On Friday morning, soon after two rockets were fired at Israel from Lebanon, Defense Minister Israel Katz did what he has done so often since taking over from Yoav Gallant last November: issued threats.
“The fate of Beirut will be the same as the fate of Kiryat Shmona,” he warned. “If there is no peace in Kiryat Shmona and the Galilee communities, there will be no peace in Beirut either.”
Without saying who was responsible for the rocket fire – one of which was intercepted and one which fell short inside Lebanon – Katz placed direct responsibility on the Lebanese government.
“We will not allow a return to the reality of October 7. We will ensure the security of Galilee residents and act forcefully against any threat,” he said.
Upon hearing this, many Israelis likely just yawned and went on with their day, having grown accustomed to a steady stream of empty threats over the last few weeks and months. They were surprised, therefore, when a few hours later, the ground in Beirut shook when IAF planes hit an alleged drone storage center in Dahiyeh, the southern Beirut neighborhood that houses Hezbollah’s headquarters.
This time, the threat was not empty.
The rockets launched Friday from Lebanon marked the second such incident in six days, following a barrage of six rockets toward Metulla earlier in the week – the first rocket attack from Lebanon since December. In that earlier incident, three rockets were intercepted, and three fell short. The IDF responded with artillery fire, followed by two waves of airstrikes in southern and eastern Lebanon.
Friday’s strike on Beirut – signaling that there will be no quiet in the Lebanese capital if there is no quiet in Kiryat Shmona – was meant as a message, both to the Israeli public and to Lebanon.
Israel must show northern residents their homes are safe to return
In early March, the government told the estimated 70,000 residents displaced from 43 communities in the North that it was safe to return home. If the government indeed wants those residents to go back – and to stay – it needs to show that it is secure.
One way to do that is by significantly increasing the IDF presence on the Lebanese border and near the adjacent communities, which it has done. Another is by adopting – and enforcing – a zero-tolerance policy toward any rockets or projectiles launched from Lebanon, regardless of who fires them.
For those who have returned to their homes and those still weighing the move, it makes little difference if the rockets fired at Metulla and Kiryat Shmona were fired by Hezbollah, Hamas IN Lebanon, or some other spin-off terrorist organization. What matters is that their lives were once again disrupted.
Which is why a direct strike on Dahiyeh makes strategic sense.
Under the ceasefire agreement that went into effect on November 27, “The government of Lebanon will prevent Hezbollah and all other armed groups (emphasis added) in the territory of Lebanon from carrying out any operations against Israel, and Israel will not carry out any offensive military operations against Lebanese targets, including civilian, military, or other state targets, in the territory of Lebanon by land, air, or sea.”
The second part of that clause is dependent on the first. Israel’s operation against Lebanon will end when there are no longer operations – or preparations for operations – against Israel from Lebanese territory.
The Lebanese government, under this agreement, was to deploy 10,000 troops to southern Lebanon to prevent the type of rocket fire witnessed on Friday. It hasn’t done so. Friday’s response is meant to serve as an inducement.Tellingly, Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam used the term “irresponsible” to characterize the rocket attack – which, according to the Alma Research and Education Center, was fired from an area north of the Litani River, some 17 km. from Kiryat Shmona – and said it was a threat to the stability and security of Lebanon.
Lebanese Armed Forces Commander Rudolf Haykal was quoted Saturday as saying that several suspects involved in the launch of the rockets had been arrested. He said that firing rockets at what he called “the occupied Palestinian territories” serves Israel.
Had Israel not responded as it did, would Salam have denounced the attacks and ordered the arrest of those responsible? There is room for doubt.
Israel’s response, however, must be calibrated. Since the November 27 ceasefire, it has made clear that the old formula of “quiet will be met with quiet” no longer applies if Hezbollah uses that quiet to rearm and regroup. It will no longer absorb provocations or rocket fire without responding, and it will not rely on the international community to enforce the terms of the ceasefire but will do so itself.
At the same time, Israel sees a government in Beirut, with Salam as prime minister and Joseph Aoun as president, that it can work with. That government has made it clear to Hezbollah that it hopes to reclaim sovereignty. Israel does not want to stand in the way of that effort.
Striking Dahiyeh, Hezbollah’s stronghold, walks a fine line: It sends a clear message without weakening Lebanon’s central government, as a strike on national infrastructure might.
Following the attack on Beirut, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said, “Whoever has not yet internalized the new situation in Lebanon has received an additional reminder of our determination.
“The equation has changed; what prevailed before October 7 will not recur. We will not allow firing at our communities, not even a trickle.”
US backs Israel completely in IDF strikes in Lebanon
One factor that has changed in the equation is unflinching US support.
Following the attack, Washington backed Israel completely. There was no hesitation, no warnings of an escalation, and no talk of “proportionality.”
“Israel is defending its people and interests by responding to rocket attacks from terrorists in Lebanon,” State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said on Friday. “We expect the Lebanese Armed Forces to disarm these terrorists to prevent further hostilities.”
And Deputy Special Envoy for Middle East Peace Morgan Ortagus, in an interview with Al Arabiya, said the rocket launches were “blatant violations” of the ceasefire and called on Beirut “to rid their territory” of the terrorist groups responsible.
“So to me, it’s insignificant if it’s Hezbollah, if it’s Hamas, or another group. What matters is whenever rockets leave your country and go to another country, then you are unfortunately breaking the ceasefire.” She added that the steps the Lebanese Army took, while positive, were not enough.
That, ultimately, is the heart of the matter. Lebanon’s failure to assert complete control over its territory is as much an Israeli problem as a Lebanese one. Friday’s strike in Beirut was meant to get that message across: The strike was not just retaliation but a recalibration of the rules.