Hezbollah-Israel: An Endless War in Whose Interests? (3)
In a series of articles, we aim to shed light on the current situation in light of the past, moving beyond impassioned, ideological, or romanticized rhetoric that misses the mark and leaves the reader to draw their own conclusions. In this context, it is high time to seriously counter the sterile rhetoric of resistance, not with counter-rhetoric, but with an in-depth approach that champions the rule of law, which can only be built upon sovereignty.
The first two articles presented a reinterpretation of the events surrounding Hezbollah's rise to power, from the Taif Agreement through Operation "Settling of Accounts" and the "July Agreement" (1993), up to the eve of its second war with Israel.
Stage 3: Hezbollah's Guerrilla War Against Oslo and Madrid
For three years following Operation "Settling of Accounts" (July 1993), the implementation of the Oslo Accords between the PLO and Israel progressed only sluggishly, catalyzed by Washington, which maintained its strategy at all costs to contain the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah in order to prevent it from derailing the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, while simultaneously seeking to advance rapprochement efforts between Tel Aviv and Damascus.
Furthermore, Washington and Tel Aviv openly discussed the imminent possibility of Israeli-Lebanese negotiations, in light of news from Lebanon indicating that the Syrian Ba'athist army had launched a campaign of repression against Hezbollah. Later, this news turned out to be disinformation orchestrated by the Iranians, with the complicity of Hafez al-Assad. To lend credibility to its deceptions, Tehran leaked information suggesting that Iran would now deliver military aid to Hezbollah through channels other than Syria, implying that Syria was willing to reduce tensions in southern Lebanon. To further convince observers of Syria's good intentions, the Iranians did indeed send a shipment of weapons, which was intercepted in Turkey, much to Ankara's dismay. In reality, the Syrians were playing two contradictory cards: on the one hand, the card of peace, which allowed them to manipulate Washington, and on the other hand, the card of the failure of the peace negotiations. The Americans, having believed that the Syrians had chosen peace, were convinced that their pressure on Tel Aviv and Damascus had borne fruit… when in fact, this was not the case.
Hafez al-Assad was actually preparing for the failure of the Oslo and Madrid processes, drawing ever closer to Iran and meeting secretly with Saddam Hussein, who was under American sanctions. Taking advantage of the American strategy of appeasement and convinced of the limits of Washington's pressure, Assad and Tehran advanced their interests in Lebanon, especially by supporting, arming, and strengthening Hezbollah. Between 1993 and 1996, Hezbollah waged a war of attrition against the South Lebanon Army (SLA) and the Israeli army, using rockets, missiles, and explosive roadside bombs. The SLA and the IDF, for their part, retaliated with artillery and air power. The belligerents tried to spare civilians in accordance with the "July 1993 Agreement," but to no avail. In each clash, the United States intervened swiftly and acted as mediator, preventing Israel from escalating its reprisals beyond a critical point. By early 1996, the Israeli death toll was rising.
Since the end of Operation "Settling Accounts," and due to Hezbollah's advanced tactics, 210 Israeli soldiers and 110 SLA soldiers had been killed; in addition, between 60 and 80 Lebanese civilians had fallen inside and outside the "security zone," killed by random strikes or explosives. For its part, Hezbollah lost 200 fighters, including operatives assassinated, others captured, and still others who escaped capture attempts.
Step 4: Israel’s “Grapes of Wrath” Operation against Hezbollah
The second Hezbollah-Israel war, dubbed Operation “Grapes of Wrath” (April 11–27, 1996), ended the “July Agreement” and represented a major escalation aimed at changing the rules of the game between the two sides. Israel’s objective was to pressure Lebanon and Syria to contain Hezbollah operations. During this operation, the Israeli Air Force carried out 1,800 sorties, targeted 500 objectives including both civilian and military infrastructure, and displaced 400,000 civilians—a figure that corresponds exactly to the current situation, in addition to the razing of villages in the south. The culmination of this war was the Israeli artillery bombardment of a UNIFIL center in the town of Qana, where hundreds of civilians were seeking refuge, resulting in the deaths of 106 people.
Israel claimed it was a blunder, while Hezbollah called the incident deliberate. Nevertheless, the Qana massacre sparked enormous international pressure, leading to a ceasefire. Operation Grapes of Wrath failed to stop Katyusha rocket fire on Israel and ended after sixteen days of fighting with an unsigned written agreement, dubbed the "April Agreement," brokered by France and the United States. This agreement stipulated a fragile and ill-defined rule of engagement: "Hezbollah will not fire from populated areas, and Israel will not bomb populated areas."
Furthermore, a committee comprising the United States, France, Syria, Lebanon, and Israel was established to monitor violations and investigate complaints. It bears a striking resemblance to the "Mechanism" established by the November 2024 ceasefire, which followed the Gaza War and comprised the same members, with the exception of Syria, and the addition of UNIFIL. Separated by 33 years, these two committees proved ineffective in halting hostilities.
The "April 1996 Agreement" affirmed Hezbollah's right to act against military targets within the "security zone" south of the Litani River, occupied by Israel and held by the SLA, while sparing civilians and residential areas on both sides of the river as well as in Israel. This agreement was considered a major turning point because it implicitly legitimized Hezbollah operations against the IDF and the SLA inside Lebanese territory and indirectly amplified Iran's growing influence in Lebanon.
Indeed, Tehran was the big winner of this agreement and proved to its Syrian and Palestinian allies, as well as its American and Israeli enemies, that it could initiate wars through its proxies, and consequently torpedo the Oslo and Madrid peace processes. Curiously, the cessation of hostilities and the continuation of Hezbollah's activities perfectly aligned with American objectives of pressuring Israel to make concessions to Syria and encouraging Syria to reach a peace agreement with Israel (to be continued).
Read also: