Israeli security agencies propose three options for response if Lebanon is used to launch new missile attacks
Israeli security agencies have presented three options to decision-makers for responding if Lebanon is again used to launch missile attacks on Israel.
Tel Aviv has already ruled out allowing the region to become a battlefield for prolonged rocket warfare.
The first option is to maintain the existing equation of striking Beirut in response to every rocket fired at Israel. However, this approach lacks majority support as it risks dragging the region into a war of attrition.
The second option is a return to combat, starting with an expansion of the Israeli army's deployment and strengthening its five positions in Lebanon.
The third option, which has majority backing and aligns with the demands of local leaders from frontline towns, is to reestablish control over a buffer zone in Lebanon.
In a recommendation prepared by former security and military officials at the Alma Center, which specializes in assessing security conditions in northern Israel, two immediate steps were proposed regarding Lebanon:
A large-scale attack on Hezbollah targets in Beirut, similar to the strikes carried out in the southern suburbs in November last year.
A renewed assassination campaign, with a list of recommended targets that includes key political figures such as:
Naim Qassem, Hezbollah's secretary-general
Ali Daamouch, head of the Executive Council
Mohammad Raad, head of Hezbollah's parliamentary bloc
Ibrahim Amin al-Sayyed, head of the Political Council
Mohammad Yazbek, head of the Judicial Council
Wafiq Safa, head of the Coordination and Liaison Unit
For military leadership, the center recommended targeting:
Muhammad Haydar, chief of staff
Haitham Ali Tabatabai, commander of the southern front
Talal Hamia, head of Unit 910
These recommendations risk reigniting conflict on the northern front at a time when Lebanese, French, and U.S. efforts are underway to achieve lasting calm and advance negotiations on the demarcation of the land border.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
L'Orient-Le Jour
6 hours ago
- L'Orient-Le Jour
Iran backs Hezbollah's decisions on disarmament, says foreign minister
TEHRAN — Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Wednesday that Iran supports Hezbollah, its Lebanese ally, in its decisions, after the group rejected Cabinet's plan to disarm it, AFP reports. "Any decision on this matter will ultimately rest with Hezbollah itself. We support it from afar, but we do not intervene in its decisions," Araghchi said in a television interview, adding that the group has "rebuilt itself" following setbacks during its war with Israel last year.
LBCI
6 hours ago
- LBCI
Hezbollah's arsenal through the years: A historical overview of its rise and impact
Report by Nada Andraos, English adaptation by Mariella Succar Since its founding in 1982, Hezbollah's arsenal has evolved from basic tools of local resistance into a fully integrated military system, now considered a key component of regional deterrence dynamics. This transformation was not just a result of technical battlefield advances but stemmed from sustained external support—first from Iran, then Syria—in weapons, training, and supply routes that ran from Iran to Lebanon via Syria. The development of Hezbollah's arsenal occurred in six phases: Phase One began during the organization's formation, with direct Iranian military assistance. Iran capitalized on the political and security vacuum created by the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982, deploying its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps via Syria into the Bekaa Valley. There, members of what became known as "The Faithful Amal"—a group that split from the Amal Movement—underwent training in guerrilla warfare, ambush tactics, and the use of improvised explosive devices against the Israeli army, which was occupying large swaths of southern Lebanon. Iran began supplying Hezbollah with light and medium-range weapons. Phase Two spanned from 1990 to 2000. Following the Taif Agreement, Hezbollah's weapons remained the only arms outside state control, justified under the banner of resisting occupation. During this period, regional supply lines were expanded, providing the group with Katyusha rockets and anti-armor guided munitions. With Syria overseeing Lebanese political affairs at the time, Hezbollah assumed responsibility for security and military resistance. In 1996, Hezbollah's confrontation with Israel during 'Operation Grapes of Wrath' marked the first time its rockets were used as part of a deterrent strategy. The Israeli army's full withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000 further solidified the group's legitimacy as a resistance force in the eyes of many Lebanese, instead of prompting disarmament. Phase Three, from 2000 to 2006, saw a qualitative leap in Hezbollah's arsenal, culminating in the July 2006 war with Israel. The group used medium-range Fajr-3 and Fajr-5 rockets with ranges of 45 to 75 kilometers, along with Russian-made Kornet anti-tank missiles, which proved decisive in battle. Hezbollah also employed naval missiles to hit the Israeli Sa'ar warship and introduced tunnel networks and ground communication systems. Phase Four, from 2006 to 2012, reflected Hezbollah's shift toward strategic regional weaponry. Long-range missiles like Zelzal and Fateh-110, and even Scud missiles, reportedly entered the group's arsenal. Hezbollah also unveiled reconnaissance drones, such as the 'Mirsad.' Phase Five, from 2013 to 2020, coincided with Hezbollah's military involvement in Syria. Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah, aware of the implications of Bashar al-Assad's potential fall, intensified efforts to preserve the group's advanced weapon supply routes. This period further expanded Hezbollah's battlefield experience and access to strategic weapons. Phase Six, from 2020 until just before the September 24 war, marked the height of Hezbollah's stockpiling. Reports during this period estimated its arsenal at over 150,000 missiles, including precision-guided munitions and drones capable of penetrating air defense systems. All of this weaponry was sourced from Iran and transported through Syria to Lebanon. However, in the most recent conflict, this arsenal proved insufficient against Israel's advanced technological capabilities, particularly its AI-driven warfare systems. This has raised questions: What remains of Hezbollah's rocket and aerial capabilities? Have they fulfilled their strategic purpose? Is it time to transition this arsenal toward the service of state-building?
LBCI
6 hours ago
- LBCI
Countdown to confrontation: Lebanon's Cabinet braces for disarmament showdown
Report by Lara El Hachem, English adaptation by Mariella Succar The Lebanese government is handling the issue of exclusive state arms with unprecedented seriousness. In less than 24 hours, the Cabinet Secretariat called for a session on Thursday at Baabda Palace to continue discussions on this topic. The agenda item states: 'Continuing the discussion on implementing the government's ministerial statement regarding extending state sovereignty over all its territories through its own forces, and arrangements for halting hostile actions.' On Tuesday evening, the Cabinet tasked the Lebanese Army with developing a practical plan to consolidate arms under state control and present it by the end of the month, with implementation set for the end of the year. However, the Tuesday decision prompted the withdrawal of two ministers close to the Amal-Hezbollah duo—Rakan Nassereddine and Tamara el-Zein—citing prior communications that did not indicate a timeline for disarmament would be set. Minister Fadi Makki expressed reservations about setting a timetable but did not withdraw, maintaining his insistence on prioritizing Israeli withdrawal. How will Thursday's session unfold as the government moves toward approving Tom Barrack's new proposal, which Hezbollah views as more Israeli than American? As of this report, all scenarios remain possible, according to Amal-Hezbollah sources. The ministers close to the bloc may choose to boycott the session without withdrawing from the government, protesting the new proposal for failing to consider Lebanese concerns. Meanwhile, government sources affiliated with the Lebanese Forces say Tuesday's debate focused on 'the objectives of approving the proposal,' not its technical details, and that the president and prime minister emphasized that the discussion centers on Barrack's revised proposal, which includes Lebanese amendments. Another possibility is a split within the bloc between attending and abstaining members. In this context, Minister el-Zein confirmed to LBCI that she intends to participate in the session. Regardless of the bloc's decision, Minister Makki will attend independently while maintaining his reservations, which would preserve the quorum. Ultimately, Hezbollah considers setting a timetable that does not require Israeli withdrawal as a gift to Israel. In an official statement, the group said the government committed a grave mistake by stripping Lebanon of the resistance's arms and complying with the U.S. envoy's demands. Hezbollah will therefore treat the government's decision as non-existent but will maintain its commitment to dialogue and discussions on national security strategy—just not amid aggression. Conversely, other circles believe Lebanon can no longer afford to remain stagnant. Among them is the leader of the Dignity Movement, Faisal Karami, who told a Hezbollah delegation that the current priorities are protecting Lebanon, preserving civil peace, engaging in serious dialogue with the state, conceding to the army's authority, and maintaining strong relations with Saudi Arabia.
