Hezbollah will respond to Al Arouri killing but will avoid all-out war, say experts
Few but Hezbollah’s top leaders have a clear idea of what the group could do next after the assassination of Hamas deputy Saleh Al Arouri in Beirut on Tuesday.
Hezbollah secretary general Hassan Nasrallah warned on Wednesday that the group “cannot be silent”.
But Nasrallah, who is set to give another speech on Friday, did not elaborate further, and it is unclear how exactly the group plans to retaliate.
A source close to Hezbollah told The National on Thursday: “The retaliation has to be clear. It won’t be the kind that leads to a full-scale war, but an act that clearly says: this is our retaliation.
“There is no way the Hezbollah sees a strike on Dahiyeh and do nothing,” they said, referring to the Beirut neighbourhood where Mr Arouri was killed, which is a stronghold of Hezbollah.
“Until yesterday, there was still no general mobilisation. The fighters at the borders are from nearby villages, not other regions, which means things haven’t escalated yet,” the source added.
“But that was until last night. Things could change at any moment.”
Historically, political assassinations of Hezbollah officials, such as Imad Mughnieh, a senior member of the militia killed in a joint US-Israeli operation, have not sparked a strong retaliation.
After Mr Al Arouri’s death, Hezbollah has a similar interest in keeping the war from escalating, say experts.
Some see Israel as wanting a full war with Hezbollah so it can destroy the group’s capabilities to strike from border areas, which would weaken Hezbollah in the long run.
“The assassination of Saleh Al Arouri is an attempt to trigger an angry impulse, a miscalculation which would grant [Israeli Prime Minister] Benjamin Netanyahu the same legitimacy he claims to have in Gaza to trigger an all-out war in Lebanon,” said Bashir Saade, lecturer in politics and religion at the University of Stirling.
“But Hezbollah has no interest in providing this opportunity for Israel. It would be weakened by an all-out war, while it prospers in guerrilla warfare.”
Hezbollah just needs to “maintain a front of pressure to create a situation of instability in the north, pushing for an evacuation of northern settlements”, while Israel is pushing for a more violent escalation, which is its “only way” to achieve its military objectives, he added.
Hezbollah and Israel last fought an all-out war in 2006, when the conditions were different. Today’s conflict is a “totally different ballgame”, said Imad Salamey, an associate professor of political science and international affairs at the Lebanese American University in Beirut.
Hezbollah is just one cog in a much wider conflict, centred on the Israel-Gaza war but featuring clashes between Iran-backed groups and the US and its allies across Lebanon, Iraq, Syria and Yemen.
“Hezbollah’s ability to gain backing and co-ordination among various armed groups in the region is much more available than it was in 2006,” Prof Salamey said.
Hezbollah has also expanded its military arsenal since 2006, and now has a greater ability to damage Israel.
Mr Saade said: “Since 2006, Hezbollah’s arsenal has significantly expanded; it has drones, long range missiles, and they can challenge the Iron Dome.”
In 2006, Hezbollah had about 15,000 missiles. Now it is rumoured to have about 150,000.
Nasrallah has said the militia has 100,000 fighters and can attack every city in Israel.
“He is usually very cautious, so his estimates can be trusted,” Mr Saade said.
Prof Salamey concurred. “Armed technology has developed so much, Hezbollah today is totally in command of the Lebanese state,” he said.
“It has emerged victorious in Syria, it has logistical support coming in, modern arms, more capacity, training, they’ve learnt more from previous fights.”