Hezbollah’s New Strategy: Gradual Escalation, Focus on Ground Combat

An image of Imad Mughniyeh raised alongside Hezbollah missile launchers during a military drill in southern Lebanon. File photo
An image of Imad Mughniyeh raised alongside Hezbollah missile launchers during a military drill in southern Lebanon. File photo
TT

Hezbollah’s New Strategy: Gradual Escalation, Focus on Ground Combat

An image of Imad Mughniyeh raised alongside Hezbollah missile launchers during a military drill in southern Lebanon. File photo
An image of Imad Mughniyeh raised alongside Hezbollah missile launchers during a military drill in southern Lebanon. File photo

Since suffering major setbacks on September 17, the day its communication systems were targeted, Hezbollah appears to have outlined a new military strategy for confronting Israel in a potential large-scale war.

The strategy focuses on gradually increasing missile strikes and targeting key sites, while giving priority to ground combat. Hezbollah is aiming to resist Israeli attacks, which have recently spread to south Lebanon’s western sector after a week of fighting in the eastern and central sectors.

In a statement on Tuesday, Hezbollah confirmed its missile forces are ready to strike any location in Israel as directed by its leadership.

The group warned that further Israeli aggression could lead to strikes on Haifa and beyond, making those areas as vulnerable as the border towns of Kiryat Sehmona and Metula. It also hinted that its attacks wouldn’t be limited to missiles and drones.

Hezbollah Preparing for a Long Fight

Military expert Brig. Gen. Hassan Jouni explained that Hezbollah’s current actions are part of an existing plan rather than a new strategy.

“This phase is about implementing plans that were already in place,” he told Asharq Al-Awsat.

Hezbollah is now intensifying its missile use and choosing more significant targets, having delivered recent blows to Haifa.

On the battlefield, Jouni said Hezbollah’s approach is clear: resist Israeli advances and inflict losses.

He emphasized that the group’s goal isn’t to prevent an Israeli occupation but to make it unsustainable. Hezbollah’s defense of the front lines, he added, is aimed at lowering Israeli morale and taking advantage of key positions.

Jouni also highlighted comments by Hezbollah’s deputy leader, Sheikh Naim Qassem, who said a prolonged conflict would put Israel in a tough position, suggesting Hezbollah is prepared for a long fight and will gradually escalate its use of missiles.

Haifa for Beirut’s Southern Suburbs ‘Dahiyeh’

Brig. Gen. Munir Shehadeh, Lebanon’s former coordinator with UNIFIL, said Hezbollah is fighting with little left to lose after Israel’s assassination of its leaders and the destruction of its communities.

Shehadeh suggested that Hezbollah’s strategy would involve targeting areas beyond Haifa and Tel Aviv, already hitting residential areas in Haifa under the “Haifa for Dahiyeh” equation.

Hezbollah, Shehadeh explained, is relying on close-range combat to prove its resilience after severe blows that would normally lead to surrender.

Iran Holds the Key

Retired Brig. Gen. George Nader expressed doubts that any strategy could save Hezbollah after the losses of its leaders and large missile stockpiles. He argued that while Hezbollah may still be able to fight on the ground, it will struggle to withstand a large-scale Israeli invasion.

Nader also noted that if Hezbollah had the capability to strike strategic targets within Israel, it would have already done so. He said the decision to launch such attacks ultimately rests with Iran, not Hezbollah.



Three Scenarios for Russia’s Military Presence in Syria

Russian President Vladimir Putin inspecting his troops at Hmeimim Airbase in Latakia on December 12, 2017 (Sputnik/AP)
Russian President Vladimir Putin inspecting his troops at Hmeimim Airbase in Latakia on December 12, 2017 (Sputnik/AP)
TT

Three Scenarios for Russia’s Military Presence in Syria

Russian President Vladimir Putin inspecting his troops at Hmeimim Airbase in Latakia on December 12, 2017 (Sputnik/AP)
Russian President Vladimir Putin inspecting his troops at Hmeimim Airbase in Latakia on December 12, 2017 (Sputnik/AP)

Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Thursday he would meet former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, who fled to Russia after his regime fell in Damascus. But what will Putin say to his former ally? And how might their first exchange unfold, given Russia’s role in helping Assad escape on a chaotic night?

The Kremlin, known for staging Putin’s meetings with precision, might opt to limit media coverage this time. Putin could be seen sitting at a small table with Assad, now on asylum

in Moscow, in a soundless scene—one that leaves little room for formal pleasantries.

Why has Putin announced plans to meet Assad? Is it to reprimand him? Many in Russia believe Assad’s stubbornness has hurt Moscow’s efforts, threatened its gains in Syria, and could eventually risk its key military presence there.

As details remain unclear, Russian experts are racing to analyze developments in Syria and outline scenarios for the next phase.

Some Russian experts have painted grim scenarios. A member of the prestigious Russian Council on Foreign and Defense Policy warned of potential risks, including a prolonged conflict with civil war elements, a humanitarian catastrophe with millions of refugees, escalating migration in Europe, and rising tensions among nations like Israel, the US, and Iran.

He also predicted a new wave of international terrorism that could reach far beyond the region.

Other experts echoed this pessimism. One posted an image of a Syrian dissident stepping on a statue of Assad’s father, warning that “this is just the beginning.” Another blamed the crisis on the “Obama curse,” citing the West’s interference, while a third shared a bleak analysis titled, “We Must Pray for Syria.”

So far, Russian media and think tanks have avoided any optimistic outlooks for Syria’s future.

Experts, who spoke to Asharq Al-Awsat, believe Moscow may be preparing to handle one of three possible scenarios in Syria.

The first, most favorable for Russia’s interests, involves Moscow reaching an agreement with the new Syrian authorities to maintain its military presence for a limited period.

This could mean replacing the current 49-year agreements with a five-year deal to facilitate a gradual Russian withdrawal. Such an arrangement could help the new leadership in Syria manage Western pressure to cut ties with Moscow.

The second scenario envisions Russia giving up its airbase in Hmeimim while retaining a significant presence in Tartus. This would mirror agreements from 1972, which allowed Russian naval vessels to use the Tartus logistics center in the Mediterranean. This compromise would preserve Russia’s interests while reducing Western pressure on Damascus.

The third scenario involves a full Russian withdrawal from both bases, with Moscow later seeking agreements for shared use of air and sea ports. Such agreements, similar to those Russia has signed with other countries, are less likely to provoke Western opposition.

Regardless of the outcome, the Kremlin has yet to develop a clear strategy for dealing with the emerging situation in Syria.

Key questions remain, including how to curb Iran’s regional influence, manage Türkiye and Israel’s growing roles in Syria, and establish a new regional balance that secures Moscow’s minimum interests.