The Lebanese are holding their breath. Will the cease-fire, which started this morning at 8 am, hold ? No one dares imagine what happens if it doesn’t, but an extraordinary phenomenon developed this morning
as thousands of southern residents took to the road back to their villages, voting literally with their feet for a return to peace and normalcy. Another encouraging dimension was the announced withdrawal
of Israeli troops, signaling that there is no Israeli desire to stay in Lebanon should the cease-fire hold under the terms of UNSCR 1701.
Two heavy clouds remain: one concerns the low threshold of a nervous Israel, which turns any incident into a risk for hell to break loose. Incidents are inevitable on an imbricate terrain where Israeli soldiers
and Hezbollah militants form a fuzzy map. One or two Hezbollah militants were killed today, and the repetition of such incidents would quickly undermine the truce. Speaking to the Knesset this afternoon,
the Israeli Prime Minister announced Israel’s intention to continue its pursuit of Hezbollah. War would be again inevitable if these threats were carried out against Hezbollah’s leadership.
Read more…
In the Hezbollah-Israel war, another pattern resulting from the asymmetric conflict — pitting an armed political party against a state — has been the “battle of the forms.” It is
clear that neither party can win the war in the classical Clausewitzian manner: overpower the enemy and take over its territory. To overpower Israel, Hezbollah must occupy it. But it does not even envision
advancing into the Galilee. On the other side, Israel rightly hesitates to move too deep into Lebanese territory, not only because of the high number of casualties expected against a universally acknowledged
brave and effective resistance. By taking over Lebanese villages, Israel risks turning its anti-Hezbollah war into anti-Lebanon war of conquest — in other words into a classical war with a different
enemy.
What does asymmetry mean in terms of victory? A concept used by contract lawyers may be useful on such new terrain of geopolitics: “the battle of the forms.” When offer and acceptance become very
close in the formation of a contract, it is the very last formulation that wins the day, hence the advice to business clients to get their version of the last draft to prevail. Between Hezbollah and Israel,
success will be defined for each by the last version in the cease-fire contract.
Read more…
Three weeks into the war between Israel and Hezbollah, some patterns have emerged. In the first week, Israeli security officials declared that they wanted to bomb Lebanon back 50 years, and indeed destroyed
over 40 bridges across the country in the first few days, as well as a large number of factories, over 30 according to the Association of Lebanese Industrialists. Then the targets changed radically.
Clearly prompted by the United States, the Israeli government announced an objective alliance with the Lebanese government on the latter’s exclusive sovereignty over its territory and borders. Israel
then acted accordingly in its warfare. On a handful of occasions, which have puzzled the observers, Lebanese army points were targeted, but non-Hezbollah areas were rarely hit. The map of destruction was
characteristically Shiite; only few missiles were fired in other areas. In Beirut, destruction was limited to a perimeter of about one and half square kilometer, now known as the security quadrangle, which
consists of a small, poorer section in the Shiite suburbs, where Hezbollah’s sway has been historically dominant.
Read more…
