Israel Kills Hezbollah Leader Hassan Nasrallah Raising Tensions

International Efforts for 21-Day Cease Fire Fail

Prior to the Israeli attack that killed the Hezbollah Leader Hassan Nasrallah, the US and France were leading efforts to reduce tensions with a proposed 21-day ceasefire between Israel and the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah, amid escalating conflict along their shared border. The proposal has garnered support from the G7, EU, Australia, and several Arab nations. However, skepticism remains about its acceptance by Israel and Hezbollah, especially following recent missile strikes by Hezbollah on Israel.

Key Points

• Ceasefire Proposal: U.S. and France propose a 21-day ceasefire to de-escalate tensions between Israel and Hezbollah.
• Support: Backed by G7, EU, Australia, and Arab nations; aims to create space for longer-term conflict resolution.
• Skepticism: Doubts exist regarding acceptance from both Israel and Hezbollah; concerns about linking the ceasefire to wider regional issues.
• Recent Conflicts: Intensified hostilities have resulted in significant casualties and displacement in Lebanon.
• Military Preparations: Israeli military chief indicated readiness for potential ground operations in Lebanon as tensions escalate.

Potential Implications

The proposed ceasefire, if accepted, could have paved the way for humanitarian aid to reach affected areas and provide a much-needed respite for civilians caught in the crossfire. However, the complexity of the situation raises questions about the feasibility of enforcing such an agreement, especially given the divergent interests of the involved parties.

Regional Reactions

• Israel’s Position: Israel has expressed concerns that a ceasefire could be exploited by Hezbollah to regroup and rearm. Officials have indicated that any cessation of hostilities must come with assurances that Hezbollah will not be able to launch further attacks.
• Hezbollah’s Stance: The militant group may view a ceasefire as an opportunity to solidify its position along the border. Hezbollah has previously stated that it will continue to respond to Israeli military actions, complicating any negotiations for peace.

In the end, Israel struck first with a major blow against the militant group Hezbollah with the killing of its leader, Nasrallah. This follows the pager attack and more than 2000 air strikes on strategic Hezbollah targets. In short, Israel has weakened Hezbollah in terms of leadership and military capabilities.

The big question is what comes next.

Israel sees the five weeks before the US Election as allowing it a free hand to pursue a more aggressive approach.  This puts the US in a bind but for reasons noted below, we do not see a wider war in the Middle East.

The wider context is the US and Israel against Iran with Hezbollah being its most important proxy group. With its key ally, Hezbollah, weakened the focus is on what Iran would do next.

It is our view, that tensions will be kept under control and that this will not escalate into a wider war for several reasons. First, the new Iranian president, Masoud Pezeshkian, is seeking a nuclear deal with the US especially if Kamala Harris is elected. The goal would be to get some economic relief and buy time for itself. Second, Iranian options are very poor at this time. If it does escalate it risks going against the powerful US and Israel. A war that it knows it will loose now. Third, it needs to do something to prop up its key ally Hezbollah.

Therefore all the options on the table are bad for Iran and it will seek to avoid in getting involved in any direct attack on Israel. This would bring in the US military. It simply has too much too loose at this time. Thus, expect some token retaliation for reputational purposes.