Exploring the Possible Scenarios of an Israeli-Lebanese Conflict

Exploring the Possible Scenarios of an IsraeliLebanese Conflict July 12, 2024 Alireza Hejazi, Ph.D. © 2024 alirhej@mail.regent.edu Contents Download the original paper here: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.12697226 Introduction Method Scenario 1: Contained Conflict Scenario 2: Regional Conflict Scenario 3: Battle of Attrition Scenario 4: Regional Proxy War Scenario 5: Stalemate Scenario 6: Fragile Ceasefire Scenario 7: Victorious Hezbollah Scenario 8: Impasse Scenario 9: Nuclear Showdown Scenario 10: Surprise Capture Scenario 11: Widespread Cyberattack Conclusion Introduction This study presents the use of a scenarios matrix based on the dependence and independence of relevant variables. It serves the objective of envisioning alternative scenarios effectively. It provides a reliable framework for considering possible scenarios and analyzing their outcomes. It underscores the complex and unpredictable nature of regional conflicts and the interconnectedness of regional dynamics. The study develops hypothetical scenarios that inform readers of the potential consequences of an Israeli-Lebanese conflict. These are only hypothetical scenarios and should not be interpreted as predictions or endorsements of any particular outcome. Israel and Hezbollah Launching Strikes Across the Border Strikes by Israel and Hezbollah between October 7, 2023, and May 23, 2024. (Source: Council on Foreign Relations, June 6, 2024) Method (1/4) This study applies the scenarios matrix method to explore possible future(s) of a r egional conflict that may take place between Israel and Lebanon. The output is a set of scenarios foreseeing the conflict in eight main possible situations and three other plausible conditions. It considers four variables in the process of developing scenarios, including the I. D.F.’s fighting power, Hezbollah’s response, the U.S. and allies’ intervention, Iran, and the Axis of Resistance’s intervention. The U.S.’s allies will be the United Kingdom (U.K.), France, Jordan, and some of t he Persian Gulf states. The Axis of Resistance led by Iran will include Lebanon’s Hezbollah, Shia armed groups in Iraq, Yemen’s Houthi re-bels, and Syrian govern ment and pro-government militias. Method (2/4) The I.D.F.’s fighting power and Hezbollah’s response are independent variables a s they are the primary drivers of the potential conflict. The I.D.F.’s decision to inva de Lebanon and Hezbollah’s subsequent defensive actions would shape the cour se of the conflict. The U.S. and allies’ intervention and Iran and Axis of Resistance’s intervention ar e the dependent variables. These variables would depend on and react to the dev elopments between the I.D.F. and Hezbollah’s direct military engagement. Normally, a 2x2x2x2 matrix with four variables having two states should generate 16 unique combinations. However, for specific reasons, the number of combinatio ns are limited to 8 possible and 3 plausible scenarios. Method (3/4) Firstly, strong interdependencies between the variables were identified. For exam ple, a high state for one independent variable strongly influenced the state of anot her independent variable, making certain combinations less likely or even impossi ble. This reduced the number of plausible combinations. Secondly, similar scenarios were merged. For example, two scenarios that had sli ghtly different combinations of independent variables but led to roughly the same outcome for the dependent variables were combined into one scenario. This also reduced the number of scenarios while retaining the essence of the analysis. Thirdly, there was a prioritization of plausibility. The study focused on scenarios th at were deemed more plausible. Even though all 16 combinations are mathematic ally possible, some were considered highly improbable or irrelevant based on curr ent conditions and understanding of future situations. Method (4/4) The study applied “High” and “Low” states for each variable. Despite a range of st ates or specific levels of intervention, response, or capability, “High” and “Low” we re the best candidates to narrate each scenario as simply as possible. The choice of two-value variables was mainly due to limited resources or unexpec ted resistance and also a strategic choice to avoid escalation. By simplifying varia bles to “High” or “low,” they could be broadly categorized and managed to generat e meaningful scenarios. The American and Iranian intervention variables could be categorized into four val ues, including no Intervention, limited support, regional proxy force, and direct mili tary intervention. These values would generate similar consequences and scenari os. Therefore, the two-value option was also applied for dependent