Lebanese military sources familiar with recent events reveal that Israel has carried out roughly 18 focused air strikes over the past two days against sites it says were being used to rebuild fighting and training capabilities belonging to Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. The strikes represent the most serious escalation since the border tensions began.
Sources speaking to Sunna Files say these developments place the Lebanese government under a decisive test, even as signs multiply that the “zero hour” for a military operation — one that could mimic the Gaza model in objectives without a full ground invasion is approaching.
The sources warned that the start of a military campaign may be near, explaining that Israel’s planned war strategy, modelled on what it has done in Gaza, would avoid large-scale occupation while seeking to retain the territorial gains it manages to seize. There is also a possibility that the geographic footprint of occupied points — currently five known positions — could be expanded.
They added that the operation would likely include special operations targeting selected sites in southern Lebanon and the Bekaa Valley, but without launching a widescale ground invasion. The sources asserted that the Lebanese state would be unable to effectively counter such operations, and maintained that the outbreak of such a campaign is only a matter of time.
With US–Iran negotiations stagnant, the sources claimed that decisions regarding Lebanon have effectively been settled, stressing that while Hezbollah has prepared, it is not at a level of maximal readiness, and the Lebanese state remains largely powerless despite the president’s attempts to pressure Israel through Washington to halt or at least delay hostilities.
A Buffer Zone by Attrition
Israeli sources familiar with the situation interpret events on the ground as evidence that Israel is adopting a strategy combining systematic military pressure with political warfare, closely resembling aspects of the Gaza model to achieve its objectives without initiating a comprehensive war.
According to these sources, the continuing military operations aim to accomplish what earlier campaigns failed to do: push Hezbollah away from the border and create a practical buffer zone. Israel may refuse to fully withdraw from certain areas and instead seek to weaken Hezbollah’s military capabilities through targeted assassinations and precision strikes — exhausting fighters and resources without engaging in an all-out confrontation.
A Volatile Scene — Lebanon at Risk
Military strategist Brigadier General Khaled Hamadeh described the ongoing strikes and Israeli attacks as part of Lebanon’s daily reality, warning that the situation is liable to explode into far greater escalation. He noted that Lebanon suffers political isolation from much of the Arab world, Europe, and the United States, leaving it little diplomatic recourse. This vacuum, Hamadeh said, creates space for Israel to continue its assaults, and heightens the likelihood of sudden escalation.
Hamadeh argued that if the Gaza settlement proceeds on its current course, freeing Israel from a previously active front, then Lebanon will become the immediate danger zone. In that scenario, the Israeli campaign that succeeded in Gaza could be replicated and widened in Lebanon, producing deeper strikes and greater incursions.
He warned that the political discourse blaming the Lebanese government, the army, Tehran, and Hezbollah for the crisis could make open conflict the only remaining option under current conditions.
Hamadeh concluded that only the introduction of a new factor — one that rearranges priorities and changes the calculus on the ground — could break the current impasse. Absent such a shift, a military solution may increasingly present itself as the viable option.
Sunna Files Perspective
This pattern — precision strikes, attrition tactics, and a focus on shaping political outcomes rather than full territorial occupation — reflects a troubling doctrine of modern aggression. The “Gaza model” has taught occupiers how to inflict mass destruction, degrade resistance, and consolidate political aims without committing to costly ground occupations. Repeating that model in Lebanon would spell grave humanitarian consequences for civilians and further destabilise the Levant.
For the Muslim community and regional defenders of sovereignty, the record is clear: economic and political pressure, diplomatic isolation, and military coercion are all tools used to enforce a strategic agenda that marginalises resistance and erodes territorial integrity. Lebanon today faces renewed danger not only as a theatre of military operations but as a test of Arab and Muslim solidarity.
