War in installments

The Lebanese-Israeli border has witnessed a noticeable escalation recently, as the pace of military operations carried out by Hizbollah against Israeli targets increases. This escalation comes amid growing tensions in the region, and I describe it as a "war in installments", as Hizbollah relies on the tactic of sporadic operations limited in time and place instead of launching a comprehensive war, which reflects a calculated and flexible strategy in dealing with developments on the regional scene.

Historically, Hizbollah has been known for its ability to move within tactical frameworks that suit the field and political circumstances, and its operations against Israel are part of a long-term policy aimed at maintaining a balance of deterrence with the Hebrew state. Although these operations appear sporadic and not linked to a broad escalation context, they carry multiple messages to Israel and regional and international powers.

One of the most prominent factors that explain this strategy is the desire to avoid being dragged into a comprehensive war that could have disastrous results for Lebanon and the region. Hizbollah is fully aware of the high price of such a war, especially considering the deteriorating economic and social conditions in Lebanon. Therefore, these operations are used as a means of pressure and keeping tensions from reaching the point of no return.

These operations rely on guerrilla warfare tactics, whereby sudden and rapid strikes are carried out on specific targets, often in border areas, such as military sites or Israeli patrols. These operations are highly flexible, making it difficult for Israel to respond effectively. Although these operations do not usually result in a large-scale escalation, they maintain a state of instability and put Israel in a permanent defensive position.

In addition, the “instalment war” allows Hizbollah to gradually test Israeli and international reactions, which enables it to adjust its strategy based on changes on the ground and politically. For example, if Israeli reactions are limited, this may encourage the party to carry out larger or more daring operations. However, if the responses are harsh, it can retreat or change tactics to avoid an unwanted escalation.

At the same time, however, this strategy carries significant risks, as escalating operations, even if gradual, could eventually lead to a comprehensive confrontation that is difficult to control. Israel, which views Hizbollah as a major threat, may find itself forced to respond with greater force if the pace of operations escalates to the point of posing a real threat to its national security. This means that both sides are walking a tightrope, as any miscalculation could lead to the outbreak of a full-scale conflict.

On the domestic front, Hizbollah seeks through these operations to enhance its image as the protector of Lebanon and the defender of its causes, especially in light of the increasing internal and external criticism of its role in Lebanese politics and its impact on the country’s stability. These operations could be used to divert attention away from the internal crises that Lebanon is experiencing, and to present the party as a resistance force confronting the “Zionist enemy” at a time when Lebanon is under enormous economic and political pressure.

Finally, it can be said that Hizbollah’s military operations against Israel are part of a calculated strategy aimed at achieving multiple goals, both locally and regionally. This strategy, despite its flexibility and adaptability to changing circumstances, remains fraught with risks, as gradual escalation could lead at any moment to a comprehensive explosion of the situation, putting the entire region on the brink of the abyss. Thus, the situation remains open to all possibilities, awaiting the outcome of this war in installments.

Hasan Dajah is professor of strategic studies at Al Hussein Bin Talal University