variables. The Scenarios Matrix Scenario Probability The IDF’s Fighting Power Hezbollah’s Response The U.S. and Allies’ Intervention Iran and the Axis of Resistance’s Intervention 1 10% High Low High Low 2 5% High Low Low High 3 15% High High High Low 4 20% High High Low High 5 5% Low Low High High 6 10% Low Low Low Low 7 20% Low High High High 8 15% Low High Low Low Scenario 1 Contained Conflict In this scenario, the I.D.F.’s intense campaign against Hezbollah is met with a rela tively muted response from the group. Hezbollah, facing the prospect of a devasta ting defeat, opts for a more restrained approach, limiting its attacks on Israel and r efraining from drawing Iran and other regional actors into the conflict. The U.S. and its allies provide significant support to Israel, but their involvement is largely limited to intelligence sharing, logistical assistance, and diplomatic efforts t o contain the conflict. While the fighting in Lebanon is still fierce, the conflict remai ns largely contained within the Israel-Lebanon theater, with minimal regional escal ation. The I.D.F. can degrade Hezbollah’s military capabilities, but the group’s polit ical and social influence in Lebanon remains intact, set-ting the stage for future te nsions. Scenario 2 Regional Conflict In this scenario, the I.D.F. launches a major offensive against Hezbollah. The grou p responds with a strong counterattack. Due to some regional and international co nsiderations, the U.S. and its allies remain passive. They limit their involvement in diplomatic efforts. However, Iran and the Axis of Resistance significantly escalate their involvement. This could lead to a protracted and devastating regional conflict, with the potential for significant casualties, widespread destruction, and the risk of escalation into a broader confrontation. Scenario 3 Battle of Attrition In this scenario, the I.D.F. launches a military campaign against Hezbollah. It lever -ages its firepower and technological capabilities. Hezbollah responds with a stron g, coordinated attack. It unleashes a barrage of rockets, drones, and other asym metric tactics against Israel. The U.S. and its allies provide support to Israel. They focus primarily on diplomati c efforts to de-escalate the situation. On the other hand, Iran and the Axis of Resi stance support Hezbollah passively. They provide intelligence and weapons rathe r than participating directly in the ongoing conflict. This scenario leaves the I.D.F. t o bear the brunt of the conflict. It potentially leads to a prolonged and costly battle of attrition. Scenario 4 Regional Proxy War Backed by the U.S. and allies’ logistical support, the I.D.F mounts a fierce attack. Hezbollah responds with considerable force and protracted resistance. In this sce nario, the conflict escalates into a regional proxy war. Iran supplies advanced wea ponry and potentially deploys its forces. The U.S. provides Israel with significant logistical and diplomatic support but feari ng a wider conflict, is hesitant to engage directly in military operations. This scena rio is highly likely, especially if Iran is determined to challenge Israel’s regional do minance and seeks to establish a stronger foothold in Lebanon. Scenario 5 Stalemate In this scenario, Israel’s limited military capabilities hinder its ability to achieve a d ecisive victory. Hezbollah, with active support from Iran, mounts an insignificant re sistance, inflicting some casualties on Israeli forces. The U.S., while providing logi stical and diplomatic support, is hesitant to intervene militarily, fearing a wider con flict. The scenario ends in a stalemate, with both sides suffering losses and a constant risk of escalation. This scenario is less likely if Israel’s military advantage is dimini shed and Iran is willing to escalate the conflict through its active Axis of Resistanc e. Scenario 6 Fragile Ceasefire Israel, facing internal pressure and a weakened military, negotiates a ceasefire wit h Hezbollah, mediated by the U.S. The ceasefire is fragile, with constant border vi olations and a high risk of renewed conflict. Iran, while not actively engaging in military operations, continues to exert its influe nce in Lebanon, seeking to exploit the situation for its interests. This scenario is m oderately likely if both Israel and Hezbollah are hesitant to engage in a full-scale war, but tensions remain high. Scenario 7 Victorious Hezbollah Recognizing its limitations, Israel focuses on achieving specific objectives, such a s preventing Hezbollah from obtaining advanced weaponry. The U.S., actively inv olved in diplomacy and mediation, encourages a swift ceasefire and long-term pe ace negotiations. Iran, while providing support to Hezbollah, is more interested in increasing the cos t of war for Israel, the