All-powerful in Lebanon, pro-Iranian Hezbollah has until now been content with limited intervention in the war launched by its ally, Palestinian Hamas, against Israel, which has already left thousands dead.
But the close ties between the two groups could push him to open a new front on Israel’s northern border, particularly in the event of a ground offensive on Gaza, analysts believe.
Since well before the October 7 attack, Hamas and Hezbollah have formed a “joint operations room” with the Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the Al-Quds Force, the elite unit of the Revolutionary Guards in Iran, according to a source close to Hezbollah.
And they have been coordinating their actions for years, as part of the “axis of resistance”, encompassing Palestinian, Lebanese, Iraqi and other movements opposed to Israel and close to Iran which provides them with financial and logistical support.
For analyst Mohanad Hage Ali of the Carnegie Center for the Middle East, in the case of “a global ground invasion of Gaza, Hezbollah could find itself forced to participate in the war”, by virtue of this “unity of the fronts” .
“A decisive attack against one of the components of this alliance, which could annihilate Hamas,” would push for “the intervention of the other components,” he explains.
A military spokesperson said Thursday that the Israeli army was preparing for a “ground maneuver” in the Gaza Strip, but that nothing “has yet been decided.”
Since Sunday, the day after the bloody Hamas attack, Hezbollah, which has a formidable arsenal, has announced that it is bombing Israeli positions near the border between the two countries.
Hamas and Islamic Jihad also claimed responsibility for bombing and infiltration into Israel from the Lebanese border.
Balance of Terror
But operations have for the moment remained limited, as have Israeli bombings on the outskirts of border villages in southern Lebanon.
A Western diplomatic source in Beirut underlines that Israel and Hezbollah have for the moment “remained within the framework of the tacit rules of engagement” which provide for equivalent reprisals.
The “balance of terror” has prevailed since the 2006 war between the two parties, which left more than 1,200 dead on the Lebanese side, mostly civilians, and 160 on the Israeli side, mostly military.
The pro-Iranian formation thus emphasized on Wednesday that it had fired guided missiles at an Israeli position in response to the death of three of its militants in a bombing of their observation posts two days earlier.
But “there is a real risk that the situation will degenerate in the event of a trigger, such as a ground offensive in Gaza or civilians killed on both sides,” according to the same diplomatic source.
“Hezbollah’s position since 2006 has been focused on deterrence rather than military confrontation,” notes Aram Nerguizian of the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).
The Shiite formation, which has, according to him, an “increasingly sophisticated combination of missile capabilities” de facto controls southern Lebanon despite the deployment of the Lebanese army and UN peacekeepers.
Terrible cost
On August 14, its leader Hassan Nasrallah warned Israel, which had threatened to return Lebanon “to the Stone Age” if Hezbollah provoked it.
Hezbollah only needs “a few high-precision missiles” to destroy “airports (..), power plants, communications centers and the Dimona (nuclear) power plant,” he replied.
Last May, Hezbollah unveiled heavy weapons during maneuvers in southern Lebanon, and simulated a drone attack against an Israeli town.
Its fighters had also simulated an infiltration for an attack via a breach in the concrete wall erected by Israel on the border.
Israel and Washington, which dispatched an aircraft carrier to the region, have warned Hezbollah against opening a new front.
The cost of a new war for Lebanon, already economically exhausted, would be terrible.
Moreover, “political and community polarization is at such a level that in the event of a new major war in southern Lebanon, the Shiite voters of Hezbollah who flee would not be well received by their compatriots” other communities, unlike what was the case in 2006, warns Aram Nerguizian.