At dawn, the border does not announce itself with gunfire, but with silence.
The state retreats, as Israel advances into Dahiya
A farmer from southern Lebanon, in Dahiya, points to the land his family has cultivated for generations. He says he no longer knows where Lebanon ends. A new surveillance tower watches over the fields. Its roving cameras prying on the people tending to their land. Israeli patrols now tread new routes that did not exist a year ago.
In Beirut, officials speak of restored control and post-ceasefire stability but on the ground the frontier is shifting without resistance. The war is not being fought with guns. It is being waged through infrastructure, the bureaucratic apparatus, and the retreat of the Lebanese state. If state control was supposed to bring international legitimacy and deterrence, why then is Israel advancing?
Who controls Lebanon’s southern border
In the months following a ceasefire that promised to restore state authority, the community in the south are no closer to peace. The official Lebanese position is that the army is the sole legitimate security force south of the Litani River. Even so, this has not stopped Israeli military incursions into Lebanon.
Lebanese authorities say they coordinate with so-called “friendly states” — primarily the US and France — but its diplomatic appeals have ended in vain. Belligerent to the laws of international law, Israel continues to inch deeper into Lebanese territory as the international community stands back, mouth agape. Beirut insists that the Lebanese Army now “controls” the south. The reality on the ground suggests otherwise.
Undeterred Israel pushes deeper into southern Lebanon
Despite reassurances from Beirutm, UN peacekeepers have reported that Israeli forces control the buffer zonesl, blocking civilian and military access. Their posturing violates the terms of the ceasefire agreement whose promise to restore “full Lebanese control” remains unfulfilled.
Israeli War Minister Israel Katz has stated that Israel will maintain these positions “indefinitely”. The UN interim force in Lebanon has documented frequent violations along the Blue Line — the demarcation drawn by the UN in 2000 after Lebanon’s liberation ended 18 years of Israeli occupation.
UN winds down peacekeeping mission — But can Beirut go it alone?
Notwithstanding these repeated violations, the UN is winding down its historical peacekeeping mission. By the end of 2026, the Lebanese state will shoulder these security responsibilities alone. Given its limited military capacity and diplomatic leverage, its ability to do so is tenuous at best. With near daily raids and incursions, the palpable fear on the ground is that Israel will exploit the security vacuum the UN’s withdrawal is anticipated to create.
Local residents and officials report that Israel’s fortified positions restrict access to traditional farmland, which these Lebanese army is unable to challenge.
The Lebanese Army patrols, observes, and documents violations but is incapable of preventing incursions, dismantling newly built Israeli infrastructure, or reclaiming farmland. This is due to limited defensive capabilities and political constraints, namely pressure from the US, Lebanon’s primary military backer.
This pressure determines how the army operates and the limits of its powers.
All talk and no bite
Local officials describe a chain of command that focuses on documentation not action, while leaders in the capital shy away from difficult conversations to avoid escalation for the sake of stability. This results in the hollowing of sovereignty, existing in name only for the peace of mind of Lebanon’s international partners.
Lebanon’s reliance on international legitimacy, once seen as its protection, has shown its limits. No pressure from Lebanon’s so-called allies has pressured Israel to change its behavior. In reality, Lebanon’s failure to add has emboldened Israel and an unspoken acceptance of border violations and incursions.
History shows that borders aren’t just redrawn by treaties but by habits entrenched over time. Surveillance towers become permanent, access restrictions become accepted, and exceptional emergency orders set the stage for future negotiations.
Analysts warn that these changes may cultivate a new status quo, which Lebanon may be forced to accept. Historically speaking, such shifts have been accompanied by occupation, displacement, massacres, and military rule, often sustained by international consent, particularly from the US — Israel’s trusted ally.
In this way, today’s silence is an investment that fosters a weaker state and future in Lebanon.
Featured image via author
This post was originally published on Canary.