U.S., and its allies as much as possible. This scenario has t he second-highest probability and could lead to a victorious Hezbollah if Israel pri oritizes stability over territorial gains and if the U.S. fails to succeed with its diplom atic efforts desirably. Scenario 8 Impasse Israel launches limited military operations but fails to achieve a decisive victory. H ezbollah, with minimum support from Iran and the Axis of Resistance, mounts a si gnificant resistance, utilizing asymmetric tactics and tunnel networks. Hezbollah’s asymmetric methods prove highly effective in countering Israel’s adva nced air force by exploiting vulnerabilities, using terrain to their advantage, and e mploying tactics that are difficult for conventional air power to counter. The U.S., reluctant to intervene, leaves both sides to fight a protracted and bloody war. This scenario could result in a stalemate or fragile ceasefire. Likely, Israel’s military capacity is significantly weakened and Hezbollah is determined to resist u nconditionally. Scenario 9 Nuclear Showdown (Wildcard Scenario) As the conflict grows, deterrence loses its conventional meaning, and the risk of h itting critical facilities like Israel and Iran’s nuclear sites increases. Israel’s failure i n achieving its goals in fighting with Lebanon’s Hezbollah amplified by the U.S.’ re luctance to the deteriorated situation convinces the Israeli leaders to order selecti ve bombardment of Iran’s nuclear facilities. Encouraged by Iran, Hezbollah successfully targets Israel’s Dimona nuclear react or with a precision strike, causing significant damage and potential radiation leaks . Israel retaliates by launching more airstrikes against Iranian nuclear sites, escala ting the conflict into a full-scale regional war. The U.S. and its allies intervene acti vely, providing intelligence and military support to Israel. Iran and the Axis of Resistance significantly escalate their involvement, leading to a protracted and devastating regional conflict with the risk of nuclear escalation at regional and global levels. Scenario 10 Surprise Capture (Wildcard Scenario) In a surprise maneuver, Hezbollah captured the Golan Heights strategic territory o ccupied by Israel. This alters the strategic landscape and intensifies the conflict wi th Israel. Despite involved costs, Hezbollah seizes control of the Golan Heights. Is rael responds with a massive ground invasion of southern Lebanon. It aims to des troy Hezbollah’s military capabilities. The U.S. and its allies intervene actively. They provide intelligence, weapons, and potential military support to Israel. Iran and the Axis of Resistance significantly es calate their involvement. This scenario leads to a regional war with the potential fo r further territorial disputes and instability. Scenario 11 Widespread Cyberattack (Wildcard Scenario) In this wildcard scenario, the conflict takes an unexpected turn. Hezbollah, with Ir anian support, launches a sophisticated cyberattack against Israel’s critical infrast ructure. The group hits Israel’s power grid, water systems, and military command and control networks. The attack causes widespread disruption in Israel. It temporarily grounds Israel’s air force and disables its Iron Dome defense system. Israel responds with its cybe r capabilities. It targets Lebanese and Iranian infrastructures. A cyberattack crippl es critical infrastructure in Israel and Iran. It disrupts military operations and fuels chaos in an already volatile conflict. The conflict becomes primarily a digital one. Both sides attempt to cripple each ot her’s technological capabilities. The U.S., U.K., and France become involved in d e-fending against and countering these cyber threats. Conclusion An Israeli-Lebanese conflict presents a high degree of uncertainty. It involves mult iple actors with competing interests and the potential for escalation to unforeseen levels, including the use of nuclear weapons. This level of uncertainty makes it diff icult to anticipate the outcomes of the conflict. Regarding an Israeli-Lebanese conflict, it is essential to understand how changes in individual probabilities affect the overall likelihood of different scenarios. In addi tion to thinking of the scenarios developed in this study, decision-makers and poli cymakers are expected to consider qualitative factors like political will, public opini on, and unforeseen events. They should recognize that these scenarios are dynamic and can change as even ts unfold. The likelihood of these scenarios unfolding is heavily influenced by the political climate, the regional alliances and the specific objectives of each actor in volved. Exploring the Possible Scenarios of an IsraeliLebanese Conflict July 12, 2024 Alireza Hejazi, Ph.D. © 2024 alirhej@mail.regent.edu