The slightest spark can set the entire Middle East ablaze. Tensions have been extremely high since the October 7 terrorist attack by Hamas against Israel, which left some 1,400 people dead. In response, the Israeli army bombards the Gaza Strip daily, causing more than 2,750 victims and appears to be preparing a ground intervention to eliminate the Hamas structure. The Jewish state must also monitor its northern border with Lebanon, where its confrontation with Hezbollah has resulted in exchanges of missile and rocket fire that have intensified for several days. Israel also evacuated the border after the death of an Israeli civilian on Sunday.
Enough to raise fears of the appearance of a new front in the war declared between Hamas and Israel. The conflict “would then change scale, paradigm, with consequences for the entire Middle East and the international system,” warns Adel Bakawan, director of the French research center on Iraq. However, Hezbollah, like Israel, has no interest in launching hostilities. Explanations.
Could the exchanges of fire between Israel and Hezbollah lead to the opening of a new front?
Each of the two parties flexes their muscles but neither seems to really want to strike. If the temperature rises on the Lebanese border between the Israeli army and Hezbollah, ally of Hamas, with the multiplication of deadly clashes, “what is happening does not go beyond the strategy of managing the balance of power”, according to Adel Bakawan. In other words, “it doesn’t go beyond the usual, the everyday,” he adds. “These intimidation shots from both sides are an exhibition of forces in order to impose themselves in the game, it is a dangerous game of intimidation because we are close to war, but there is a kind of restraint,” adds Pascale Asmar, political and media discourse analyst and independent researcher in Lebanon.
For the researcher, these are “messages sent to Israel and its American and European allies” by Iran, of which Hezbollah is “the armed wing” in the Middle East. These mutual provocations are unlikely to trigger a full-blown war between Hezbollah and Israel. It would not be the first time, but “the context is very different than in 2006”, recalls Pascale Asmar. Today, neither has any interest in triggering an open conflict which could have much broader consequences at the regional and global level.
Why neither Hezbollah nor Israel has any interest in fighting openly?
These acts of presence are therefore not intended to go much further. An agreement was reached almost a year ago to the day between Lebanon and Israel on the question of the exploitation of offshore gas deposits in the Mediterranean. An energy problem that is all the more important in light of the war in Ukraine. On the other hand, Hezbollah is already busy inside Lebanon in the grip of a multiple crisis, economic, political and “an internal context which does not allow for more damage. Lebanon has already touched the font, it could turn against Hezbollah,” recalls Pascale Asmar.
And there is no question of calling into question its status in Lebanon. “Today, despite its grand speech on the Resistance front, Hezbollah is rooted in what is happening in Lebanon and if it is theoretically concerned with Palestine, it has no concrete action strategy to support Hamas is more instrumental, capitalizing on the conflict,” explains Adel Bakawan. “He indirectly manages Lebanon and if he goes to war with Israel, it is not guaranteed that he will not lose his monopoly on the Lebanese state,” he adds. “There is a reciprocity of interests,” summarizes Adel Bakawan.
What are the elements that could trigger another front in the war?
Certain red lines could nevertheless trigger the fury of Hezbollah, starting with the participation of the United States in the conflict. The latter have no interest in actively participating in this war. Joe Biden is on the campaign trail for his re-election next year and intends to convince his voters that the Middle East region is safer today than before his arrival. “In all probability, we are moving towards respecting this red line,” believes Adel Bakawan.
If this American intervention is therefore excluded for the moment, the question of foreign hostages could change the situation, particularly if an American hostage were executed by Hamas. This is the scenario that pushed Washington to go to war against the Islamic State in Syria. While Barack Obama refused to commit, he was prompted by the staged execution of several American journalists by the terrorist group. Other red lines have been established by Hezbollah: the total occupation of the territory of the Gaza Strip by the Israeli army, or an attack on Iranian nuclear infrastructure.
A third front to lead to a third world war?
This is the disaster scenario. The worst imaginable. Because if this front opens, it does not open on its own. The entire region could be lost in an armed conflict which could become global with the participation of Western states allied to Israel. “We would change scale,” warns Adel Bakawan. Alongside Hezbollah, we must also anticipate the probable participation of the Syrian army. Israel would then be surrounded on three sides. “Israel has the capacity to manage three fronts – the Golan Heights, southern Lebanon and Gaza – but the consequences would be dramatic for the Middle East,” adds the researcher. Furthermore, “there is no guarantee that other countries will not rush into the conflict, such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iraq, Iran of course, but also Turkey… », he continues.
Entering this war for Hezbollah would be “a suicidal operation, the whole Middle East could burn,” says Pascale Asmar. This is why the United States and other powers like France are doing everything to try to calm things down. Emmanuel Macron thus “warned” Iranian President Ebrahim Raïssi on Sunday “against any escalation or extension of the conflict” between Israel and Hamas, “particularly in Lebanon”. Western countries cannot afford the luxury of another war, at the same time as they already provide significant material aid to Ukraine.