Many are confused by the sudden ceasefire between the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. One of Hezbollah’s initial operational goals was to maintain military pressure on Israel until a ceasefire was achieved in Gaza.
That outcome now seems increasingly unlikely, though some remain hopeful that the ceasefire in Lebanon could spark similar agreements elsewhere in the region.
The recent ceasefire between the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and Hezbollah in southern Lebanon has raised questions, especially given reports of the IDF facing shortages in munitions and manpower. To delve into this issue, analysts and journalists Batool Subeiti and Ghadi Francis join us on State of Play.
Conventional military wisdom suggests that from a strictly strategic perspective, this acceptance is a significant misstep by Hezbollah and the broader Axis of Resistance.
Under the ceasefire terms, all military infrastructure and positions will be dismantled, and unauthorized weapons confiscated. A committee acceptable to both Israel and Lebanon will be formed to monitor and assist in enforcing these commitments. Israel and Lebanon will report any potential violations to the committee and UNIFIL.
Lebanon is required to deploy its security forces along all borders, crossing points, and the line defining the southern region, as outlined in the deployment plan. Israel, in turn, will withdraw and consolidate its forces south of the Blue Line in a phased manner over 60 days. Additionally, the United States will promote indirect negotiations between Israel and Lebanon to establish a recognized land border.
There is considerable wariness surrounding the campaign of U.S. influence in Lebanon, exemplified by the construction of a new 43-acre American embassy in Beirut.
Turning to Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the question: Why establish a ceasefire now? He outlined three primary reasons.
First, to focus on the threat posed by Iran, though he declined to provide further explanation. Second, to rearm, resupply, and renew the Israel Defense Forces, as it is widely acknowledged that the Israeli defense apparatus is low on munitions, manpower, and morale. Third, to separate the fronts and isolate Hamas and other resistance networks in Gaza.
Israel appears to be buying time to replenish its military, both in firepower and manpower, while waiting for a potentially more compliant U.S. administration. The ceasefire also separates resistance fronts, enabling the IDF to focus on defeating Palestinian resistance through what critics argue is the only means possible: the complete ethnic cleansing of northern Gaza. This also grants Israel time to prepare for a broader confrontation with the Axis of Resistance and Iran.
The concern is that allowing Israel this opportunity to regroup and mobilize could cost Hezbollah in the long run. However, this mirrors conventional wisdom that failed during the 20-year Global War on Terror. Much like the 2006 Lebanon War, Israel was widely declared the victor at the time, but nearly two decades later, it is almost universally regarded as having suffered a strategic defeat.
Tonight, we explore why this might be the more reasonable interpretation of events.
Greg Stoker is a former US Army Ranger with a background in human intelligence collection and analysis. After serving four combat deployments in Afghanistan, he studied anthropology and International Relations at Columbia University. He is currently a military and geopolitical analyst and a social media “influencer,” though he hates the term.
MintPress News is a fiercely independent media company. You can support us by becoming a member on Patreon, bookmarking and whitelisting us, and subscribing to our social media channels, including Twitch, YouTube, Twitter, and Instagram.
Subscribe to MintCast on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, and SoundCloud.
Also, check out rapper Lowkey’s video interview and podcast series, The Watchdog.
The post Setback or Strategy: Hezbollah’s Ceasefire Deal Sparks Confusion appeared first on MintPress News.