Lebanon’s health ministry reported on Sunday that Israeli forces, after missing the agreed withdrawal deadline, killed 24 Lebanese civilians and injured 130 more after opening fire on protesters.
The incident came hours before news broke that the deadline was extended until 18 February. Tensions had flared in southern Lebanon as demonstrators, some waving Hezbollah flags, attempted to enter multiple villages still under Israeli control. The protesters voiced anger over Israel’s failure to meet the original Sunday deadline to withdraw.
Thousands of displaced civilians have returned to their homes in southern Lebanon despite stark warnings from Israel that the area remains dangerous, as the Israeli army continues to occupy villages despite the ceasefire agreement brokered by the United States and France in November.
Israel, however, claims that the ceasefire was not fully enforced, citing the Lebanese army’s incomplete deployment and Hezbollah’s lingering presence.
The ceasefire agreement calls for both Israel and Hezbollah to withdraw from southern Lebanon, with the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) deploying 10,000 soldiers to secure the region and dismantle Hezbollah’s military infrastructure.
The area, south of the Litani River along the Blue Line with Israel, is to be solely under the LAF’s control, allowing displaced civilians to return, but according to a statement from the Israeli prime minister’s office, “since the ceasefire agreement has not yet been fully enforced by Lebanon, the gradual withdrawal process will continue, in full coordination with the United States”.
Hezbollah, the dominant political and militant force in southern Lebanon, on Sunday called for international mediators to hold Israel accountable and urged Lebanese citizens to remain vigilant in defending their territories while affirming its commitment to resistance.
“No force, no matter how mighty, can withstand the popular wave seeking liberation,” the group said.
Civil unrest can pressure Israel
According to Lebanese analyst and political writer Tawfiq Shouman, Sunday’s incursions and subsequent confrontation between protestors and Israeli forces could be “the beginning of a broader series of moves aimed at breaking the occupation” through direct civilian pressure.
“A new form of resistance is gaining traction in southern Lebanon, popular civil movements, referred to by some as ‘civil incursions’ into occupied villages are adding pressure to the IDF,” he told The New Arab.
Shouman emphasised that the growing effectiveness of these efforts is due, in part, to the Lebanese army’s facilitation of civilian entry into occupied areas.
“The current situation creates a new kind of pressure on Israel, posing a non-military but highly effective challenge,” he said. “This strategy emerged after Israel failed to meet the 60-day deadline for withdrawal, prompting local residents to seek alternative ways to reclaim their lands.”
The risk of escalation remains high as Israel cites UN Security Council Resolution 1701 to justify its military operations. The resolution calls for Lebanese sovereignty over areas south of the Litani River, a cessation of hostilities, and the disarmament of armed groups in coordination with UNIFIL forces.
“Israel’s actions may contradict the resolution’s intent, risking further destabilisation in the region,” Shouman warned. “Israel keeps pressuring Hezbollah, and a new confrontation cannot be ruled out, especially if the Jewish state decides to change the rules of engagement in the south.”
Israeli forces conducted two airstrikes on Nabatieh in southern Lebanon on Tuesday, claiming they targeted a Hezbollah truck transporting weapons. Shouman believes these strikes were not isolated incidents but part of a clear escalation strategy with multiple dimensions.
“The airstrikes are a test of how the Lebanese state, Hezbollah, and the resistance will react,” he explained, noting that the timing of the attack, coinciding with the rise of civil resistance in recent days, suggests an attempt by Israel to “intimidate this nascent popular movement”.
Amid this complex landscape, Lebanese diplomacy has become a vital pillar in confronting Israeli aggression. The government is intensifying its international outreach, particularly with France and the United States, to pressure Israel into a complete withdrawal from the remaining occupied areas, he added.
Yet success is far from guaranteed.
“History shows that Israel rarely abides by international resolutions without significant external pressure,” Shouman pointed out. “It often uses delays to establish facts on the ground that serve its interests.”
Nevertheless, the analyst remained cautiously optimistic, suggesting that the combination of diplomatic efforts and the momentum of civil resistance could create a strong leverage point.
“If popular movements maintain their current intensity over the coming weeks, they may force Israel to reconsider its stance,” he said.
Israel’s strategy in Lebanon
According to Lebanese analyst George Alam, the deadline extension reflects “a lack of credibility” from both Israel and the American and French mediators.
“The agreement has not been implemented within its designated timeline,” he told The New Arab.
“And now, we’re left with a possibility that Israeli calculations might change in light of the new US administration’s position, as talks are already expected between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Trump, with Lebanon and Gaza likely to feature prominently on the agenda.”
The analyst pointed out that if Israel stalled in light of these new developments, it could force Beirut into difficult choices, potentially at the expense of Hezbollah and the broader resistance movement.
Additionally, he highlighted that the persistent Israeli breaches are not merely tactical manoeuvres but could be a part of a broader strategy aimed at “imposing new realities on the ground that prevent Lebanon from fully reclaiming control of its southern territories”.
These actions, he noted, are unfolding amid a regional context where some Arab nations may normalise relations with Israel under US pressure, which in the “long run could add to Lebanon’s already dire political and economic crises”.
Despite these pressures, Alam expressed scepticism about Israel’s ability to succeed in its goals.
“The resistance, combined with political manoeuvres from the Lebanese government, could be a formidable obstacle,” he said. However, the situation remains “precarious,” dependent on evolving regional and international dynamics, particularly the fraught relationship between Washington and Tehran.
“The next stage will determine whether we head toward further escalation or meaningful negotiations,” he remarked.
He also dismissed the notion of renewed military confrontation between Hezbollah and Israel, despite recent remarks by the party’s current secretary-general, Naim Qassem.
“Hezbollah’s recognition of Israel’s superior weaponry and the immense human and economic toll of the recent war makes another conflict difficult to justify,” he told The New Arab.
Still, the analyst warned against assuming that the conflict has reached its conclusion.
“While the war may have ended in a military sense, its final outcome remains uncertain,” he observed. “Last year’s escalation, sparked by the war in Gaza and its ripple effects across the region, suggests the current outcome may be a prelude to a more complex and unpredictable phase.
“The truce may hold for now, but without credible enforcement and genuine political will, Lebanon’s road to lasting peace remains perilous,” he said.
This article is published in collaboration with Egab.
