In the autumn of 2025, the already fragile ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah, brokered in late 2024 following that year’s devastating conflict, came under severe strain as Israeli forces resumed extensive airstrikes on Hezbollah targets across Lebanon. The renewed hostilities, marked by intensified bombing campaigns in October 2025, have reignited fears of a regional military escalation, drawing condemnation from international observers and further deepening Lebanon’s multifaceted crisis.
The latest wave of strikes, targeting Hezbollah infrastructure, financial networks and military positions, has been denounced by Beirut and the UN as systematic violations of the truce, aimed at consolidating Israel’s strategic dominance. Between October 13 and October 19, 2025, the Israeli army carried out a series of coordinated operations across 22 Lebanese localities, maintaining a level of intensity like the previous week. These operations included seven airstrikes, six drone strikes and several ground maneuvers targeting Hezbollah’s efforts to rebuild its military capabilities. The strikes resulted in three fatalities — two of whom were confirmed Hezbollah operatives — and 11 injuries. The most significant incidents occurred in the Baalbek-Hermel, Nabatieh and South Lebanon governorates, where both military assets and civilian areas were hit under Israel’s pretext of destroying weapons caches and tunnel reconstruction sites. Later in the month, Israel’s air force conducted at least 18 airstrikes targeting Hezbollah positions and personnel across Lebanon on October 23 and October 24, up from 15 strikes earlier in the month, as part of Israel’s broader campaign to prevent Hezbollah’s reconstitution.
Subsequent IDF communiqués framed the strikes as preemptive measures against Hezbollah’s alleged rebuilding of “terror infrastructure.” One airstrike on October 16, 2025 killed a Lebanese customs officer. Similarly, attacks on construction sites near Sidon were justified as targeting Hezbollah’s reconstruction apparatus, including entities such as Green Without Borders, which Israel accused of operating under environmental cover to conceal militant activity.
The resumption of hostilities is best understood against the backdrop of the 2024 Israel-Hezbollah war, which evolved from cross-border skirmishes into a full-scale Israeli invasion of southern Lebanon. Triggered by Hezbollah’s solidarity attacks with Hamas during the Gaza conflict, the 2024 war displaced over 1 million Lebanese and caused severe civilian and military losses. The US-brokered ceasefire of November 2024 mandated Israeli withdrawal from occupied territories, Hezbollah’s disarmament and the deployment of the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) south of the Litani River.
However, by October 2025, these commitments had only been partially implemented. Israel maintained control of several strategic hilltops, citing Hezbollah’s incomplete disarmament and persistent threats. Sporadic exchanges continued throughout the summer, culminating in intensified Israeli operations in October 2025. Israel’s stated objectives center on national security and the neutralization of imminent threats from Hezbollah. Strikes in Baalbek and Nabatieh, Israeli officials argue, respond to intelligence about Hezbollah’s reconstruction of tunnels, command posts and missile stockpiles. This logic of anticipatory defense echoes Israel’s longstanding doctrine of preemption.
Yet beneath these justifications lie more complex motives. Israel’s campaign reflects an effort to exploit Lebanon’s internal fragility to permanently degrade Hezbollah’s military and political capacity. By striking financial institutions and logistical nodes associated with the organization, Israel aims to undermine its parallel welfare networks — long a source of legitimacy among the majority of Lebanon’s Shiite population. This approach resonates with earlier Israeli interventions in Lebanon, notably the 1982 invasion and the 2006 war, both of which pursued “defensive” objectives that evolved into broader projects of territorial and infrastructural control. Satellite imagery and humanitarian reports, including from Amnesty International, have documented extensive damage in southern villages such as Aita Ash-Shaab and Kfar Kila, suggesting a de facto strategy of depopulation and demilitarization along the border. Analysts have further noted that Israel’s continued occupation of contested zones near the Blue Line contravenes UN Security Council resolutions, raising concerns over its long-term intentions to alter the territorial status quo.
Lebanon’s government and the UN have condemned Israeli strikes as blatant violations of the ceasefire. In March 2025, Prime Minister Nawaf Salam warned that renewed hostilities could “drag the country into a new, devastating war,” highlighting the economic devastation inflicted on a state already mired in bankruptcy. According to the Lebanese Army Command, Israel had committed more than 4,500 ceasefire breaches since the truce was concluded in November 2024, as of September 2025.
The LAF’s limited capacity to confront Hezbollah has fueled frustration among international partners. US Special Envoy Thomas Barrack has urged Lebanese authorities to advance disarmament, warning in October 2025 of a “major confrontation” should Hezbollah’s rearmament continue. Moreover, during her visit to Lebanon on October 28, 2025, US Deputy Special Envoy Morgan Ortagus expressed support for pursuing direct or indirect negotiations between Lebanon and Israel to address the issue of Hezbollah’s disarmament through diplomatic rather than military means.
At the geopolitical level, Israel’s operations intersect with broader US-backed strategies to counter Iranian influence. Beyond strategic calculus, the humanitarian toll has been severe. UN data indicate that Israeli operations since late 2024 have caused dozens of civilian deaths and extensive damage to hospitals, electricity grids and agricultural zones. Strikes on villages without confirmed military targets have prompted accusations of collective punishment. Within Lebanon, the bombings have reinforced Hezbollah’s narrative of resistance, deepening sectarian polarization and undermining state authority.
Regionally, the risk of escalation remains acute. Continued Israeli operations could provoke retaliatory action from Hezbollah or allied militias in Yemen and Iraq, potentially escalating into a broader confrontation involving Iran. Israel’s renewed bombing of Lebanon in October 2025, framed as a defensive measure to secure its northern frontier, reflects a convergence of security imperatives, strategic ambitions and domestic political imperatives. While the operations respond to concerns about Hezbollah’s rearmament, they also embody a broader pursuit of regional dominance and deterrence by punishment.
The result is a policy that risks entrenching instability, undermining international mediation and perpetuating Lebanon’s humanitarian collapse. A sustainable resolution will require strict adherence to ceasefire agreements, credible international monitoring and a reinvigorated Lebanese state capable of reclaiming sovereignty south of the Litani River. Without such steps, the cyclical logic of escalation will persist — threatening to engulf not only Lebanon and Israel, but the broader Middle East in yet another destructive spiral of proxy warfare and retaliatory violence.
