In an interview with the website of the Strategic Council on Foreign Relations about the current developments in West Asia, especially in Lebanon, Rahman Qahramanpour said: It seems that the actions of the Israeli regime in Lebanon, the West Bank, and Gaza can be analyzed under two variables: First, this regime seeks to restore its deterrent power. In this regard, the army and a part of the public opinion support Netanyahu and his cabinet and believe that if the Israeli regime wants to have security in the future, it must restore its power of accountability and return to the policy of military superiority in the region after the October 7 operation was marred by Hamas. Secondly, the Israeli regime sees all these in a “package,” and it is natural to include Iran in the same package. Israeli regime officials believe that Iran has been the main factor in weakening the military superiority and preference power of this regime. Despite some predictions, especially from regional analysts and the Resistance axis, who believed that the Israeli regime cannot continue a long war and its military strategy is based on an early and sudden war, this war has continued until today.

He said: Another factor in explaining the Israeli regime’s behavior is Netanyahu’s personal preferences and political position inside the occupied territories. He initially started a war in which he was unpopular; moreover, he had forged a fragile coalition with the religious right and had a fragile lead in the Knesset. But in the past few months, with the attacks he has carried out on Gaza, Hamas, Hezbollah, and the West Bank, his popularity has increased inside, and he feels that if he continues this process, he will consolidate his position in the occupied territories and weaken the opposition.

This international affairs expert said: Before the October 7 operation, there was a serious disagreement in the occupied territories over the powers of the Supreme Court, and some called it a judicial coup against the Israeli regime’s judiciary, although Netanyahu backed away from this issue but the current of the Likud Party and the religious right still wants the independence of the judiciary and the Supreme Court to be limited. In this situation, Netanyahu tries to divide his opponents by continuing the war. On the one hand, he regards protests against him as an action against national security. He presents himself to the gray spectrum of the Israeli regime as the savior of the Jews and thus gains their support for the next possible election.

He pointed out that, Presently, the situation of Netanyahu and the Likud Party has improved to some extent, unlike the early months of the October 7 war. It can be assumed that Netanyahu’s actions in Gaza, Lebanon, and the West Bank will not end soon. He will not allow a ceasefire to be established and the situation to return to normal because he wants to keep the initiative even after the end of the war.

Regarding the increasing and unbridled attacks of the Israeli regime on the northern borders with Lebanon, Qahramanpour stated: Considering that about sixty thousand Jews living in the north of the occupied territories were driven out of that area due to Hezbollah attacks and moved to other areas, on September 17, the cabinet of the Israeli regime approved that these numbers return to their homes, and it was then this conflict between the Hezbollah and the Israeli regime intensified. The Israeli regime wants Hezbollah to withdraw to the north of the Litani River, 18 miles from the Lebanese border and the occupied territories so that its short-range missiles do not reach sensitive areas in the infrastructure of the Israeli regime and normal life continues there.

This expert on international issues stated: Another issue that the Israeli regime is looking for is the disarmament of the Hezbollah, but because it knows this is not possible, it has started heavy and widespread attacks on military facilities and warehouses of the Hezbollah to, according to itself, eliminate the threat of the Hezbollah. to destroy the Israeli regime and restore its power of retribution.

He said about Lebanon’s political and economic situation under the status quo: the fact is that the Lebanese government has become a crisis government in recent years, unable to exercise sovereignty over its territories and experiencing a severe political and economic crisis.

Overall, the Lebanese government cannot easily have a strong and powerful army and bureaucracy to defend its land, national sovereignty, and territorial integrity. In addition, it is predicted that foreign influence in this country and government will increase more than in the past.