An Israeli war that began with high expectations has settled into a stalemate, with Hezbollah appearing more capable than it did at the start of the war, The New York Times reported.

When the Israeli prime minister and security minister warned on Monday that airstrikes would soon target the Southern Suburb of Beirut, the statement marked more than an escalation in the ongoing war on Lebanon. It also reflected growing doubts about Israeli ability to achieve its objectives, as per the report.

Just hours later, "Israel" walked back that threat, highlighting the pressure it faces from competing demands at home and from the United States to limit its aggression on Lebanon.

A 'buffer zone' strategy meets fierce resistance

"Israel’s" initial approach aimed to establish a "protective buffer inside Lebanon," in an attempt to push Hezbollah forces beyond the range of anti-tank missiles that have long threatened northern Israeli settlements.

However, Israeli forces appear to have been unprepared for Hezbollah’s expanded use of explosive first-person-view drones, which are fiber-optically guided and resistant to electronic jamming.

While Israeli strikes have caused significantly higher casualties among Lebanese civilians, Hezbollah’s drone operations have steadily targeted Israeli troops and commanders in both Lebanon and "Israel".

The movement has also circulated footage of these attacks online, amplifying their psychological impact, the report stressed. The Israeli military reported that two soldiers were killed and ten wounded in such incidents on Monday alone.

From confidence to stalemate

What once looked like a decisive Israeli advantage has turned into a more uncertain confrontation. Israeli leaders who once spoke confidently about overwhelming Hezbollah now face a situation in which neither side appears able to gain clear dominance, the report stressed.

“There was a strategy — was,” said Orna Mizrahi, a former Israeli security official. She noted that Hezbollah’s drone capabilities came as a surprise, with Israeli planners initially underestimating their significance.

“In Israel, they looked at it as a toy,” she said.

Domestic and US pressure limits Israeli options

Beyond battlefield challenges, "Israel", as per the report, faces political constraints: domestic pressure to act decisively against Hezbollah, and US pressure to avoid excessive escalation.

For Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, this creates a difficult political environment ahead of upcoming elections, particularly as displaced settlers in northern "Israel" remain unable to return to their settlements.

Analysts argue that "Israel’s" current approach lacks coherence. Michael Koplow of the Israel Policy Forum described it as political necessity driving military action rather than a clear plan.

“It’s not really a strategy,” he stressed. “It’s a political imperative in search of a strategy.”

From grand ambitions to limited objectives

"Israel" initially framed its war in sweeping terms, promising to fundamentally reshape the situation in Lebanon. However, those ambitions were quickly scaled back, as full occupation of Lebanon was deemed unrealistic.

By April, further restrictions were imposed after US pressure, including limits on strikes in Beirut amid broader diplomatic efforts involving Iran.

Since then, "Israel" has focused on maintaining a "buffer zone" and targeting alleged "Hezbollah infrastructure", while forcibly displacing large numbers of civilians in southern Lebanon.

However, analysts say simply holding territory presents long-term operational and political risks.

Lessons from past invasion unlearned

Retired Israeli Brig. Gen. Assaf Orion warned that current policy appears to ignore lessons from "Israel’s" 1982 invasion of Lebanon, which eventually led to an 18-year military presence and the rise of Hezbollah itself.

He noted that stationary forces become easier targets and politically reinforce the very resistance they aim to weaken.

Israeli officials have increasingly called for renewed air operations targeting Hezbollah positions in Beirut and elsewhere, arguing that current restrictions limit their effectiveness.

Some Israeli analysts say constraints imposed by Washington leave Israeli forces operating at a disadvantage.

Shira Efron, an analyst at RAND, compared the situation to earlier wars where "Israel" operated under similar limitations, arguing that restrictions on "striking central Hezbollah targets weaken deterrence."

Others, however, see those constraints differently.

'Israel' locked in a 'cat-and-mouse' dynamic

Sarit Zehavi of the Alma Research and Education Center argued that limiting strikes allows Hezbollah to recover and sustain its operations, creating a prolonged cycle of low-level war.

Without deeper strikes, she said, "Israel" remains locked in a “cat-and-mouse” dynamic that does not resolve the underlying threat.

In contrast, Shira Efron suggested that a negotiated US-Iranian arrangement including a ceasefire could ultimately serve Israeli interests better than prolonged military entanglement.

She warned that continued operations risk deeper occupation and sustained vulnerability for Israeli troops, while a broader deal could reduce tensions on multiple fronts.

Source:Websites