Israel appears to be shifting to a new strategy for managing the conflict in southern Lebanon, relying on sustained low-intensity military operations while maintaining freedom of movement and a military presence along the border, rather than pursuing a full-scale war or broad territorial occupation, according to military analysts.

The approach comes as implementation of the framework agreement remains stalled and Israeli forces continue to establish new facts on the ground, suggesting a transition to what experts describe as a strategy of "low-intensity warfare" that allows Israel to manage the conflict over the long term with lower military and political costs.

While diplomatic efforts continue, the Israeli military has intensified activity on the ground. Israeli forces carried out demolitions targeting homes in the southern Lebanese towns of Hadatha, Beit Yahoun and Tayri, with explosions heard across villages in the Bint Jbeil district. Heavy gunfire was also reported from Khiyam.

Israeli troops have also established crossing gates linking the "yellow zone," the border area and the region south of the Litani River. They continued bulldozing roads stretching from Hamoul to Naqoura and onward to Ayta al-Shaab, while cutting down mature trees along both sides of the route.

Retired Brig. Gen. Fadi Daoud said the developments cannot be characterized as a conventional war but instead represent a distinct military doctrine.

“What is happening in southern Lebanon cannot be described as a full-scale war,” Daoud told Asharq Al-Awsat. “It falls within what is known militarily as low-intensity warfare—a form of conflict that allows the stronger side to sustain military operations over a prolonged period at relatively limited cost while maintaining continuous pressure on its adversary without sliding into a broader war.”

Daoud argued that "low-intensity warfare" is the most accurate military description of the current situation, rather than simply describing it as an effort to reduce military costs.

“This type of warfare differs from conventional or large-scale wars because it relies on intermittent but continuous military operations that can be sustained over long periods at relatively low cost for the side that enjoys military superiority,” he said.

According to Daoud, Israel has fundamentally altered the dynamic that had previously governed its confrontations with Hezbollah.

“Hezbollah traditionally relied on prolonging the conflict in order to raise Israel’s costs,” he said. “Israel has now reversed that equation. It is the one managing a low-intensity war at a cost it can sustain, taking advantage of its air superiority and its freedom to operate inside Lebanese territory.”

He said the shift reflects more than a tactical adjustment.

“This is also a long-term strategic approach that allows Israel to retain the battlefield initiative while imposing a new deterrence equation in which any attempt to retaliate becomes more costly for its adversaries than for Israel itself,” Daoud said.

He pointed to Israel’s construction of what he described as “military gates” along the border as one of the clearest indicators of a long-term operational strategy.

“These gates are not simply temporary security measures,” he said. “They reflect a long-term operational vision.”

According to Daoud, the structures are designed to regulate movement into and out of areas under Israeli control, monitor civilians and restrict freedom of movement.

“The establishment of such gates effectively represents an occupation,” he said. “They are not normally built if the military presence is expected to last only days or weeks.”

“When a military force installs permanent gates, it signals preparations for a relatively long-term deployment,” he added. “No one builds this kind of field infrastructure if they intend to withdraw after ten days or a month.”

Daoud also said Hezbollah’s military options have become increasingly limited under the new conditions.

“Launching rockets or drones no longer produces the same strategic effect because any such attack now triggers an Israeli response that is more severe than the attack itself,” he said.

Instead, he said Hezbollah could increasingly resort to limited operations carried out by small units.

“We may see specialized operations conducted by small groups of two, three or five fighters through ambushes or attacks targeting patrols or officers,” Daoud said. “This was the prevailing model in southern Lebanon before 2000, although the Israeli army is now much more cautious and better prepared to deal with such tactics.”

Retired Brig. Gen. Naji Malaeb offered a similar assessment, saying the decline in military activity should not be interpreted as an end to the risk of renewed confrontation.

“The continued low level of military activity does not necessarily mean the possibility of confrontation has disappeared,” Malaeb told Asharq Al-Awsat. “So far, it reflects continued, albeit partial, adherence to the ceasefire despite political objections to the framework agreement.”

Malaeb said Hezbollah’s early rejection of the framework agreement had not translated into systematic violations of the ceasefire.

“The only exception was the isolated incident in Deir Seryan, when one individual opened fire on an Israeli patrol, killing one officer and wounding several soldiers,” he said.

“Since then, Hezbollah has carried out no further operations, which suggests, in my assessment, that it remains committed to the ceasefire.”

Malaeb said he does not expect hostilities to resume if U.S. mediation succeeds in securing implementation of the understandings reached by the parties.

“However, continued Israeli incursions and military operations could lead to localized clashes or revive military activity,” he said. “Any fighting would likely remain confined to areas where Israeli forces are still deployed rather than escalating into a full-scale confrontation.”

According to the analysts, southern Lebanon is witnessing a transformation in the way the conflict is being managed rather than in its underlying objectives.