Israel’s latest airstrikes on Beirut’s southern suburb, known as Dahiyeh, have moved beyond mere retaliation for rocket fire, signaling a shift in the rules of engagement. By targeting the area twice in less than a week, Tel Aviv has effectively abandoned the informal understanding that had kept the suburb off-limits since the ceasefire took effect in November.
The escalation raises questions about how Lebanon’s government and Hezbollah will respond and whether this marks the beginning of a more intense phase of conflict.
Pressure to normalize ties
Observers close to Hezbollah believe Israel’s strikes are aimed to increase pressure on Lebanon to engage in normalization talks.
Brig. Gen. Mounir Shehadeh, former Lebanese government coordinator with the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), suggested that the rockets fired into Israel last Friday—which prompted the initial Israeli response—ultimately served Israeli interests.
“It was evident that these were crude, suspicious rockets, giving Israel the pretext it needed to strike deep into Lebanese territory, specifically Dahiyeh,” Shehadeh told Asharq Al-Awsat.
He pointed to Tuesday’s assassination of a Hezbollah member in the Dahiyeh strike, describing it as a significant escalation. “Unlike last week, there was no pretext for this attack,” he said. “This confirms that Israel’s objective is to pressure Lebanon into normalization.”
Shehadeh argued that the US and Israel are working to push Lebanon into political negotiations involving diplomats and politicians rather than military representatives.
“There are also growing efforts to force Hezbollah into making internal concessions, particularly to disarm in areas north of the Litani River,” he added.
He stressed that Israel is sending a clear message: no location in Lebanon is off-limits, and it will continue to act whenever and wherever it sees fit.
A different perspective
Retired Brig. Gen. George Nader offered a different interpretation of the escalation. He believes Israel does not need excuses to carry out its attacks, but argues that Lebanon should avoid giving it any justification.
“We have failed to implement international resolutions, particularly Resolution 1701, and we continue to insist that Hezbollah’s disarmament requires national dialogue,” Nader told Asharq Al-Awsat.
He questioned the relevance of such discussions, given that Lebanon’s previous government had already signed an agreement calling for the disarmament of armed groups and the dismantling of their military infrastructure, starting south of the Litani River.
“As long as the situation remains unchanged, we should expect Israeli violations and attacks to intensify,” he warned. He also cited explicit US warnings that Lebanon could face cuts in military aid and even sanctions if it fails to implement the agreement.
“We are at a crossroads,” Nader said. “Either Hezbollah acknowledges the shifting regional and international dynamics, helps the state assert full sovereignty over Lebanese territory, and surrenders its weapons—or Israel will continue the aggressive approach we are seeing today.”
