Security measures and friction with Lebanese authorities
Hezbollah’s response and the situation on the ground
The Litani River line as a strategic boundary
Israel maintains an active and sustained presence in southern Lebanon despite the ten-day ceasefire agreed with Hezbollah. The situation on the ground is far from what would constitute a genuine withdrawal: the Israeli Army has deployed troops and issued clear warnings to the civilian population, restricting access to large areas within Lebanese territory.
Recently, the Israeli Army released an operational document showing a deployment line extending between 5 and 10 kilometres into southern Lebanon. This perimeter covers an east-west strip encompassing more than fifty towns, whose inhabitants have been advised not to return for security reasons, indicating an effective occupation of the area.
Image of Israeli tanks on the border with Lebanon – PHOTO/MENAHEM KAHANA
Security measures and friction with Lebanese authorities
An Israeli military spokesperson defended this strategy, arguing that it is a measure to “prevent the return of hostile activity in areas where Hezbollah cells still operate. This justification is not unprecedented, as the Army has on previous occasions used the creation of security belts to protect northern Israel.
However, the depth and extent of the Israeli operation have led to tensions with the Lebanese authorities. Several local officials in the south have insisted that displaced people must wait before returning to their homes due to damage to housing, blocked infrastructure and the risks posed by unexploded ordnance. A mayor from the Marjayoun area summed up the situation: “The conditions for returning are not in place. People would find their homes destroyed or areas still under military surveillance”.
Hezbollah’s response and the situation on the ground
Hezbollah maintains its usual stance in the conflict. In a recent statement, a spokesperson for the group reaffirmed that the organisation “reserves the right to resist any foreign military presence on Lebanese territory”.
At the same time, isolated incidents have been reported in southern Lebanon which both sides interpret differently: Israel refers to attacks on its positions, whilst Hezbollah maintains that its actions are defensive in the face of incursions by Israeli troops.
Hezbollah insists its actions are defensive in response to the movements of Israeli troops – REUTERS/AZIZ TAHER
The Litani River line as a strategic boundary
One of the most sensitive aspects of the conflict is the Israeli Army’s reference to the Litani River as the boundary of its deployment. This line is no coincidence, as historically the Litani has been a symbolic and strategic boundary in southern Lebanon.
The inclusion of this reference on the military map implies an expansion of the area under Israeli operational control or, at the very least, a civilian exclusion zone. This has further strained relations along the border, by extending a perimeter that restricts the local population’s access and mobility beyond what is customary.
Political interpretations
The current ceasefire is perceived more as a reduction in the intensity of the conflict than as a tangible withdrawal. Although open fighting has subsided, normalisation in the region is still a long way off. Numerous communities in southern Lebanon remain displaced and reconstruction work has not yet begun.
In the capital, Beirut, political sources acknowledge that the situation could drag on if a broader agreement regarding the military presence on the border is not reached. Conversely, Israel reiterates that withdrawal will only be possible once it is guaranteed that Hezbollah has lost its operational capacity in the area.
In short, southern Lebanon remains in a grey area, caught between the absence of open warfare and the lack of effective peace, with active military movements and thousands of civilians displaced from their homes.