To the lebanese it is distressingly familiar. Their country is once again under attack from Israel. In response to missiles and drones fired by Hizbullah, a Shia militia, in support of its long-time backer, Iran, Israel has launched a massive onslaught on southern Lebanon and the capital, Beirut. Since March 2nd Israeli strikes have killed more than 950 people, among them over a hundred children. Israeli evacuation orders cover more than 14% of Lebanon’s territory. More than one million Lebanese, a fifth of the population, have been displaced, many for the second or third time in barely two years. Families who scrambled back to the ruins of the south after a ceasefire between Israel and Hizbullah in November 2024 are sleeping in cars on Beirut’s corniche or in its streets.
Things could get still worse. On March 16th Israel Katz, Israel’s defence minister, announced that the Israel Defence Forces (idf) had begun a “ground manoeuvre” against Hizbullah in Lebanon “to remove threats and protect [Israel’s] residents in the Galilee.” Touring the border in early March, Israel’s far-right finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich, posted a video promising that Dahiyeh, Beirut’s densely populated southern suburb, would soon look “like Khan Younis” in Gaza. On March 18th the idf destroyed some bridges over the Litani river, suggesting it may be preparing for a longer occupation.
Israel is not yet committed to a ground offensive, however. So far, the idf is operating only a few miles beyond the border. It has set up forward positions in a fairly narrow strip of land and carried out raids in deserted villages to find and destroy what it claims are hidden Hizbullah weapons stores and to prevent Hizbullah attacking Israel’s border communities.
A deeper Israeli invasion and occupation could push Lebanon into crisis. The mass displacement, overwhelmingly of Shias from the south, is reopening Lebanon’s sectarian fault-lines. In some Christian areas local authorities are telling Shias to stay away, and landlords refuse to rent to them. As more are displaced the strain on an already fragile political order increases.
Israel would also pay a heavy price for yet another war in Lebanon. Many thousands of reservists would have to be called up. Israel has now been on a war footing for almost two and a half years. The idf is anxious to avoid another major conflict while the war in Iran continues.
Israel’s dilemma is stark. Hizbullah is still weak. It is a long way off restoring its military, political and organisational power. Its only patron, Iran, is under withering American and Israeli attacks. Israel reckons this is its best chance to destroy it.
But air strikes and a limited ground offensive will not do that. In the 15 months since the ceasefire, hundreds of Iranian operatives have taken direct control of Hizbullah’s ground operations and the group’s efforts to rebuild itself. They have restocked weapons caches and decentralised command structures. For Israel to eliminate Hizbullah’s forces in southern Lebanon, even temporarily, would require a prolonged ground campaign, tying up much of the idf’s standing and reserve forces, for months at least.
An invasion also risks boosting Hizbullah. Lebanon’s Shias were starting to drift away. Support had ebbed after the militia drew Israel’s wrath in 2024 and then failed to repair the resulting damage. Those who know Hizbullah say it longs to confront Israeli soldiers on its own turf. A prolonged war or occupation would allow the group to reposition itself as a resistance movement fighting on behalf of all Lebanese.
All this comes as Lebanon’s own leaders are at last beginning to confront the militia that has functioned as a state within a state for so long. For years the country’s politicians and army have found reasons to avoid that. They have blamed a lack of resources and firepower and pointed to the risk of internal fragmentation (around a third of Lebanon’s official army are Shias). Many fear that such action would prompt Hizbullah to return to the assassinations and kidnappings it used in the past.
Lebanon’s government has gone further than ever seemed possible. In the week since Hizbullah pulled Lebanon into the war, it has declared the group’s military activities illegal and arrested dozens of its members for carrying weapons. The support for the ban by Nabih Berri, parliament’s speaker, himself a Shia, shows how far Lebanon’s politics has shifted. It has also offered direct talks with Israel, previously unthinkable (contact with Israel or Israelis is still a crime in Lebanon).
Israel’s leaders are still hesitating over whether to go in more forcefully. But they will not hesitate for ever. French and American diplomats have been trying to broker an Israeli-Lebanese agreement that would give Beirut more time to disarm Hizbullah; Israeli generals are sceptical about the capacity of Lebanon’s army to do so.
Success is not guaranteed. But even if doing something might be bad, argues Aram Nerguizian, an expert on the army, “doing nothing is much, much worse.” The longer the state hesitates, the closer the country drifts towards collapse.
The dilemma is clear: either Lebanon’s army takes on Hizbullah or Israel will. “It’s a turning point in 50 years of struggle,” says Sami Gemayel, head of Kataeb, a Christian party. “No one will allow Hizbullah to get out of this alive.” But, he adds bleakly, “will it be at the cost of destroying Lebanon or not?” ■
Sign up to the Middle East Dispatch, a weekly newsletter that keeps you in the loop on a fascinating, complex and consequential part of the world.