Israel fears the 2006 scenario… This is what Hezbollah might do

The “Emirates 24” website reported that the Israeli newspaper “Maariv” wondered whether Hezbollah would reorganize itself as happened in 2006 after the Second Lebanon War, against the backdrop of a ceasefire or not.

The newspaper quoted Israeli Professor Amatsia Baram, an expert in Middle Eastern studies, describing the complex picture of the reality on Israel’s northern border, saying that “the party” may interpret the silence as an opportunity for another war.

Baram said in his interview with “Maariv” that the ceasefire is a sensitive strategic test that Israel must conduct with caution, but also with determination, noting that Hezbollah retreated ideologically when Hezbollah Secretary General Naim Qassem announced the separation of the two fronts between the north and the south, contrary to the secretary’s statements. The previous year, Hassan Nasrallah’s initial statement that as long as there was a war in Gaza, the north would also be destroyed, Baram described this as a kind of tactical surrender on the part of Hezbollah.

He pointed out that the next test will take place on January 27, which is the date on which Israel is supposed to withdraw from southern Lebanon according to the current agreements, and if the Americans confirm that the understandings remain in the area from which Israel must withdraw, then withdrawal will be possible, but if it becomes clear While Hezbollah is using the time to build new sites, smuggle weapons and rebuild itself, Israel may remain in place and sabotage these attempts, even at the cost of renewed conflict.

According to Baram, the relative peace that may emerge on the northern border carries a known danger, as Hezbollah may interpret it as an opportunity for another war, just as happened after the Second Lebanon War, when UN Resolution No. 1701 set the conditions, and he adds: “And so, after six Only months ago, they returned to the region, began arming themselves, and rebuilding their defensive and offensive formations, while Israel avoided any reaction under these circumstances.”

He pointed out the assumption that “silence in exchange for silence” was a grave mistake, because silence served them to dig tunnels and collect weapons, which ultimately led us to events like October 7 in the south. Therefore, Baram believes that the current policy should change, instead of… Passively awaiting violations, and Israel must respond with fire to every sign of building sites, smuggling weapons, or any preparation for war.

Baram explained that there is another problem related to what will happen inside the southern regions of Lebanon and how Israel will deal with the residents of the border villages, as some Hezbollah members are residents of the same villages, and when life returns to normal they may return to their homes with their families, and if they return armed or They start building fortifications, it will be a clear violation of the agreement that requires an immediate response, and if they return to their homes without weapons, and to full civilian life, Israel will not be able to do anything, even if these are people associated with the party.

Baram stressed the importance of American intervention in what is happening, noting that Israel has American support to respond militarily to any violation, but the question is whether Hezbollah will continue to adhere to calm out of its desire to rehabilitate itself, or whether it will feel that its honor is being compromised. It justifies a response that could reignite the entire war in the region.

He pointed out that Hezbollah has a dual interest, in terms of calm, which will allow it to reorganize its ranks, as well as maintaining its narrative as a defender of Lebanon, and if Israel does not withdraw from the village areas in front of Metulla, as promised, the organization may feel forced to respond in order to preserve its image. However, Baram estimates that if Hezbollah returns fire, Israel will not hesitate to use its force in important centers such as Beirut.

Baram explained that the ceasefire is a complex test that may become a testing point for the entire region, and if Israel acts out of vigilance and maintains a policy of resolute disruption of every violation, it can maintain deterrence and avoid an all-out war. On the other hand, if it allows Hezbollah to organize itself without interruption, it may This leads to another cycle of violence that will erupt as soon as the party feels that it is ready, stressing: “The matter must not be answered with silence. Every preparation for war must be met with fire, and this is a principle that must not be abandoned in confronting Hezbollah.” (Emirates 24)