Islam Times - ’Israel’s’ History of Neglecting Commitments and Misjudging Hezbollah’s Capabilities

’Israel’s’ History of Neglecting Commitments and Misjudging Hezbollah’s Capabilities

Islam Times - Throughout its history, "Israel" has frequently disregarded international laws, treaties, and commitments made to other countries and groups. A recent example is "Israel's" declaration that it may postpone its withdrawal from Lebanon, despite stipulating such a withdrawal in a ceasefire agreement. This behavior risks undermining regional stability and could regress the situation to pre-2000 conditions. This essay explores the implications of this development, potential miscalculations regarding Hezbollah's capabilities, and important lessons from the past.

A Pattern of Disregarding Commitments

The tendency of "Israel" to overlook its commitments is not new. Since its establishment in 1948, "Israel" has engaged in numerous conflicts and peace processes, often delaying or avoiding the implementation of agreed-upon terms. For instance, the Oslo Accords in the 1990s aimed to establish a framework for so-called “peace” between "Israel" and the Palestinians, but "Israel" has acted as if the accords didn’t exist. These provocations often stem from internal political pressures, security concerns, or a desire to maintain strategic advantages. In the case of its occupation of Lebanon, "Israel's" hesitation to withdraw exemplifies a broader pattern of prioritizing short-term tactical benefits over long-term commitments to peace. However, this approach often comes with significant consequences, especially when dealing with an adversary like Hezbollah.

Hezbollah's Evolution as a Force

Hezbollah, founded in the early 1980s in response to "Israel's" invasion of Lebanon, has transformed into a formidable political and military force. Since the “Israeli” withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000, Hezbollah has grown significantly. At that time, the group lacked the sophisticated weaponry and battlefield experience it possesses today. Nevertheless, it succeeded in forcing "Israel" to withdraw, marking a rare instance of an Arab resistance group achieving such a victory against the “Israeli” military. This success was partly due to Hezbollah’s use of asymmetrical warfare tactics and deep integration within the local population, which provided logistical support and intelligence.

Recent Withdrawal Challenges

In November 2024, a ceasefire agreement brokered by the United States and France ended more than a year of fighting between "Israel" and Hezbollah. The agreement stipulated that "Israeli" forces would withdraw from southern Lebanon within 60 days, allowing for the return of displaced civilians. However, as the deadline approaches, "Israel" has expressed concerns about implementing the ceasefire and indicated a possible postponement of its withdrawal.

This decision has drawn strong opposition from Hezbollah, which warned that any delay would be seen as a violation of the agreement and could lead to renewed conflict. The Lebanese government has also urged "Israel" to adhere to the terms of the ceasefire, emphasizing the importance of maintaining regional stability.

Misjudging Hezbollah's Strength

Despite these developments, "Israel's" suggestion to delay its withdrawal suggests a potential miscalculation of Hezbollah’s current strength and resolve. This misjudgment may be influenced by regional power dynamics, particularly the change in regime in Syria and the election of Donald Trump as US President. The Trump administration’s strong support for "Israel" and confrontational approach to Iran may have emboldened “Israeli” leaders, leading them to underestimate the risks of provoking Hezbollah.

However, "Israel" should be cautious in assuming that Hezbollah’s capabilities have diminished. The group’s leadership has consistently demonstrated its commitment to resisting “Israeli” aggression and has shown remarkable adaptability. Despite suffering losses, Hezbollah still possesses an arsenal capable of inflicting damage on "Israel." Notably, during the 2024 conflict, "Israeli" air forces conducted extensive bombing campaigns but struggled to fully occupy even one village in southern Lebanon. Hezbollah fighters exhibited resilience and skills not seen before.

Learning from the Past

As the saying goes, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." "Israel" seems to have overlooked the historical lesson that the people of South Lebanon are resilient and resistant to occupation. They previously inflicted significant casualties on "Israeli" forces, leading to "Israel's" withdrawal in 2000 without a formal agreement, effectively handing a victory to Hezbollah. Now, "Israel" appears poised to make the same mistake. Hezbollah and the people of South Lebanon are likely to respond similarly, making "Israel" pay a heavy price for any renewed aggression.

Before 2000, Hezbollah was far from the military powerhouse it is today. Despite lacking advanced weaponry and extensive combat experience, Hezbollah compelled "Israel" to withdraw from southern Lebanon. This marked a significant shift in the balance of power and demonstrated that even organizations with limited resources could achieve substantial victories. Today, Hezbollah's capabilities have only grown, with access to sophisticated weaponry and a well-trained, battle-hardened militia.

Conclusion

"Israel's" history of neglecting commitments, especially in the context of its occupation of Lebanon, highlights a pattern of short-term strategic thinking that often backfires. While "Israel" may believe that delaying its withdrawal will provide a tactical advantage, such a move is likely to provoke Hezbollah and destabilize the region further. Given Hezbollah’s enhanced capabilities and historical resilience, "Israel" must recognize that its adversary is not the same as it was before 2000. Failing to do so risks repeating past mistakes, with potentially dire consequences for "Israel" and the broader Middle East.

The international community, particularly the United States and France, has a responsibility to pressure "Israel" to comply with the ceasefire agreement. Postponing the withdrawal undermines the credibility of ceasefire agreements and may erode trust in diplomatic solutions.