What Is Hezbollah’s Strategy to Deter and Counter Israeli Aggression?

The confrontation between Israeli occupation forces and Hezbollah has sharply escalated since October 2023. Since last Tuesday, the Lebanese group has been subjected to brutal and hybrid Israeli attacks, resulting in the deaths of dozens of its members and leaders, with thousands more injured. On Sunday morning, Hezbollah responded by bombing Haifa for the first time since 2006, introducing new missiles with destructive capabilities into its arsenal. The situation now appears to be irreversibly moving towards full-scale or open confrontation between the two sides.

Hassan Nasrallah, Hezbollah’s leader, stated on Thursday, September 19, 2024, that “Israel has crossed all red lines” by turning Hezbollah’s wireless communication devices into explosive devices. Simultaneously, Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant announced shifting military operations from Gaza to the north to confront Hezbollah. On Friday, Israel assassinated Ibrahim Aqil, Hezbollah’s Special Operations Chief, along with 14 other prominent leaders from the Radwan Forces, killing several civilians as well.

Netanyahu Seeks a Victory in the North by Increasing Hezbollah’s “Pain”

According to The Times (UK), as Netanyahu’s government struggles in its war against Hamas in Gaza and fails to find any resolution or to recover Israeli prisoners, the increasing strikes against Hezbollah come with clear objectives set by the Israeli Prime Minister. The primary goal is to deter Hezbollah, allowing Israeli settlers to return to their homes and halting Hezbollah’s support for Hamas.

By intensifying the level of pain, Israel seeks to push Hezbollah towards a breaking point, potentially agreeing to a side deal that could calm the northern front, facilitating the return of tens of thousands of displaced Israelis. This would ease the economic pressure on Netanyahu’s government while also reducing internal dissent, as achieving these northern objectives would be seen as a significant victory.

Abraham Shalom, former head of the Israeli Security Agency (Shin Bet), commented that Israel’s covert wars, conducted by its intelligence services for decades, lacked strategic vision, focusing solely on tactics. He noted that operations such as the bombing of Hezbollah’s pager systems bought Israel some time, but left fundamental questions about long-term peace unanswered.

Bravery Alone Won’t Help Israel Achieve Its Goals with Hezbollah

The Times questions whether last week’s extraordinary Mossad operation will push Hezbollah towards the strategic goals Israel hopes to achieve. If “bravery” alone could suffice, Israel might have succeeded. However, the reality is far more complex.

With hospitals overflowing with thousands of wounded, including children who perished in the Israeli attack on pagers held by Hezbollah members, public outrage in Lebanon underscored the harm done to innocent civilians. Charles Lister, Director of the Middle East Institute in Washington, argued that had Israel tried to achieve the same effect with missiles, “there might have been hundreds, perhaps thousands, of civilian casualties,” as he put it.

Hezbollah’s Strategy for Handling Israeli Escalation

Nasrallah acknowledged that the past few days have been “extremely heavy and bloody” for Hezbollah. Despite being deeply involved in politics and social programs in Lebanon, Hezbollah’s true strength comes from its vast missile arsenal and its veteran brigades with years of combat experience.

A large-scale attack by Hezbollah on Israel could result in thousands of missiles and drones—many equipped with precise guidance systems—destroying Israeli infrastructure, including airports, oil refineries, power stations, and transportation networks.

However, Hezbollah’s actions have so far been limited primarily to military targets. The question remains: will Israel’s painful attacks push Hezbollah to unleash its full arsenal against Israel?

The Times reports that Israeli officials believe Hezbollah won’t take this step, as these advanced weapons from Tehran serve a specific purpose: “to deter any Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear program.” If Hezbollah were to use its full strength, Iran’s deterrence capability would be exhausted, leaving its nuclear program vulnerable to attack, according to Israeli assessments.

This creates a tense and complex dilemma for Hezbollah, which has suffered significant “harm and humiliation.” Many expect a strong retaliation. While Iran wants Hezbollah to continue hitting northern Israel, it also wants to preserve the arsenal it provided to its Lebanese allies as a “safety net.”

This dilemma worsened following Nasrallah’s speech in response to the assassination of senior leader Fouad Shaker, when the Israeli Air Force launched a dense wave of airstrikes on southern Lebanon, claiming to have hit 150 rocket launch sites. The aim seemed to be to preempt Hezbollah’s retaliation before it could launch a proper offensive.

Given Hezbollah’s earlier statement declaring that any attack on Beirut would cross a red line, the assassination of Ibrahim Aqil and his comrades appears to signal Israel exploiting the gap between Hezbollah’s desires and its capabilities.

Limited Options That Only Worsen the Situation

Emile Hokayem from the International Institute for Strategic Studies noted, “Hezbollah wants this war to end, but it’s stuck in a spiral it cannot always control, with options that only make things worse.”

Hezbollah is fully aware that while it still enjoys strong support from its Shia base, many in Lebanon—especially Christians, Druze, and Sunnis—do not want to be dragged into a bigger conflict. Some continue to blame Hezbollah for the 2020 Beirut port explosion and its catastrophic economic fallout. The painful memories of the 2006 war with Israel also linger.

Accordingly, Israel’s calculation is that Hezbollah is trapped between an Iranian patron that prevents it from using its most destructive weapons and a broader Lebanese public that fears a larger war.

Israel repeatedly cites the UN Security Council resolution that ended the 2006 war, which required Hezbollah’s armed units to withdraw north of the Litani River, about 30 kilometers from the border.

But is there any real chance that Israeli pressure on Hezbollah will succeed? So far, it hasn’t. In his Thursday speech, Nasrallah dismissed the idea entirely and vowed to continue supporting the fight in Gaza. He said Hezbollah’s military pressure on Israel “remains one of the most important bargaining chips the Palestinians hold.”

Lina Khatib of Chatham House added, “Separating Hezbollah from the conflict in Gaza is not a realistic scenario for Israel. Hezbollah will not allow itself to be seen as having abandoned Hamas or its other allies.”

By taking this stance, the Lebanese group ensures that both Iran and a significant portion of Lebanon’s population will continue to support it. Thus, the stalemate persists, with Israel planning its next moves to increase Hezbollah’s pain.

Netanyahu Government’s Options

This is where Netanyahu’s government calculations become increasingly murky. Threatening to target Beirut’s airport or other civilian infrastructure in Lebanon has had little effect on Hezbollah thus far and could cause issues with the Americans, who have expressed a desire to avoid further escalation. Likewise, troop movements and hints of a ground invasion into southern Lebanon have failed to change Hezbollah’s position. The group claims to be prepared for these scenarios and to defeat the occupying army.

Israel is expected to ramp up the pressure, while Hezbollah might continue sending longer-range and more destructive missiles and drones southward. The Israeli military could begin launching deeper strikes into Lebanon, specifically targeting long-range systems that could threaten Israel’s national infrastructure in the event of a full-scale war. Such moves could push Hezbollah and Iran into a “use it or lose it” dilemma.

Opposition leader Yair Lapid claims that Netanyahu is leading Israel toward a “multi-front war” with many of its enemies, including Iran. Both at home and abroad, Netanyahu’s critics argue that the Prime Minister “relies on perpetual conflict” to maintain his grip on power.