah, and further intimidation of the Lebanese through messages promoting its “long arm” policy.
Potential Fallout
The Israeli escalation, culminating in the assassination of Hezbollah’s Secretary-General, carries significant repercussions for the evolving conflict between the two sides, which can be explored through the following key dimensions:
1. Internal Turmoil within Hezbollah: The latest Israeli operation will likely trigger intensified internal turmoil within Hezbollah on multiple fronts. First, reorganizing the party’s ranks will be an immense challenge, particularly after the assassination of all its top-tier leaders, including those from the Jihad and Shura Councils. Second, this restructuring has to happen amidst the fiercest conflict with Israel, adding further complexity. Third, a growing sense of Israeli infiltration, whether through technology or human intelligence, further complicates matters and deepens the party’s internal crisis. Fourth, Hezbollah faces the pressing need to reassess its combat priorities and decide how to address this unprecedented Israeli escalation.
In this vein, some forecasts suggest that Hashim Safi al-Din, currently leading Hezbollah’s executive council (viewed as the party’s governing body), stands as the most likely successor to Nasrallah. Being Nasrallah’s cousin and the son-in-law of Qassem Soleimani, the former commander of the Quds Force, Safi al-Din’s candidacy is favored for several reasons, including his robust connections with both the political and military factions within Hezbollah, his familiarity with critical Hezbollah matters, and his longstanding consideration for the role. Meanwhile, Mohammad Yazbek remains another potential candidate, though he is considered less likely than Safi al-Din. Some analysts speculate that Hezbollah might opt for a military figure to lead the party for the first time, signaling defiance against Israel, akin to Hamas’s choice of Yahya Sinwar as head of its political bureau.
2. Expanding Israel’s Target Bank in Lebanon: Given Israeli movements and official statements, coupled with the sense of euphoria gripping Israel, the most realistic scenario points to an Israeli escalation against Lebanon, potentially transforming it into another Gaza. The first step in Israel’s strategy appears to be intensifying airstrikes in the south to pave the way for a ground invasion of southern Lebanon. However, Israel’s objectives may extend further, seeking to capitalize on the current situation to launch a large-scale invasion that could even reach Beirut’s southern suburbs, with the broader aim of dismantling all of Hezbollah’s military brigades. Some projections even point to Israel possibly seeking to occupy areas of southern Lebanon, reminiscent of the 1978 Operation Litani. The American factor cannot be ignored here, especially since Washington seems to have delayed addressing ceasefire and de-escalation efforts in the region until after its elections, suggesting that Lebanon could be facing a prolonged war.
3. Forcing Hezbollah into War: The current dynamics-from the broadening scope of Israeli military operations against Lebanon and the near-unanimous decision within Israel to wage war, to the assassination of Hezbollah’s top leadership and the party’s recent efforts to retaliate for its losses-compels Hezbollah to go beyond the established rules of engagement, which Israel has long disregarded. In the coming days, Hezbollah’s focus may shift to key strategic actions, including addressing its internal crisis by relatively stabilizing its leadership vacuum; escalating its attacks deeper into Israeli territory, particularly beyond Haifa and Tel Aviv, with potential strikes on critical energy, economic, and political targets; and preparing for the possibility of an Israeli ground invasion in southern Lebanon.
In conclusion, Israel’s unprecedented bombardment of Beirut’s southern suburbs, its expansion of targets to include the assassination of Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah, and the large-scale military buildup along the occupied Lebanese border all signal a potential invasion of Lebanon. Israel appears to be steering toward turning Lebanon into a second Gaza, a scenario now more plausible than ever, as it views the current context as an opportune moment to achieve its objectives in Lebanon.
That said, this mission is far from easy, due to several factors. First, Hezbollah possesses substantial military power, much of which remains untapped. Second, for Hezbollah, this battle is existential. Third, Iranian officials have signaled the possibility of sending fighters to Lebanon in the coming days. Fourth, the idea of a unified front across multiple arenas could become a reality, potentially sparking conflicts in places like the Red Sea and the Golan Heights. Finally, Hezbollah’s decentralized operational strategies minimize the impact of its leadership vacuum in the current escalation.
