A carefully measured escalation between the Lebanese Shia group Hizbullah and the Israeli Army has been taking place at the Lebanon-Israel border over the past week amid the Israeli assault on Gaza and since the Hamas Operation Al-Aqsa Flood was launched on 7 October.

Initially, both sides adhered to a relatively stable pattern of engagement, characterised by the exchange of artillery fire across the border. One side would initiate the shelling, and the other would target the source of the fire.

Hizbullah directed its bombs towards the occupied Lebanese territories in the Shebaa Farms area and the Kafr Shuba Hills. In response, the Israeli army retaliated by targeting the sources of fire in border strip villages such as Alma Al-Shaab, Ramish, Al-Dhahira, and Aita Al-Shaab.

Gradually, the sources of fire saw a shift as the Palestinian factions operating in Lebanon became involved. The artillery attacks conducted by these factions, including the Al-Quds Brigades affiliated with the Islamic Jihad Organisation, and later the Ezzeddin Al-Qassam Brigades associated with Hamas, did not result in significant casualties on the Israeli side in the first few days.

However, the attacks became more precise over time and began to target Israeli settlements, resulting in severe injuries. The Israeli army claimed to have thwarted multiple infiltration attempts by armed men crossing the Lebanese border, eliminating them before they could penetrate deep into Israeli territory.

Hizbullah and Israel were careful not to escalate the exchanges during the first days of the conflict. However, they exchanged messages through mutual bombings, aiming to establish new rules of engagement.

At first, Hizbullah refrained from shelling the Occupied Palestinian Territories and focused its operations on the Lebanese territories instead. Nevertheless, with the intensification of the Israeli air bombardments of the Gaza Strip, Hizbullah allowed the Palestinian factions to operate from across the Lebanese border. This was done either through missile attacks or by infiltrating fighters.

The Israeli army did not shell Palestinian sites in Lebanon because their locations are not known. Instead, it targeted known Hizbullah sites, resulting in the deaths of four of the group’s members during the first week.

In response, Hizbullah targeted Israeli military sites in the shared border region, including military vehicles such as fortified tanks, destroying them and causing serious injuries to their crews. There have been reports of unconfirmed deaths on the Israeli side.

However, this carefully calculated pattern of escalation was short-lived. Israel then sought to assert its military dominance over the situation in southern Lebanon and began targeting Lebanese villages near the eastern city of Tyre, including Aita Al-Shaab, Alma Al-Shaab, Dhahira, and Rmeish.

Unlike the previous bombings that targeted uninhabited areas, the new Israeli fire started affecting populated regions. Israel even targeted a group of journalists in the village of Aita Al-Shaab, resulting in the death of a Reuters journalist and injuries to three others, including an Aljazeera correspondent.

On Sunday, Israeli bombings in villages east of Tyre led to the deaths of two Lebanese citizens residing in these areas.

In retaliation, Hizbullah fired rockets at the Al-Raheb military site and the military garrison of the Shtula Settlement before expanding its bombing on Sunday to include five military sites in northern Israel.

In a statement, Hizbullah said that it was responding proportionately to Israeli bombings and adhering to established rules of engagement. However, the Israeli targeting of populated southern villages resulted in civilian and journalist casualties, compelling Hizbullah to escalate its response and expand its targets from military sites to encompass northern settlements.

Concurrently, the Palestinian factions in Lebanon, such as the Al-Qassam and Al-Quds Brigades, also expanded their attacks on northern Israeli settlements on Sunday.

The rules of engagement between Hizbullah and Israel, which have remained relatively stable over the years, are now possibly changing due to developments in Gaza. Hizbullah had earlier said that it would engage in open combat if a ground invasion of Gaza took place. The sustained bombings throughout the week may be a strategic move to make Israel think twice before launching such an invasion.

Israel has responded in a manner calculated to gauge the seriousness of Hizbullah in carrying out its threats. The Israeli army has stated on multiple occasions that its targeting along the Lebanese front is limited to retaliating against the sources of fire, with a fallback response targeting Hizbullah’s military infrastructure if these sources cannot be determined.

