After weeks of intense diplomacy aimed at brokering a cease-fire between Israel and Hezbollah militants, the United States opted for a completely different approach: to let the conflict in Lebanon play out.
Just two weeks ago, the US and France demanded an immediate 21-day ceasefire to prevent an Israeli invasion of Lebanon, reports Reuters. That effort was thwarted by Israel's execution of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, the launch of Israeli ground operations in southern Lebanon on October 1, and Israeli airstrikes that destroyed much of the group's leadership.
Meanwhile, Israel has expanded its targets to northern Lebanon where, according to health officials, at least 21 people were killed in an attack on the Christian-majority city of Aitou on Monday, while millions of Israelis sought shelter from missiles fired across the border. There have also been tensions between the Israeli military and UN peacekeepers in Lebanon.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who visited a military base in central Israel where four soldiers were killed in a Hezbollah drone strike on Sunday, said Israel would continue to attack the group "relentlessly, everywhere in Lebanon - including Beirut."
It is understood that US officials have dropped their request for a ceasefire, claiming that circumstances have changed. "We are supporting Israel in conducting these operations to weaken Hezbollah's infrastructure so that we can ultimately reach a diplomatic solution," State Department spokesman Matthew Miller said last Sunday.
The Pentagon announced on Sunday that it will send US troops to Israel, along with an advanced US anti-missile system. On Monday, the US Embassy in Lebanon strongly encouraged its citizens to leave the country immediately, warning that additional flights organized by the government to help US citizens leave Lebanon, which have been in place since September 27, will not be organized indefinitely.
The change in direction, according to Reuters, reflects the conflicting goals of the US - curbing the growing conflict in the Middle East, while at the same time trying to seriously weaken Hezbollah.
The new approach is both practical and risky.
The US and Israel would benefit from defeating a common enemy - Hezbollah, which Tehran uses as a threat to Israel's northern border - but encouraging Israel's ever-expanding military campaign risks a conflict that could spiral out of control, the analysis said.
John Alterman, a former State Department official, told Reuters the US wants to see Hezbollah weakened, but must weigh that against the risk of "creating a vacuum" in Lebanon or sparking a regional war.
He added that Washington's position appears to be: "If you can't change Israel's approach, you can try to steer it in a constructive way."
The virtue of necessity
Israel's new conflict with Hezbollah began when the group fired rockets at Israeli positions immediately after the October 7, 2023, attack on Israel by Hamas gunmen that triggered the Gaza war. Hezbollah and Israel have been exchanging fire ever since.
As months of indirect ceasefire talks between Israel and Hamas went by without success, Israel began in September to step up its bombing and pounding of Hezbollah.
After Nasrallah's death - which the US called "a measure of justice" - US President Joe Biden again called for a ceasefire along the border between Israel and Lebanon.
Netanyahu's government, however, launched a ground invasion, and within days the US dropped its cease-fire demands and expressed support for its ally's campaign.
Aaron David Miller, a former US negotiator for the Middle East, said Washington did not have high hopes of reining in Israel and saw potential benefits from the operation.
“On the one hand, many Lebanese stumble unhappily under the weight of Hezbollah's presence in Lebanon. But, on the other hand... this change is being imposed on Lebanon through a very violent campaign," said Jonathan Lord
"It certainly created a flywheel where the administration probably thought, 'Let's make a virtue out of necessity,'" he said, adding that U.S. officials were also likely holding off on pressure to try to contain Israeli retaliation for a ballistic missile attack by Tehran. last sunday.
There are no significant ceasefire negotiations underway today, European sources familiar with the situation said, adding that the Israelis will continue the operation in Lebanon for "weeks, if not months." Two US officials told Reuters that could be the timeframe.
Reuters writes that the Israeli campaign could bring Washington at least two benefits.
First, weakening Hezbollah - the most powerful Iranian-backed militia - could curb Tehran's influence in the region and reduce the threat to Israel and US forces.
Washington also believes military pressure could force Hezbollah to lay down its arms and pave the way for the election of a new government in Lebanon that would oust the powerful militant movement, which has been a major player in Lebanon for decades.
Jonathan Lord, a former Pentagon official who now works at the Center for a New American Security in Washington, said that would be difficult to achieve.
“On the one hand, many Lebanese stumble unhappily under the weight of Hezbollah's presence in Lebanon. But, on the other hand... this change is being imposed on Lebanon through a very violent campaign," said Lord.
A risky strategy
The ultimate goal, U.S. officials said last weekend, is to implement United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701, which ordered the establishment of the UNIFIL peacekeeping mission, to help the Lebanese army clear the southern border with Israel of weapons or armed personnel other than those belonging to the Lebanese state. .
However, as Israel expands operations in Lebanon, tensions have risen between Israel and UNIFIL. The UN said that Israeli tanks stormed their base on Sunday.
On Monday, Netanyahu dismissed accusations that Israeli troops deliberately threatened UNIFIL members as "totally false" and repeated calls for them to withdraw from combat zones near the border with Israel. He said Hezbollah uses UNIFIL positions as cover for attacks that have killed Israelis, including a drone attack on a military base on Sunday that killed four soldiers.
Netanyahu said he regretted any harm caused to UNIFIL personnel, but added that the best way to ensure their safety was "to obey Israel's request and temporarily withdraw from the danger zone."
A UNIFIL spokesman said on Platform X on Monday that the peacekeeping mission will remain. "We remain... we are in the south of Lebanon under the mandate of the Security Council. It is important to maintain the international presence and the UN flag in this area," said Andrea Tenenti.
The Israeli military brought foreign journalists to southern Lebanon on Sunday and showed them the entrance to a Hezbollah tunnel located less than 200 meters from the UNIFIL position, as well as the weapons caches the soldiers found.
UNIFIL has said that previous Israeli attacks have limited its monitoring capabilities, and UN sources say they fear it will be impossible to monitor possible violations of international law during the conflict.
US officials say talks with Lebanon's warring parties can take place while fighting continues, though analysts warn that the conflict greatly increases the risk of a wider war, especially as the region awaits Israel's response to an Iranian missile attack.
In addition to the risk of a war that could involve the US, there are fears that Lebanon will become the new Gaza.
A year of Israeli military operations has devastated the enclave and killed nearly 42.000 people, according to Gaza health authorities. American officials openly warn that Israel's offensive in Lebanon should not in the least be like the one in the Gaza Strip.
Despite those dangers, Alterman, who now heads the Middle East program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said diplomacy is unlikely to stop the fighting anytime soon.
"Netanyahu sees that all his risks are paying off, and it seems to me that at this moment Israel will have a hard time thinking that it should stop using its advantage," he said.
Bonus video:
