To read this article in the following languages, click theTranslate Websitebutton below the author’s name.
Hebrew, عربي, Farsi, Русский, Español, Portugues, 中文,Français, Deutsch, Italiano, 日本語,한국어, Türkçe, Српски. And 40 more languages.
Lebanese officials, and citizens are worried this is the beginning of a forever-war, and permanent occupation of Lebanon. The memories of a past 18-year brutal military occupation pf South Lebanon conjure up painful recollections of torture, death and imprisonment in Khiam of men, women and children.
The international community is impotent in the face of Israel, who is seen as dictating American foreign policy in the Trump administration. France had been seen as a defender of Lebanon, but President Emmanuel Macron cannot stand up toPresident Benjamin NetanyahuwhilePresident Donald Trumpprops green-lights him.
Steven Sahiounie of MidEastDiscourse interviewed Egyptian Army BrigadierGeneral Hatem Atef,a political and military analyst. His insight gives a rare glance into the military aspect of Lebanon’s current dilemma.
Steven Sahiounie (SS):Israel has announced the “Yellow Line,” which includes large areas of southern Lebanon and southern Syria. In your view, how will this issue be resolved, especially given that both the Lebanese government and the resistance completely reject it?
Brigadier General Hatem Atef (HA): As a researcher in strategic affairs and national security, I am pleased to offer an in-depth military and intelligence reading of these rapidly evolving developments that are reshaping spheres of influence in our volatile region.
The “Yellow Line” is an Israeli attempt to impose a geographical fait accompli under the pretext of national security. In essence, it is a replication of the old “security belt” scenario, but with greater strategic depth, extending into the Golan and southern Lebanon. Resolving this issue will not come through diplomatic tables alone, but through a “balance of deterrence on the ground.” Lebanon—both its army and its resistance—views this line as an existential threat and a disguised occupation. Therefore, a field-based solution will likely impose itself through a “smart war of attrition” that will make the cost of Israel’s presence behind this line extremely high in both human and economic terms. Ultimately, this may compel the international community to return to arrangements that guarantee full sovereignty, as history has shown that maps drawn by tanks are erased by popular will.
SS:Tensions in the Strait of Hormuz have returned to their highest levels, with threats of negotiations collapsing and a third round of war. Are we on the brink of such a round, and who would be the victor?
HA: The Strait of Hormuz is the “artery of global energy,” and tensions there are not merely a show of force but a strategic “arm-wrestling” contest. We are already living in the atmosphere of a “third round,” but it is a different kind of war—one of “hybrid corridor warfare.” A complete collapse of negotiations would push the region into a “controlled explosion.” The victor will not be the side with more weapons, but the one with greater endurance and the ability to withstand disruptions in supply chains. Militarily, Iran holds the advantage of “geographical leverage” in the strait, while Washington maintains technological superiority. However, the real winner will be the party that succeeds in securing alternative energy routes away from the strait—something neither side has fully achieved yet.
Source: Global Research
