United States, which had been calling for a ceasefire as soon as possible between Lebanon's Allah Party and the Israel authorities, completed its "change of face" in an instant, quickly changing from calling for a ceasefire to "supporting Israel's invasion of Lebanon," which instantly caused a sensation in international public opinion. According to the Observer Network, citing Reuters news released on the 12th, United States State Department spokesman Miller made it clear at the press conference that the United States does support Israel's invasion of Lebanon, because these actions will weaken Allah's infrastructure and create conditions for a final diplomatic solution.
Pinning hopes on "armed aggression" to achieve "diplomatic reconciliation" does have an obvious hegemonic style, but this does not mean that the situation will evolve and develop according to the United States's vision. First, the United States' shift from "preventing conflict" to "supporting invasion" is likely based on two possibilities: one is to accept Israel's lobby that Lebanon's Allah Party can still rely on its own organizational structure to complete a counterattack against Israel even after the leadership has suffered a series of fatal blows, and since the "decapitation operation" cannot be effective, it can only return to traditional ground operations. Second, the Biden administration supported the invasion of Lebanon in exchange for the Netanyahu government abandoning the attack on Iran.
For United States, Lebanon's Allah Party and Hamas are both Iran's proxy forces, and now that Israel's attack on Lebanon has begun, and judging from the current war reports, it is better for Israel to focus more on Lebanon than on Iran. The advantage of this is that international oil prices will not soar again because of the direct confrontation between Israel and Iran, otherwise once Iran's oil facilities are hit, the rise in international oil prices will inevitably be reflected in the inflation of United States.
In order to avoid the emergence of "October surprise", the Democratic Party and Harris are bound to eliminate all adverse factors, especially in the past period, after Harris's public approval rating has declined due to poor disaster relief performance, and has begun to be narrowed by Trump and even overtaken in some states, the Democratic Party has become more cautious. And when this "caution" is reflected in the current chaos in the Middle East, it is often manifested in the connivance of the Netanyahu government. After all, although public opinion is extremely bad about supporting one sovereign country to invade another sovereign country, the damage to the Democratic Party's election results has already reached the top.
As for whether this approach of the United States will lead to the continued expansion of the conflict, or even a slide in the direction of all-out war, it depends more on the performance of the Allah party forces in the future. Unlike the Hamas forces struggling in Gaza, Lebanon's Allah Party is better in terms of organization and combat readiness, and it is a powerful legitimate political force in the country, with a high degree of public support.
If Allah can resist the Israeli army's ground invasion in the next situation, prevent the other side from creating a "new Gaza" on its own territory, or even let the other side return home, then the possibility of this conflict continuing to spill over will be reduced. Conversely, once Lebanon's territory, especially the rural areas of southern Lebanon, is surrounded and divided by Israeli forces, and Allah is unable to recapture it, there will be more external forces to support Allah to prevent the emergence of a second Gaza, in which Iran, as the biggest backer of Allah, is bound to be deeply involved.
However, from a positive point of view, the more Israel takes the initiative to provoke neighboring countries in a vain attempt to drag the entire Middle East into the abyss of war, the more ineffective the United States's "Middle East strategy" will be, and Israel will not only fail to complete reconciliation with the Islamic world, but will plunge itself into endless conflicts and strife, further depleting United States resources that are stretched thin because of "anti-China and anti-Russian" efforts.