As usual, Israel struck Lebanese territory — in the Bekaa to the east and Hermel to the north — on 23 October, claiming it targeted Hezbollah arms sites and factories. The raids were intense and reached northern Lebanon, far beyond the south of the Litani River, an area allegedly covered by the ceasefire between Lebanon and the Israeli occupation.
A few days before these heavy strikes, Israeli drones swarmed notably over Beirut, flying above the Government Palace (the Grand Serail) and the Presidential Palace in an intentional violation and a deliberate provocation against the Lebanese state.
Israel: the dirty hand of American policy
The course and consequences of Israel’s aggression on Gaza have confirmed the extent of American tutelage over Israel — demonstrating that Israel cannot strike in the region (whether in Syria, Lebanon, Yemen or Iran) without US political, military and economic approval. One may therefore say that Israel functions as an advanced American base in the Middle East — a dirty arm used to achieve US objectives in the region.
The US special envoy for Syria and Lebanon, Tom Barrack — long experienced in following American policy and Israeli interests — reiterated on 20 October that “Israel may move militarily on its own if the Lebanese government continues to hesitate in implementing its decision to monopolise weapons in the hands of the state.”
This stance signalled and paved the way for Israel to resume its military operations, intensifying its bombardment of deep targets in Lebanese territory. Crucially, the fierce Israeli strikes in Bekaa and Hermel occurred while US Vice-President J.D. Vance was in Tel Aviv.
Thus, a dual US-Israeli message was sent to the Lebanese government and to Hezbollah: they are serious in their threats, and Washington and Tel Aviv insist on disarming Hezbollah by force if the Lebanese state itself fails to do so. Lebanon’s government, under US pressure, pledged on 5 August to concentrate weapons in the hands of the state and tasked the Lebanese army with preparing a plan to accomplish this before the end of 2025.
Lebanon’s dilemma
The Lebanese government is reluctant to take executive steps against Hezbollah and to seize its weapons for fear that such moves would ignite internal fighting or civil war, given Hezbollah’s firm refusal to disarm and its linking of any disarmament to Israel’s withdrawal from occupied Lebanese lands, the release of Lebanese prisoners, and respect for Lebanese sovereignty.
Israel strongly rejects these conditions, backed clearly by the United States, which demands the disarmament of Hezbollah first and only afterwards will consider Israeli withdrawal from occupied Lebanese territory. This places Lebanon in an impossible squeeze — between Israeli bombardment and American pressure, between the threat of civil strife and the devastation of internal conflict.
The New Middle East
The US administration under President Trump and the Israeli government led by Benjamin Netanyahu coordinate closely to redraw the Middle East by force, according to new criteria liberated from the legacy of post-World War II geopolitical nation-states and unconcerned with the ideas of state sovereignty and international law — as was manifest in the genocidal and ethnic-cleansing campaign in Gaza.
This approach is reinforced by the repeated statements of Trump and Netanyahu about creating “peace by force” — imposing wills rather than basing settlement on international law or land-for-peace principles. This departs from even the Abraham Accords’ transactional logic, leaving the Palestinian cause’s future uncertain.
Netanyahu, who heads an extreme right-wing government, shocked the world and Arab states with his statement that he is on a “historical spiritual mission for a Greater Israel.” He surprised observers again with aggression that even targeted Qatar — a US ally and mediator — sending a clear message to the region that Israel feels unbound by law or norms and may act recklessly to achieve its quasi-messianic aims of an expanded Israel.
In the same arrogant and ignorant vein regarding the region’s history, US envoy Tom Barrack argued that the Middle East is not composed of “states” in the Western nationalist sense but rather of “tribes, villages and families,” suggesting that nationalist borders and Sykes-Picot maps have failed to produce stability or peace.
This indicates that Washington and Tel Aviv remain intent on continuing to redraw the Middle East so that Israel will become the dominant power in the region under American protection, freeing the United States to concentrate on global policies vis-à-vis China and Russia, which Washington increasingly sees as direct threats.
Lebanon as the starting point
Having failed to achieve its aims by military means in Gaza, Israel — with American support — may pursue a dual approach that affects Gaza and the wider region. Failure in Gaza does not necessarily mean Washington and Tel Aviv will abandon their goal of remaking the Middle East. Potential tracks include:
- Consolidating a pause in bombardment of Gaza while completing Trump’s plan to place Palestinians under an international tutelage after disarming and subduing them. If Palestinian rejection prevents this, Israel may instead opt to administer the siege without war, obstruct reconstruction and prolong the humanitarian crisis to exhaust Gaza’s population and resistance.
- Accelerating settlement expansion across the West Bank, suffocating Palestinians in towns and villages through security gates, while undermining the Palestinian Authority and transforming it into a local, policing administration — a precursor to annexing the West Bank or large parts of it.
- Shifting military momentum from Gaza to Lebanon to pressure the Lebanese government to disarm Hezbollah, to wear the movement down through aerial bombardment and security strain, potentially escalating into a direct clash between Hezbollah and Israel.
- Pressuring Iraq to disarm the Popular Mobilisation Forces and Iran-aligned armed actors — a process already underway for months — which could provoke clashes between an American-backed Iraqi government and pro-Iran factions.
- Weakening Hezbollah as a priority for Israel and the US given its proximity to northern Palestine and its title as the most dangerous external front threatening Israel. If Hezbollah were successfully degraded after its recovery from the 2023–2024 Gaza support war, it would remove a key element of Iran’s regional influence.
- If Israel succeeds in Lebanon and the US weakens Iran’s allied factions in Iraq, this could lay groundwork for encircling Iran and even for a potential military blow aimed at changing, weakening or coercing Tehran to abandon support for its allies, forego its nuclear project and long-range ballistic missiles — thereby accomplishing the strategic aim of removing Iran’s regional leverage.
In this vision, targeting Hezbollah and disarming it becomes an Israeli necessity to secure the northern border and a strategic gateway to weakening Iran and striking at its heart by depriving it of its closest regional ally.
Time and strategic urgency
The battle with Hezbollah has thus become a matter of Israeli national security and a strategic interest for Washington because of its link to Iran and to the wider project of remapping the Middle East. The more Israel delays, the harder it will be later; time works in Iran’s and Hezbollah’s favour.
Netanyahu — whose hands were relatively tied in Gaza after two years of fighting that failed to deliver absolute victory — needs another confrontation to restore his personal prestige and satisfy his political ambition to appear as the great leader of an expanding Israel, with Syria and Lebanon listed as immediate priorities and as geopolitical entry points for remaking the region. This makes the coming days and months potentially hotter and, perhaps, more bloody.