The Israeli defence minister has said it is in no one’s interest to open an additional front in the north of the country where Hizbullah is located. An Israeli army spokesman has also expressed concern over Hizbullah’s missile arsenal, which exceeds130,000 missiles, saying that this poses a threat to the security of northern Israel should Hizbullah decide to enter a war.

What Israel may not fully comprehend from Hizbullah’s messages is that by permitting the Palestinian factions to carry out attacks from Lebanon, it is not only hinting at its involvement in the conflict through missile strikes, but also signalling the possibility of an attack on Israel’s north.

This may not necessarily involve Hizbullah’s own fighters, but it could include fighters from the Palestinian factions.

Meanwhile, Israel is focusing its efforts on reestablishing the army’s capabilities in preparation for a potential ground invasion of Gaza. However, its northern front will not be left exposed, given the substantial US support and the presence of two US aircraft carriers, the Gerald Ford and Eisenhower, in the Eastern Mediterranean.

The US message is that it is ready to safeguard northern Israel if Israel becomes heavily engaged in a ground invasion of Gaza in the south.

Iran, in turn, has been providing support for Hizbullah, its ally in Lebanon. During a visit by Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian to Beirut, which coincided with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s visit to Tel Aviv, Iran cautioned against a multi-front conflict and highlighted Hizbullah’s seriousness in carrying out its threats in the event of an Israeli ground invasion of Gaza.

The region is thus likely to see an escalation in the conflict, especially in the absence of serious mediation efforts for a ceasefire between Hamas and Israel. Various parties aligned with the key actors have shown strong support for them and their willingness to expand the conflict. Foremost among these actors is Hizbullah, backed by Iran.

The prospect of Hizbullah entering the conflict is not the group’s most favourable option, given the challenging economic situation in Lebanon and the lack of national consensus on engaging in hostilities with Israel, which would violate UN Security Council Resolution 1701.

Nonetheless, over the past week Hizbullah has made comprehensive preparations for a potential war. Lebanese Prime Minister Najib Mikati could not receive assurances from Hizbullah that it would refrain from participating in the conflict, for example, with the group’s response being that its involvement would depend on developments in Gaza.

Since the ceasefire on 14 August 2006, Hizbullah has been preparing for the next confrontation with Israel. While some argue that the group’s participation in the Syrian conflict has diminished its capabilities to confront Israel, the contrary is in fact true. It has gained valuable experience operating outside Lebanese territory, and this experience will come in handy in the Palestine theatre.

Israeli reports from 2008 indicated that Hizbullah was preparing for a potential future conflict with Israel, complete with a detailed plan for a ground invasion of northern Israel. These reports warned of Hizbullah’s readiness to organise five battalions to penetrate Israel through the Central Galilee region.

Such an operation would not only focus on liberating the remaining occupied Lebanese territories, but could also create an opportunity for the Palestinian factions to position themselves within northern Israel for a limited duration to conduct operations.

Within this scenario, Syria is not far from a potential escalation either. Iran has already redeployed its Revolutionary Guard forces and missiles from the city of Deir Al-Zor in Syria to the border region, and specialised artillery officers have been mobilised in this area overlooking the Occupied Golan Heights.

Based on the recent escalation, the region seems to be slipping into a multi-front conflict in which Iran will not remain idle when it comes to protecting its military arms in the region and the US will not sit idly by concerning Israel’s security.

The escalatory dynamics are leading towards a highly destructive and deadly outcome unless immediate steps are taken.

If steps are not taken to secure a ceasefire, curtail Israel’s ambitions for a ground invasion of Gaza, and prepare for negotiations regarding the release of the hostages Hamas has seized, a deadly and highly destructive escalation is bound to occur.

The writer is an expert at Al-Ahram Centre for Political and Strategic Studies.

* A version of this article appears in print in the 19 October, 2023 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly