Lebanon lived through a difficult day yesterday, as the Israeli aggression targeted Beirut and other areas, leading to the death of more than 200 people and the injury of more than 2,000 others in a short time. This incident was a great shock to the Lebanese people and the world. This escalation, which occurred within minutes, shows the enemy’s cruelty and insistence on attacking civilians, places Lebanon facing an unprecedented humanitarian catastrophe, and underscores the security and political challenges currently facing the country.
Retired Brigadier General Nidal Zahawi told Reuters that the recent Israeli attacks on Lebanon, especially in Beirut, do not target any real military targets, and pointed out that what happened is part of a psychological war and an attempt to influence the negotiations.
Zahwi explained: “There were absolutely no military targets in what happened, and all the victims were civilians. We as military personnel know our locations precisely, and these locations are not in residential neighborhoods or inside civilian buildings, but rather in specific locations.”
He added: “The second goal of these strikes is to try to upset the incubating environment, which is considered one of the most supportive environments. As for the third goal, it relates to what was promised to some Lebanese parties, as the objection of Lebanese politicians to some forces led to this result, and therefore there is no real military goal.”
Regarding targeting inhabited residential buildings, Zahwi said: “Can a building containing children and families be considered a military target? Absolutely not. This is 100% a war crime. Even if a person belonging to an armed group is found but he does not carry a weapon and is not in a combat position, targeting him is considered a war crime.”
He pointed out that the principle of the use of force requires minimizing collateral damage, not destroying entire buildings: “What happened is a flagrant violation of international humanitarian law.”
On the political level, he added: “No documents were presented to justify these operations. On the contrary, there are those who justify the Israeli military action, including some Lebanese media outlets that have become part of the justification, and sometimes a source of information.”
Regarding the possibility of additional escalation, Zahwi believed that what happened was aimed at testing Iran’s position: “The goal was to test whether Iran would abandon or separate the fronts, as separating the fronts is considered a political victory. But Iran did not accept that.”
He explained that the American and international position is not moving towards separating the Lebanese file, but rather there is international pressure to implement the agreement as it is. He added: “Therefore, I do not see there being a further escalation. On the contrary, things are moving towards calm, and we will not witness a bloody day similar to what happened in Beirut.”
Regarding the reason for the lack of an immediate response from Iran, Zahwi explained: “An immediate response is not a deliberate military behavior. Any response requires preparation and setting goals within a clear target bank, and requires coordination between various forces. The response is not just a quick action, but must be thoughtful, harsh, and based on specific goals. Therefore, being cautious in responding is part of military tactics.”
As for Hezbollah, he said: “The party’s response has been limited so far, due to the large size of the strike, and the response is still being prepared. Not responding immediately does not mean weakness, but rather it is part of rearranging priorities, preparing the target bank, and operational coordination.”
Zahwi concluded by saying: “In the end, the region is heading towards calm after this stage, due to international pressure and ongoing communications, with careful movement of the military and political balances.”
