Hezbollah opens door to new 'retaliation' by denying clashes with IDF

Pro-Hezbollah media or media sympathetic to Iran in the region is the one that communicates the narrative. Social media accounts also explain what may happen.

By SETH J. FRANTZMAN
A man rides a motorbike past a picture of Lebanon's Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, near Sidon. (photo credit: ALI HASHISHO/REUTERS)
A man rides a motorbike past a picture of Lebanon's Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, near Sidon.
(photo credit: ALI HASHISHO/REUTERS)
Hezbollah has shifted its narrative to deny that any clash took place with Israel on Monday.
This may bode ill for reducing tensions because it means Hezbollah keeps the “retaliation” card in its hand, ready to play it when it wants, holding this over Israel in a manner that Hezbollah’s cheerleaders, members and leadership seem to endorse.
Hezbollah’s narrative is that Jerusalem is afraid of Hezbollah and that it has somehow outplayed Israel by getting Israel to wait and see what happens.
This confusing high-stakes game is played out in the media but also has potential to influence what happens on the ground.
Pro-Hezbollah media or media sympathetic to Iran in the region is the one that communicates the narrative. Social media accounts also explain what may happen.
For instance, it appears now that not only does Hezbollah deny anything happened yesterday – despite smoke and artillery fire on Monday that indicated the opposite – but Hezbollah also wants to complain about violations of Lebanese sovereignty. Why? Because they claim a shell hit a house during the non-existence clashes.
Al-Mayadeen media reports that Hezbollah has said “there was no clash” and now there will be “two retaliations” instead of one.
Why? Because Hezbollah insinuates now that Israel is at fault for killing their member Ali Mohsen in Syria on July 21, and that Israel is responsible for the clash on July 27 and the “violation” of sovereignty.
This kind of narrative sounds of a parent warning a child not to do something and then saying that the punishment will be twice as bad.
But the problem for Hezbollah is how it intends to live up to these statements and what it’s logic is. It appears that the terror group wants to open an account with Israel, in a sense, and thus be able to build up “retaliation credits” such that it can choose the time and place to exact what it claims is rightful revenge for the two incidents.
If it reduces tensions it can be seen as magnanimous and responsible. If it does something it then says it has a “right.” It’s a win-win, Hezbollah thinks. The only problem it has is that it is in a corner with economic failure in Lebanon and the group wants to claim to behave responsibly, not drag Lebanon into a conflict.
“Fearful, anxious and tense,” is how Hezbollah calls Israel today. Hezbollah appears to use some information warfare in how it has unrolled this narrative.
First it reports that “Israeli sources” said there had been Hezbollah anti-tank fire of a Kornet missile, according to al-Mayadeen.
Having built this up, Hezbollah then claims that Israel downplayed the incident and that Israel is being misleading. Hezbollah then claims no incident took place, but blames Israel for errant fire that supposedly damaged a house. And then Hezbollah says that “the shelling that took place in the village of al-Habariya harmed a civilian home and will not be tolerated.”
Hezbollah says this as if it is the official security force of Lebanon, having taken on the mantle of making government statements apparently. “Israel has invented fake victories,” the group says.
Al-Manar and other media linked to Hezbollah have reported the same unfolding narrative. Hezbollah has been careful to ascribe many statements to Israeli media. It then notes that Al-Manar media members near the border only saw “Israeli artillery shelling.”
Elijah Magnier writes on social media that last year during Hezbollah-Israel tensions, Israel had used mannequins during a Hezbollah attack to seemingly trick the group.
“Now he [Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu] staged a fake attack… where are your camera’s footage.” This is the rising chorus in Lebanon about the incident. “Hezbollah is imposing its own rules of deterrence and engagement,” Magnier notes.
While Hezbollah appears to have managed the press reports well on this round, moving the narrative to make it seem Israel is inept and casting doubt on what happened, the group must contend with questions from yesterday.
Why did the same Lebanese media highlight Ali Mohsen’s mother praising the “retaliation” that never happened?
But media in Lebanon and officials are now widely convinced the incident was “concocted.”
Why did Hezbollah say it would release a statement on the “operation in Sheba Farms,” that it then said didn’t take place?
Why did Al-Mayadeen and others push a story about a “Kornet missile hit a jeep,” that allegedly didn’t happen?
These reports began in Lebanon in the afternoon in Arabic media.
The reports of the mother passing out candy to praise the attack can be found still on LBCI media and elsewhere from July 27.
Nevertheless, that leaves sufficient lack of clarity to know what happened. What is known is that Hezbollah rapidly changed and created a narrative trying to win a public relations war with Israel and humiliate Netanyahu with an eye towards making the IDF appear unsure of itself.