Netanyahu’s quandary in the North

The bottom line

> Israel is under pressure to start an offensive against Hezbollah in Lebanon amid the displacement of 70,000 Israelis from the north of Israel by rocket attacks.

> Israeli invasions of Lebanon have been unsuccessful in the past – Netanyahu will be aware of the costs of such a campaign.

> If an invasion is to happen at all, then it will not be immediate. Netanyahu is likely to wait for Israeli forces and his electorate to be ready and may see a Trump presidency as sanction to invade.

The Hamas attack on October 7 shook Israel to its core, and northern Israel remains transformed. Hezbollah rocket, missile, and drone attacks have forced more than 70,000 residents to flee south. Netanyahu is facing pressure to take action against the group in Lebanon in order to rehabilitate those at the brunt of the aggression.

Northern conflicts are costly

This is not the first time Israel has faced an enemy across their northern border – any invasion of Lebanon today is likely to be no less problematic.

In 1982 and 2006, attacks on northern Israel by the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO) and Hezbollah, respectively, led to Israeli invasions of Lebanon. Both campaigns were not as straightforward as anticipated, bore unacceptable material and human costs, and failed to achieve long-term peace and stability. In the 2006 war, Israeli forces underestimated the capabilities of their opposition and failed to curb Hezbollah rocket attacks – they withdrew after only a month.

Hezbollah’s arsenal and ranks have grown in tandem with Iran’s “axis of resistance” since 2006. While the Israeli Defence Force’s capabilities, too, have grown, the past months of war in Gaza have reminded them of the difficulty of fighting an insurgency on unfamiliar terrain: Hamas have been able to resist recent Israeli offensives; Hezbollah would prove an even more formidable foe.

Low appetite for war – on both sides

The domestic appetite for an invasion of Lebanon is low. Israel has now been at war for over nine months. Protests in Tel Aviv are signs of an electorate losing patience with a government that has failed to achieve its aims through military means. Plus, the memory of previous conflicts remains strong in the national consciousness, where Israelis were forced into underground shelters for months. War is not a popular policy tool.

On the other side of the fence, as well, there is war fatigue. Hezbollah have been fighting in Syria for over a decade, and its forces are tired, worn down, and may not have the morale for a fierce and possibly drawn-out campaign against Israel. Hezbollah have also been struggling with waning popularity domestically in the context of a growing economic crisis.

International pressure also weighs against an Israeli invasion of Lebanon. The international community fears further humanitarian fallout and a wider conflagration with Iran, and Hezbollah’s threats to Cyprus have concerned Europeans.

What comes next

Israel

Netanyahu is in no rush to invade. The likely costs are not worth the low probability of success. If an invasion comes, then it will do so in the coming months or year, not weeks. At the very least, Netanyahu must wait for the drawdown in Gaza to finish – Israel used four divisions in the 2006 invasion, and only a fraction of that number is in place on the northern border today – three remain occupied in Gaza. Movements of allied task groups into the Eastern Mediterranean are more likely for long-term deterrence rather than due to genuine concern of imminent conflict.

Such practical constraints on an immediate invasion come alongside the political and literal war fatigue of Israelis. Not only do soldiers re-deployed from Gaza to the northern border need time to rest, but after nine months Israelis are desperate for peace, and popular pressure is likely to disincentivise Netanyahu from immediate action.

Netanyahu, however, has been under fire from the far-right of Israeli politics, on which he relies for power, and may see aggression against Hezbollah as the only way to remain in office in the long run. Pressure to take action from displaced families may also prove an incentive for him to make the move.

Hezbollah

It is in Hezbollah’s interest, too, to resolve the conflict on the Israel-Lebanon border peacefully. Their own war fatigue and fears of triggering a conflict that will weaken them and further reduce their domestic support mean they are likely to be careful to not provoke, or provide the pretext for, an Israeli offensive.

To watch

While pressure has been mounting from international partners to resist war in the north, a possible change of power in Washington in the new year may give Netanyahu the sanction he needs to order an invasion. It is not clear what Donald Trump’s policy intentions would be towards Israel, but a Trump-led administration is more likely than a Democratic one to support an offensive in Lebanon, and this may give Netanyahu the confidence to do so in the coming year.