There’s no question regarding the Israel’s significant tactical advance against Hizbullah’s communication network, including pagers, walkie-talkies, and control centres. This strike has proven the ruthlessness and technical adroitness of Israel against Hizbullah, a notorious terrorist group within Lebanon. Conventional communication utilities were transformed into miniature explosives in the raid, dealing a severe blow to the heart of the organisation.
Despite the tactical success, the offensive, which unfortunately claimed the lives of 40 people and injured 3,000 more, including civilians and children, is regarded as a war crime by both Lebanon and the UN. These casualties were not all warriors, numerous worked in the welfare and health divisions of Hizbullah. According to the Geneva convention, Israel is under obligation to differentiate between civilians and combatants during wartime, thus subjecting it to accountability for this action.
While the assault was dramatic, it did not offer any meaningful strategic benefit or inflict a crippling blow to Hizbullah. Moreover, it did not provide Israel with a significant new advantage on the battlefield. Communities along Israel’s border, on the other hand, should brace themselves for likely reprisals from Hizbullah. Beirut bombings persist, keeping the conflict between Israel and Lebanon dancing on the precipice of a full-blown war. Many speculate that the Israeli Defence Forces might soon invade to establish a buffer zone in southern Lebanon.
Many are wondering if this is what Binyamin Netanyahu had in mind. Is Israel sincerely interested in peace considering the sensitive status of ongoing negotiations over Gaza and hostages, which are universally accepted as vital for region’s de-escalation?
The prevalent presumption that neither party desires a full-scale war has led to a mutual regulation of strikes, creating a ‘response formula’ to prevent severe escalation. Israel, it seems, is signaling a definitive “no more”.