Analysis: As Hezbollah reels from Nasrallah’s killing and Israel mulls a ground invasion, analysts tell The New Arab what they think could happen next.
Grief and anguish filled Beirut’s southern suburbs of Dahiyeh after Hezbollah confirmed the death of its leader Hassan Nasrallah on Saturday.
Screaming in sorrow, some collapsed to their knees as despair and rage swept over them, with spontaneous rallies erupting in Beirut and across the region renewing allegiance to the veteran leader.
A day earlier, Israel announced it had killed Nasrallah using 85 US-produced ‘bunker-buster’ bombs designed to target underground facilities in an attack that flattened six buildings in the southern suburb of Beirut, reducing them to rubble.
One of the most influential figures in Lebanon and the Middle East over the last three decades, Nasrallah was a charismatic leader adored by supporters and hated by opponents.
He played a pivotal role in shaping Lebanon’s recent history, transforming Hezbollah into one of the most powerful non-state actors in the world.
Under Nasrallah, Hezbollah experienced its golden era. His leadership was crucial, and Israel hopes that his loss will shatter Hezbollah’s morale and undermine its broader ideological support,” political analyst Ali Rizk told The New Arab.
“However, it’s uncertain if this strategy will significantly weaken Hezbollah, as their continued missile launches indicate some command structure is still in place.”
The group, however, has faced several debilitating blows in the past two weeks at the hands of Israel’s intelligence agencies and military, with Nasrallah’s killing the most impactful.
“It is like an earthquake for Hezbollah,” Imad Salamey, associate professor of Middle Eastern political affairs at the Lebanese American University, told TNA.
“The party relied on his leadership and the public trusted in his decisions, Now, everything is in doubt.”
Nasrallah’s assassination came after Israel announced a new phase in its war with Hezbollah, expanding its goals in Gaza to include the return of 60,000 displaced citizens from its northern border.
Israel then launched a series of attacks on Hezbollah and the Lebanese population, which Nasrallah described as a “big and harsh blow” in his last public speech on 19 September.
Between 17 and 18 September, Israel is suspected of detonating thousands of Hezbollah’s pagers and walkie-talkies after rigging them with explosives, killing dozens, wounding thousands, and demonstrating an unprecedented intelligence advantage over the group.
On 20 September, Israel then struck a southern Beirut suburb, killing civilians and top Hezbollah officials, including Ibrahim Aqil and Ahmed Mahmoud Wahbi.
Days later on 23 September, Israel escalated its attacks in Lebanon, targeting the southern border, the Bekaa Valley region, and southern Beirut suburbs, resulting in over 700 deaths – the deadliest day in Lebanon since the civil war (1975-1990) – and displacing over 500,000 people from southern Lebanon.
Hezbollah responded by firing missiles at Israeli military targets near Haifa and Tel Aviv and has continued to launch missiles at northern Israel since Nasrallah’s death. Meanwhile, despite growing international calls for a ceasefire, including a US-proposed 21-day truce, Israel has rejected diplomacy and vowed to continue attacking Hezbollah.
With growing fears that Israel could launch a ground invasion, experts remain divided on whether any such operation could involve a re-occupation of south Lebanon and if Israel’s goals of pushing Hezbollah away from the border and returning its citizens to the north are achievable.
This wouldn’t be Lebanon’s first experience with Israeli occupation. In 2000, Hezbollah drove Israel out of Lebanon after an 18-year occupation of the south and then forced Israel to withdraw again from southern Lebanon in 2006 after a 34-day war, which ended with UN Security Council Resolution 1701, mandating a ceasefire and the deployment of the Lebanese army and UN peacekeepers along the border.
The situation today, however, is different, with both Hezbollah and Israel strengthening their capabilities since 2006. Many analysts also say it is too early the assess how Nasrallah’s assassination will impact Hezbollah’s strategy, although the group has continued to launch attacks on Israel since his death.
Michael Young, a senior editor at the Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Centre, told TNA that Israel has created a certain amount of disarray in Hezbollah’s leadership, complicating the war effort. Any new leader won’t have the experience or authority of Nasrallah, making it harder to continue fighting.
“Many displaced Shia in Lebanon are suffering and may not support prolonging a war that only worsens their situation. Iran is also cautious and wary of being drawn into a conflict with the US, which they see as a trap. Despite talks of total war, Hezbollah may not have the capacity to escalate the conflict further,” he said.
