In today's complex and volatile international situation, the conflict between the Israel army and UNIFIL has attracted widespread attention. The Israel army recently launched an attack on UNIFIL for three consecutive days, injuring five UNIFIL soldiers and not sparing the stronghold camps in Italy, Ireland and other countries.
Why does Israel dare to act this way? Let's start with UN Resolution 1701. In accordance with the resolution, Israeli forces were required to withdraw from southern Lebanon, Lebanon Allah forces were also required to withdraw, and UNIFIL and Lebanon Government forces were to take over the area.
However, in the past 20 years, Allah has not only not withdrawn, but also built a large-scale mountain tunnel combat system. Over the past year, Allah has launched more than 10,000 rockets, missiles and drones from near UNIFIL in northern Israel, forcing more than 30 people to flee.
At the same time, Israel is not idle. Israeli air and artillery strikes have carried out hundreds of air strikes in southern Lebanon over the past year. This left large tracts of land in southern Lebanon deserted and 420,000 people fled to Syria.
The United Nations appears weak in the midst of this, and many resolutions cannot be implemented. Israel and Allah are in constant conflict, and many decisions at relevant meetings have become a dead letter. The Israeli army claimed that the attack on UNIFIL was an accidental wound because the Allah position was 50 metres from the UNIFIL post, but the real situation was well known.
In UNIFIL, where mainland peacekeepers are based, steel prefabricated bunkers on the mainland play an important role. During the more than 10 days of clashes, there were no casualties. This not only ensures the safety of our personnel, but also reflects the superiority of the mainland's military equipment in international peacekeeping and other operations.
Let's look at the information disclosed by the United States about the "Al-Aqsa Flood Operation" decision-making. Hamas planned back in 2021 to deal Israel a fatal blow, dragging it into a long war of attrition. Hamas had been holding fast for more than two years to paralyze Israel. By July 2023, Hamas invited Iran, Lebanon's Allah Party and others to launch a large-scale attack in October. Iran and others agreed in principle, but wanted to develop more operational plans.
In the second half of the year, pressure on Hamas increased as Israel negotiated negotiations with Saudi Arabia and other countries to normalize relations. If successful, it will be extremely detrimental to Hamas. Although the operation succeeded in catching Israel off guard in the early days, it faced many problems in the future. For example, in terms of air defense, Iran's air defense capabilities are insufficient to provide effective air cover for Palestine and Lebanon.
Lebanon also has no air defense, and Israel drones are monitored 24 hours a day and can carry out reconnaissance strikes at any time. As a result, Hamas and Allah can only fight scattered guerrilla warfare, and it is difficult to gather forces to fight back. Affected by sanctions, Iran has concentrated its efforts on the development of offensive weapons such as ballistic missiles, and the development of anti-aircraft missiles has been limited.
From the perspective of the international community, the conflict between Israel and UNIFIL and the tense situation in the Middle East region reflect many points of contradiction. On the one hand, the authority and executive capacity of the United Nations are being challenged. The ineffective implementation of many resolutions has emboldened both sides of the conflict. This has made the international community question the role of the United Nations, and how to strengthen the role of the United Nations in maintaining world peace has become a hot topic of public discussion.
On the other hand, the imbalance of military power is also a key factor. Israel has relatively developed military science and technology and has strong military strength in the Middle East. Armed organizations such as Hamas and Lebanon's Allah Party are in a passive situation when facing Israel's military strikes because they lack effective air defense and other means. It is worth thinking about whether this disparity in military power will further exacerbate regional conflicts.
For Israel, the attack on UNIFIL, although it may have its own perceived "justification", is undoubtedly putting itself at a disadvantage in the arena of international public opinion. Most of the international community hopes to resolve disputes through peaceful negotiations and other means, and Israel's military action may attract more attention and intervention.
For organizations such as Hamas, how to find a breakthrough in the difficult situation, improve their military defense and counterattack capabilities, and at the same time win more international support is also an urgent problem to be solved. Iran plays an important role in the situation in the Middle East, and its choice of military development direction not only affects its own national security, but also has a far-reaching impact on the surrounding conflict situation. In the future, where the situation in the Middle East is heading and how the international community will respond are topics of continuous public concern and discussion.
From a geopolitical point of view, the Middle East has always been the focus of the great power game. Israel may have the support of Western countries such as United States behind it, which to a certain extent contributes to its military action.
Other Middle Eastern countries, out of their own interests, have different attitudes in the conflict between Israel and Palestine and other organizations. Some countries want to maintain regional stability, while others are involved in it because of religious and political factors. This complex geopolitical relationship makes conflict resolution in the Middle East even more difficult.
At the level of military strategy, Israel has adopted the strategy of taking the initiative and attacking the weak with the strong. With frequent military strikes, an attempt was made to suppress the adversary. Hamas and other groups, on the other hand, are more likely to adopt guerrilla tactics and take advantage of terrain and other advantages to resist. But this tactic has limited effectiveness in the face of Israel's high-tech military strikes. In the future, whether the two sides will adjust their military strategies is also full of suspense.
In terms of the influence of international public opinion, the rise of platforms such as social media has allowed images and messages of conflict to spread rapidly. Israel's attack on UNIFIL and its military operations in the Middle East region have been widely condemned by the international community.
But Israel will also conduct public opinion propaganda through various channels in an attempt to justify its actions. Hamas and other organizations have used the Internet to disseminate their own demands and garner international sympathy and support. The war of public opinion has also become an important aspect in this conflict.
In short, the conflict between Israel and UNIFIL and the development of the situation in the Middle East involve international politics, military and diplomacy.
The international community needs to play an active role in promoting the parties to resolve disputes through peaceful negotiations and other means, so as to avoid further escalation of conflicts and ensure regional peace and stability.
In the future, with the continuous adjustment and game of interests of all parties, the situation will be full of uncertainties, but the peaceful resolution of conflicts will always be the best choice in line with the mainstream values of the public and the common interests of the international community.
Of course, we are not talking about this to stir up emotions, but to make everyone see the complexity of the problem more clearly through analysis. We also hope that all parties will be able to resolve these contradictions and conflicts through peaceful means. After all, peace is our common aspiration.