Israel-Hezbollah ceasefire has set the stage for a Fourth Lebanon War

Leaving Hezbollah in place to regroup and rebuild, and abandoning the territory in southern Lebanon adjacent to Israel’s northern border, are merely setting the stage for the fourth Lebanon war.

By MICHAEL FREUND DECEMBER 6, 2024 22:35

UNIFIL SOLDIERS of Italy’s San Marco unit patrol along the Litani River near the Lebanese village of Shuhur, in 2006. (photo credit: THOMAS COEX/AFP via GETTY IMAGES)

Last week, Israel made one of its gravest strategic mistakes since the war began on Oct. 7 last year.

Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, the Jewish state agreed to a ceasefire in Lebanon, prompting shouts of joy and sighs of relief in underground Hezbollah bunkers throughout Beirut.

Sure, Israel gave the terrorist organization an unprecedented pummeling in recent months, degrading its military arsenal, weakening its command structure, and delivering a blow to its fighting image.

But it is precisely now, when Hezbollah is down but not out, that Israel can and should finish the job rather than retreating to its corner like a boxer in the ring in between rounds.

As of this writing, the ceasefire is teetering on the brink of collapse, as Hezbollah, not surprisingly, has willfully and repeatedly violated its terms. Whether the deal holds or not is beside the point because the very idea of granting a respite to Hezbollah means giving the thugs a breather, a chance to regroup, refine their strategy, and plan future violence and attacks.

Mourners gather during the funeral of Hezbollah terrorists, who were killed during hostilities with Israeli forces, after a ceasefire agreement between the two parties took effect, in Maarakeh, southern Lebanon November 29, 2024. (credit: REUTERS/AZIZ TAHER)

But don’t take my word for it.

Just two weeks ago, former Lebanese president Amin Gemayel warned in an interview that a ceasefire would give Hezbollah an opportunity once again to reassert itself on the Lebanese scene.

“I believe that in the long term, this does not serve the interests of Israel, the United States, and the Arab region,” Gemayel said, adding, “It will be a preparation for an additional war and a type of ticking time bomb.”

Indeed, if this latest act of capitulation by Israel seems familiar, that’s because it is virtually identical to what happened in 2006 at the end of the Second Lebanon War, when the government of prime minister Ehud Olmert ignominiously agreed to halt the IDF’s counterterrorism operation against Hezbollah.

The result of that war was UN Security Council Resolution 1701, which was supposed to ensure that Hezbollah would pull back north of the Litani River and never again threaten Israel’s North.

---

---

We all know how that turned out.

At the time, Olmert insisted that his mini-war had achieved its aims. In an interview with the German magazine Der Spiegel a few months after the end of the conflict, Olmert said, “The goals we set forth for this war were to deploy the Lebanese army in the south of Lebanon and to remove the threat of Hezbollah from the townships of northern Israel. When I accepted the ceasefire on August 14, these goals were to be implemented successfully.”

The following year, in May 2007, Olmert doubled down and told Hadassah Magazine that one of the aims of the war had been “the complete removal of all Hezbollah fortifications south of the Litani River. This was achieved in full.”

Within just a few years, however, Hezbollah had not only rebuilt what had been destroyed but vastly expanded its arsenal both quantitatively and qualitatively, and eventually had terrorists literally patrolling the border with Israel.

All the promises made by the Lebanese government, the assurances of international guarantees, and soothing words from talking heads on television proved to be sheer rubbish.

Yet now, the government is inexplicably risking a repeat of Olmert’s catastrophe by putting a premature end to the third Lebanon war, which has been raging in recent months.

This is the equivalent of watching a movie for a second or third time in the hopes that the ending will be different. In other words, it is an act of unadulterated folly.

Why Israel's ceasefire with Hezbollah is a bad idea

Just consider a few of the absurdities in the ceasefire deal. It failed to create a buffer zone in southern Lebanon and permitted residents of the area’s villages, many of whom are Hezbollah terrorists and accomplices, to return to their homes.

Sure enough, within days of the deal’s announcement, there were videos on social media of Hezbollah terrorists waving their organization’s flag not far from the border with Israel.

The agreement also neglected to include detailed and specific guidelines and mechanisms for disarming Hezbollah, leaving it in possession of weapons with which to carry out future attacks.

But perhaps the biggest joke of all is the ostensible agreement that the manufacture of weapons in Lebanon or their importation will be overseen by the Lebanese government.

It is difficult to imagine that this idea was concocted with a straight face because it is precisely due to the weakness of the Beirut authorities that Hezbollah has been able to operate as a state within a state for all these years.

Furthermore, Hezbollah has held cabinet positions in Lebanon’s various governments since 2005 and currently has two seats in its administration.

Does anyone seriously think that a government that includes Hezbollah will take the steps necessary to disarm Hezbollah?

Residents of Israel’s North are furious about the arrangement, and rightly so. They have lived on the front line for decades and watched as successive Israeli governments failed at the most basic and elementary task of providing them with security.

SO IF, as I suggest, this agreement is truly as harebrained as it seems, you might be wondering why Israel went along with it.

The solution is to be found in, of all places, the length of the agreed-upon ceasefire, which is 60 days.

Why 60 days and not, say, 15 or 30?

Well, a look at the American political calendar provides the obvious answer. Sixty days takes us through the end of the Biden administration. In other words, Biden wants to go out with a “win” of some sort, and his envoy Amos Hochstein reportedly threatened Israel behind the scenes with everything from withholding weapons shipments to refraining from vetoing anti-Israel resolutions at the UN Security Council.

This is the only possible rational explanation for this deal – namely, an attempt to buy time until Donald Trump is sworn in as president in January and leave him to deal with the mess.

However politically or diplomatically necessary some believe this deal may have been, it does not take away from the fact that Israel is squandering a historic opportunity to destroy Hezbollah and restore our national deterrence.

Our brave young soldiers did not go into Lebanon to fight and bleed for the sake of yet another meaningless piece of paper backed by unreliable international monitors. They put their lives on the line to put an end to the threat to the state.

Leaving Hezbollah in place to regroup and rebuild, and abandoning the territory in southern Lebanon adjacent to Israel’s northern border, are merely setting the stage for the fourth Lebanon war.

It may take days, weeks, months, or even years, but, sadly, it will come.

And it is entirely avoidable, if only Israel demonstrates the courage to win.             

The writer served as deputy communications director under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.