Political and military analyst Elijah Magnier, however, says that Nasrallah’s assassination changes little for Hezbollah militarily. Nasrallah was a decision-maker, but his council remains intact and there are replacements for those killed, with the same leadership continuing to direct operations on the ground.
“Israel’s strategy on Lebanon depends on Hezbollah’s strength: if Hezbollah is weak, Israel will expand its operations; if Hezbollah shows strength, Israel will limit itself to aerial bombardments,” he told TNA.
Experts agree that if Israel starts a ground operation in southern Lebanon, it would be to the advantage of Hezbollah.
“Hezbollah knows the territory very well. They’re from there, and their commitment and willingness to fight is very high,” Sami Atallah, founding director of the independent think tank The Policy Initiative, told TNA.
Israel believes that its recent military actions have weakened Hezbollah and may launch a ground invasion as they see the group as less capable of inflicting casualties, political analyst Ali Rizk says, but “Hezbollah has historically surprised the enemy and defied the odds, so it may do so again”.
Hezbollah likely has a network of tunnels in southern Lebanon, similar to Gaza, complicating an Israeli ground invasion. The rugged terrain limits tank effectiveness and Hezbollah’s tactic of emerging from tunnels to strike and retreat could result in Israeli casualties.
Forcing Hezbollah to retreat north to prevent attacks on its northern border would, therefore, be complicated and could trap Israel in an escalation cycle.
Furthermore, Hezbollah has shown part of its capabilities by claiming it used the Qader-1 ballistic missile, with a range of 190 km, to target the Israeli Mossad headquarters in Tel Aviv.
Heiko Wimmen, Project Director of Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon at the International Crisis Group (ICG), explained that Hezbollah may have tens of thousands of long-range rockets that could reach up to 200km.
“The only way to keep Israel out of reach of these rockets is to destroy the rockets, not to push the border 20 km north, which wouldn’t really solve the problem,” he said.
Hezbollah’s military campaign against Israel since 8 October has been closely linked to deterring Israel’s war in Gaza. Therefore, for Israel, decoupling Hezbollah from the Gaza war is essential to force the group to retreat and allow its citizens to return home. But this would be detrimental for Hezbollah.
“Currently, linking Lebanon and Palestine is the only option, as a ceasefire in Lebanon without one in Palestine would render sacrifices meaningless,” Kassem Kassir, a Lebanese political analyst close to Hezbollah, told TNA.
However, Ghaddar noted that Hezbollah is struggling to maintain support from the Shia community, which feels abandoned and disillusioned compared to 2006, when Hezbollah provided aid. The ongoing economic crisis and destruction in southern Lebanon have further eroded public support.
Salamey, an associate professor at the Lebanese American University, believes that Israel, feeling triumphant, may likely intensify its campaign against Hezbollah and seek to reshape Lebanon’s demographics through a significant Shia exodus to Syria or a redistribution throughout Lebanon, as Hezbollah has limited options for retaliation due to weakened leadership and damaged military assets.
But with over 500,000 people displaced from southern Lebanon by Israel, the focus has shifted to war, and “Hezbollah may feel it has no choice but to fight,” Sami Atallah, founding director of The Policy Initiative think tank, told TNA.
In this context, Young explained that, while not guaranteed, it is conceivable that Israel might seize Lebanese land, exploiting Hezbollah’s disarray to negotiate border security. However, this could backfire, giving Hezbollah “more oxygen” and strengthening it as a resistance force, as seen pre-2000.
“Any land grab would likely be for leverage in withdrawal negotiations, not long-term occupation, aiming for security deals with the Lebanese state, and possibly a stronger UNIFIL mandate,” he said.
Wimmen, from the International Crisis Group, explained that for Hezbollah, accepting a ceasefire separating Lebanon from Gaza would mean defeat, and despite the devastation in southern Lebanon and hundreds of deaths, Hezbollah’s strategy is unlikely to change.
“While there may be dissent within the community, it won’t significantly influence the group’s decisions unless they are completely defeated. I also doubt that Israel would accept a temporary pause, as it would signal defeat for Netanyahu as well.”
Dario Sabaghi is a freelance journalist interested in human rights.
