Israel’s Targeting of Lebanese Army: ‘Military Error’ or Message to Stay Away from Border?

Lebanese soldiers are seen in the town of Baaloul in the western Bekaa after a strike in the area. (Reuters)
Lebanese soldiers are seen in the town of Baaloul in the western Bekaa after a strike in the area. (Reuters)
TT

Israel’s Targeting of Lebanese Army: ‘Military Error’ or Message to Stay Away from Border?

Lebanese soldiers are seen in the town of Baaloul in the western Bekaa after a strike in the area. (Reuters)
Lebanese soldiers are seen in the town of Baaloul in the western Bekaa after a strike in the area. (Reuters)

Israel’s targeting of Lebanese soldiers and their vehicles has raised questions about its attacks, especially amid discussions about the role the Lebanese army will play after the end of the war with Hezbollah.

Twenty-five Lebanese soldiers have been killed since Hezbollah opened its “support front” for its ally Hamas in Gaza on October 8, 2023. The soldiers were killed while on duty, either in a direct hit or as a result of nearby Israeli attack.

The latest casualties were reported on Sunday. Three soldiers were killed when Israel directly struck their vehicle in the Ain Ebel region.

The Israeli military issued an apology on Monday, saying it did not know that the vehicle it was targeting belonged to the army.

Israel said it struck a truck on Sunday that had entered an area where it had previously targeted a Hezbollah truck transporting a launcher and missiles. It said its soldiers were not aware that the second truck belonged to the Lebanese army.

It added that it is “not operating against the Lebanese Army and apologizes for these unwanted circumstances.”

Around ten days ago, Israel also targeted a Lebanese army position in the Kafra region in the South, leaving two soldiers dead. It again said it did not know that Lebanese troops were stationed in the area.

The Israeli statements do not clear it of the responsibility of killing the soldiers, especially when Israel is already crossing all red lines, a military source told Asharq Al-Awsat.

The repeated attacks against the Lebanese army “could be a message from Israel to limit its movement and deployment of its forces at the southern border.” This is a similar tactic Israel is using with the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL).

Israel wants to establish a buffer zone in the South and is adopting a scorched-earth policy. Nothing can stand in its way and it sees no red lines to stop it from pursuing its goal, added the source.

Some 4,500 soldiers are deployed in the South to primarily monitor the implementation of UN Security Council resolution 1701 and the violations against it.

The soldiers moved back between 3 to 4 kms when Israel escalated its attacks against Hezbollah earlier this month, said the source.

Caretaker Prime Minister Najib Mikati had declared earlier this month that he had tasked Army Commander Joseph Aoun with “doing what he sees fit to protect Lebanon and its military institution given the Israeli assault on Lebanon.”

Retired General Walid Aoun said: “There doesn’t seem to be any clear decision by Israel to attack the Lebanese army.”

In remarks to Asharq Al-Awsat, he noted that during the 2006 war between Israel and Hezbollah, the former struck an army barracks in the al-Jomhour region after claiming that it suspected it be a rocket base. Over 20 soldiers were killed in the attack.

“Israel is determined to achieve its goals and so it will not take into account other factors. So, if the army happens to be deployed near its targets, it will not hesitate in making the strike, regardless of the consequences,” he explained.

However, he expressed his concern over the negative impact the strikes will have on the army should they continue, seeing as the military will have a main role to play in the implementation of resolution 1701 in the South when the conflict is over.

Moreover, he explained that the role of the army is stipulated by the political powers and government. They task it with its duties. “As of yet, the army has not been tasked with confronting the enemy,” Aoun remarked.



Will Israeli Strikes on Iran Negatively Impact Developments in Lebanon?

A man walks past a mural painting of Iranian flags in a street in Tehran on October 26, 2024. (AFP)
A man walks past a mural painting of Iranian flags in a street in Tehran on October 26, 2024. (AFP)
TT

Will Israeli Strikes on Iran Negatively Impact Developments in Lebanon?

A man walks past a mural painting of Iranian flags in a street in Tehran on October 26, 2024. (AFP)
A man walks past a mural painting of Iranian flags in a street in Tehran on October 26, 2024. (AFP)

It is too soon to tell how the latest Israeli strikes on Iran will impact the region, especially Lebanon. Officials in Lebanon have not yet determined whether the attacks will positively influence the fight between Israel and Hezbollah.

An official Lebanese source said that the United States’ ability to rein in Israel and prevent it from carrying out a strike against major Iranian facilities must not be tied to the developments in Lebanon.

In remarks to Asharq Al-Awsat, he explained that Israel’s insistence on its land incursion in Lebanon, occupation of Lebanese villages and its destructive air strikes across the country, demonstrate that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is not tying the Lebanese front to any other, especially Iran.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, the source added that the future of the Israeli war on Lebanon is unpredictable, at least until the American presidential elections are held.

Israel had informed Iran of its intention to attack before it launched the strikes, proving that US President Joe Biden’s administration averted a widescale war in the region days before the elections on November 5.

Former Lebanese Ambassador to Washington Antoine Chedid said the American administration succeeded in persuading Netanyahu to strike Iran within the limits it had drawn up.

He ruled out the possibility that the limited strike would positively impact Lebanon.

Netanyahu is determined to achieve his goals in the war on Lebanon, which are to eliminate Hezbollah and establish security along the Lebanese-Israeli border to allow residents of northern Israeli settlements to return home, he told Asharq Al-Awsat.

Moreover, he noted that the US doesn’t really have a specific policy on Lebanon. Rather, it has a regional policy and Lebanon is part of it.

The American elections will establish a new equation in the region. Chedid said that Kamala Harris’ win will represent a continuation of Biden’s policies.

A win for Donald Trump will put the region in a different position, especially given that he is critical of calls for Netanyahu to end the war on Gaza and Lebanon, he went on to say.

Axios had quoted three Israeli sources as saying that Tel Aviv had warned Tehran of the impending strike and of what Israel was going to attack and what it wasn’t.

Director of Levant Institute for Strategic Affairs Dr. Sami Nader said the American limits to the Israeli strikes are aimed at preventing the region from slipping into a major war, which Washington wants to avoid, and at averting any negative effects on Harris’ electoral chances.

He told Asharq Al-Awsat that Israel will continue to pressure Iran and Lebanon is the main arena where it will do so instead of launching attacks deep into Iran given that the US is largely ignoring the developments in Lebanon and has a major interest in seeing Hezbollah weakened.

Gaza, on the other hand, has become a sore point for Washington given the major destruction there and the massacres Israel has committed against the Palestinian people, he remarked.

Ultimately, the strikes against Iran are not the end of the road, continued Nader.

By not attacking Iranian oil, gas and nuclear facilities and thus avoiding a widescale war, Netanyahu gave Biden a positive boost and he probably earned more weapons for Israel in return, he explained.

This will not be the last Israeli strike on Iran, he warned.