The fourth Israeli invasion of Lebanon, which officials in Israel and the US have described as a “limited ground operation” to destroy Hezbollah’s infrastructure, is seen as a reasonable approach by current and former US officials. However, they warn that it could easily take a turn for the worse.

What began last month with an Israeli raid into Syria’s Masyaf—where Iranian and Hezbollah tactical missile forces were said to be operating—was followed by the assassination of top Hezbollah commanders inside Lebanon, a two-day detonation of Hezbollah communications networks, and ultimately, the killing of its chief, Hassan Nasrallah.

This week, Israel announced the beginning of its invasion of southern Lebanon. Despite publicly warning Israel against such operations, the US quickly came out in support of the action on Monday night.

A White House National Security Council spokesperson told Al Arabiya English on Monday night, hours before Israel launched its invasion, that the operation was in line with Israel’s right to defend itself and against Hezbollah. “Of course, we know that mission creep can be a risk, and we will keep discussing that with the Israelis,” the official said.

Biden administration officials now believe there is a chance to further diminish a severely weakened Hezbollah and allow more pro-West groups to re-enter the political scene in Lebanon and for the Lebanese Armed Forces to deploy along the Blue Line in greater numbers.

The primary concern is that the Israeli operation may not be as limited as they say is intended. Israel invaded in 1978, 1982 and 2006 in a bid to clear the border area of Palestine Liberation Organization fighters before Iran formed Hezbollah and its militants took up positions in the south.

Israel has already called up additional battalions to the border this week, just hours after initiating its invasion of parts of southern Lebanon.

“The Israeli military’s brilliant tactical and operational victories almost never translate to strategic wins,” said Dave Des Roches, an associate professor at the Near East South Asia Center for Security Studies.

Israel previously stated its goal was to facilitate the return of approximately 60,000 residents to northern Israel after they fled due to Hezbollah shelling that began the day after the October 7 Hamas attack. Hezbollah declared that it would join the fight in support of Hamas and Gaza.

For months after, Israel pushed for a deal that would see Hezbollah fighters retreat with their arsenal further north, away from the border.

Hezbollah refused to budge, stating it would only cease attacks on Israel once a ceasefire was reached in Gaza and the Lebanese government was unable to pressure or convince Nasrallah to agree to a deal. This impasse ultimately led to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu approving the operation to kill Nasrallah.

After initially being blindsided by the Israeli slaying of Nasrallah, an Iranian Quds Force general, and several other top Hezbollah commanders in the southern suburbs of Beirut, Washington quickly shifted its stance. The Biden administration praised the killing of a “brutal terrorist,” claiming the world is a safer place without him.

With full US backing, Israel then invaded Lebanon, and the results remain to be seen.

Des Roches emphasized that the target list for Israel will be key. “It could be successful if they conduct a series of raids and immediately withdraw,” he said, highlighting an opportunity for Israel to degrade Hezbollah’s capabilities along the border.

Senior Biden administration officials said that the Israeli operation needs to remain limited and short in duration. “Otherwise, they lose us,” said one official, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Joseph Votel, the former head of the US military’s Central Command (CENTCOM), anticipated that the Israelis would initially conduct limited operations with smaller formations and specific missions.

“The size and duration of these operations may increase over time,” Votel said. He does not expect Israel to maintain any forces in an occupying role on the ground. Instead, he suggested they could establish sustained surveillance in the area using various technological means.

When asked why the US had changed its position—at least in the public sphere—about the invasion, the Pentagon stated that it supported Israeli plans to go after Hezbollah.

In response to why the US now backs #Israel’s invasion of #Lebanon after months of opposing it, #Pentagon Press Secretary Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder tells Al Arabiya English that the US fully supports the Israeli operation to dismantle #Hezbollah’s military infrastructure. @jhaboush pic.twitter.com/vxmqRmNPII

— Al Arabiya English (@AlArabiya_Eng) October 2, 2024

 

“As we understand it, they will be conducting limited operations to destroy Hezbollah infrastructure that could be used to threaten Israeli citizens,” Pentagon Press Secretary Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder told Al Arabiya English during a press briefing on Tuesday. “We’re continuing to consult with the Israelis to better understand how they intend to proceed.”

The Israeli army said eight troops were killed in clashes with Hezbollah inside Lebanon on Wednesday. Other reports suggested that the number was higher, with even more wounded. It is unclear how many Hezbollah fighters were killed.

US officials also told Al Arabiya English that the Israelis had shown them videos of their early raids, which purportedly included Hezbollah tunnels and weapons depots, adding that the US could not oppose such targeted operations against designated terrorist organizations.

“I do think this is a militarily prudent action to take right now—Hezbollah has been severely degraded, and now is the time to apply more pressure to achieve Israeli objectives,” Votel said.

Mick Mulroy, a former deputy assistant secretary of defense for the Middle East under the Trump administration, also believes that Israel will conduct limited, targeted raids focusing on tunnels and strongpoints before withdrawing. “This would avoid being bogged down but also allow them to eliminate the threat,” he said. Like Votel, Mulroy agrees that this would likely be the best tactical decision for the Israelis.

Regarding the US stance, he noted that the Biden administration may express objections, claiming a desire for de-escalation. “But if the US were in the same position, we would have likely gone in long ago. So, it is difficult to lecture Israel on this.”