403
Sorry!!
Error! We're sorry, but the page you were
looking for doesn't exist.
Israeli Political Security Cabinet convenes to deliberate on significant issue
(MENAFN) The Israeli Political Security Cabinet convened yesterday to deliberate on a significant issue: the potential for a ground operation by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) in Lebanon. In light of recent operational successes over the past two weeks, military leaders are keen to leverage this momentum, especially given Hezbollah's apparent fatigue. The goal is to expand on these victories along the border, focusing on dismantling the operational infrastructure that Hezbollah has developed. This infrastructure is seen as crucial to Hezbollah's strategy for occupying the Galilee, including attack tunnels and sites for hiding weapons and operatives. Addressing these threats is vital for ensuring the safety of surrounding towns and allowing residents to return home safely.
According to a report by the Wall Street Journal, the IDF has recently carried out numerous special operations designed to lay the groundwork for possible ground actions, including tunneling efforts on the Lebanese side of the border. The IDF is particularly wary of the anti-tank capabilities that Hezbollah has been bolstering since the Second Lebanon War in 2006, involving extensive armaments and advanced missile systems.
The IDF is currently considering three possible strategies. The first involves conducting maneuvers close to the border fence to dismantle Hezbollah’s infrastructure. This focused operation would be limited in both scope and duration, potentially concluding within a few weeks. The second strategy would involve advancing to the Litani River to strike at infrastructure situated further from the border. The third option entails a more aggressive approach, moving north of the Litani River to deliver a more significant blow to Hezbollah's capabilities and forces.
The decision-making process will likely be influenced by three key factors: the level of damage inflicted on Hezbollah, the potential human cost in terms of soldiers' lives (including concerns about potential abductions), and the likelihood of a prolonged military presence in Lebanon. Considering these factors, it appears that Israel may lean towards the first option, aiming for a limited operation focused on the border area. This strategy would help Israel avoid international criticism that could stem from a more extensive incursion into Lebanese territory, while also allowing it to maintain a narrative of success domestically and portray Hezbollah as having failed.
The past two weeks have proven to be pivotal, not only due to concrete military achievements—such as the disruption of key figures in Hezbollah's leadership, including Hassan Nasrallah, and significant damage to its rocket launchers and logistical operations—but also in shaping the perceptions held by both sides. The psychological ramifications of this conflict are substantial, impacting public sentiment and influencing the strategic decisions of both the Israeli military and Hezbollah. As tensions escalate, the evolving situation remains critical for regional stability and the larger geopolitical context.
According to a report by the Wall Street Journal, the IDF has recently carried out numerous special operations designed to lay the groundwork for possible ground actions, including tunneling efforts on the Lebanese side of the border. The IDF is particularly wary of the anti-tank capabilities that Hezbollah has been bolstering since the Second Lebanon War in 2006, involving extensive armaments and advanced missile systems.
The IDF is currently considering three possible strategies. The first involves conducting maneuvers close to the border fence to dismantle Hezbollah’s infrastructure. This focused operation would be limited in both scope and duration, potentially concluding within a few weeks. The second strategy would involve advancing to the Litani River to strike at infrastructure situated further from the border. The third option entails a more aggressive approach, moving north of the Litani River to deliver a more significant blow to Hezbollah's capabilities and forces.
The decision-making process will likely be influenced by three key factors: the level of damage inflicted on Hezbollah, the potential human cost in terms of soldiers' lives (including concerns about potential abductions), and the likelihood of a prolonged military presence in Lebanon. Considering these factors, it appears that Israel may lean towards the first option, aiming for a limited operation focused on the border area. This strategy would help Israel avoid international criticism that could stem from a more extensive incursion into Lebanese territory, while also allowing it to maintain a narrative of success domestically and portray Hezbollah as having failed.
The past two weeks have proven to be pivotal, not only due to concrete military achievements—such as the disruption of key figures in Hezbollah's leadership, including Hassan Nasrallah, and significant damage to its rocket launchers and logistical operations—but also in shaping the perceptions held by both sides. The psychological ramifications of this conflict are substantial, impacting public sentiment and influencing the strategic decisions of both the Israeli military and Hezbollah. As tensions escalate, the evolving situation remains critical for regional stability and the larger geopolitical context.
Legal Disclaimer:
MENAFN provides the information “as is” without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the provider above.
Comments
No comment