What Israel means by a ‘limited ground incursion’ and how previous invasions in Lebanon evolved

Israel announced on Monday “limited and localized ground incursions” against Hezbollah targets in towns in southern Lebanon close to the border. The objective, according to the authorities, is to eliminate the threat posed by the Lebanese Shiite group and its network in the south of the country. Same objectives that Israel declared during its previous invasions in 1978, 1982 – when the Lebanese Shiite armed group did not even exist – and 2006.

After announcing for several days that the boots of Israeli soldiers would tread on “enemy” soil for direct combat with Hezbollah, the army denies having planned a large-scale invasion of Lebanon. Their goal, they insist, is to dismantle the threat in southern Lebanon and allow citizens evacuated from northern Israel to return home safely.

The scale and scope of the Israeli ground operation remains unclear. “We are not going to Beirut. We are not going to the cities of southern Lebanon. We are focusing on the area of ​​these towns close to our border,” army spokesman Daniel Hagari said on Tuesday. However, the history of Israel’s successive invasions of Lebanon shows that Israel’s objectives often change once the ground incursion begins.

“Given historical precedents, it is difficult to determine the true limits of this operation. During the military operations of 1978 and 1982, Israel’s initial limited incursions escalated significantly and the 1982 invasion reached the Lebanese capital, Beirut, and led to an 18-year occupation that had wide-ranging repercussions in the country. Lebanon, Israel and the region in general. » warn analysts from the American think tank The Soufan Center.

The parallels with the 1982 invasion are obvious. Although Hezbollah did not exist at the time, Israel accused the PLO of creating “a state within a state.” [Líbano]and “frequently launching rockets and terrorist attacks against Israeli civilian targets,” the same accusations he now leveled against Hezbollah.

“The stated objective of the operation [de 1982] “This was to put the communities of northern Israel out of the reach of terrorists,” recalls the army on its website. Four decades later, the stated objective is exactly the same. The armed forces then declared that their strategy was to “push the terrorists 40 kilometers to the north”, thus denying a large-scale invasion.

The 1982 invasion began on June 6, and a week later, on June 13, the Israeli army had already decided to change strategy by launching a siege on Beirut.

In a watered-down version of events, the Israeli army explains that it was “forced” to occupy the western part of the capital after the “chaos” caused by the assassination of the elected president of Lebanon, Bachir Gemayel, enemy of the PLO . . However, Israel did not completely withdraw from the country until 2000, 18 years later.

There, in the western part of the capital, took place shortly after the Sabra and Shatila massacre, during which a force allied with Israel killed hundreds of people in Palestinian refugee camps – between 700 (according to the investigation Israeli official) and 3,500 —. The massacre was declared a genocide by the United Nations General Assembly and both the international commission of inquiry and the official Israeli commission held Israel and its leaders responsible for the massacre.

Soufan Center analysts further conclude that “Hezbollah, as an organized force, emerged largely as a result of Israel’s invasion and subsequent occupation in 1982.”

“Once a military operation begins, controlling all the variables that contribute to the fog of war becomes a challenge, especially when expansion seems feasible,” notes the Soufan Center. In this case, it remains to be seen the extent of Hezbollah’s response and the “serious consequences” that Israel assured would have from the missile attack launched this Monday by Iran in response to the offensive of Tel Aviv in Lebanon.

Ignacio Gutiérrez de Terán, professor at the Department of Arab and Islamic Studies at the Autonomous University of Madrid and author of the book Hezbollah: the labyrinth of the Middle East (published October 14 by Catarata), he explains to elDiario.es that “if Iran’s attack is a false alarm, Israel will probably continue its incursion into Lebanon.”

“How are they going to stop Hezbollah from launching rockets into Tel Aviv? They would look bad if they said now that they only went to see what the south is like,” the professor said.

“This current action marks Israel’s fourth invasion of Lebanon, following similar operations in 1978, 1982 and the 2006 war, which lasted 34 days but had enormous implications for the Middle East,” recalls the Soufan Center .

During the first invasion in 1978, Israel launched its raid in retaliation for an attack in which the PLO killed 35 civilians after infiltrating Haifa and hijacking a bus. The operation plan, according to the army, “foresaw ground operations and the occupation of a territory that would extend for approximately 10 kilometers” and, once again, would push PLO members further north. . Just three days after the start of the operation, Israel decided to “expand the area of ​​the operation and advance to the banks of the Litani River.”

During the third invasion, in 2006, Tel Aviv blamed the Lebanese state for the attacks launched by Hezbollah. “This case concerns Israel and the State of Lebanon. Where do we attack? Once in Lebanon, everything is legitimate, not just southern Lebanon and not just the line of Hezbollah posts,” the commander of Israel’s Northern Command said at the time.

The 2006 conflict ended in a ceasefire following a UN Security Council resolution ordering the complete withdrawal of Israeli soldiers from Lebanon as well as all Hezbollah forces between the Litani River and the border with Israel. Since then, multiple clashes have taken place and Hezbollah and Israel have systematically violated the Security Council resolution – Hezbollah for its presence south of the river and Israel for its continued violations of Lebanese airspace and its continued occupation of ‘an area of ​​Lebanese territory.