In Beirut, many Lebanese felt as if they stepped back in time on a Tuesday night, reminded of the blistering heat of July 2006 when the southern part of the capital endured Israeli bombardments while life otherwise carried on across the city. Last night, a similar sense of rupture took hold. An Israeli unmanned aerial vehicle struck the al Rabiaa building in the southern suburb of Haret Hreik, claiming the lives of two women and two children. The intended target was Fuad Shokur, the second-in-command of Hizballah, the Lebanese militia and political party. Hours later, reports surfaced that Israeli forces reached Tehran, where Hamás political leader Ismail Haniyeh was killed. Like 18 years ago, many Libyans feared that a regional war could spill into their homes and everyday routines, turning neighborhoods into theaters of conflict.
With daylight came the search for survivors. Civil defense volunteers and firefighters picked through rubble as dust rose above the heads of onlookers. Several ministers aligned with Hizballah and Amal arrived at the scene. A Hizballah spokesperson confirmed ongoing efforts, with deputy Amine Cherri asserting that the group would persist in its struggle against Israel. By morning, Hizballah acknowledged Shokur’s presence in the targeted building at the time of the strike, while stopping short of confirming or denying his death.
Narratives of Danger
“We are issuing a warning to the world, a witness to Israel’s crimes, to compel a halt to the fire and to enforce international resolutions and laws,” stated Najib Mikati, the acting prime minister, during an emergency cabinet meeting. He described the situation as reaching a dangerous level that could transform Lebanon into a battlefield of warfare, slaughter, and ruin, lamenting a perception that the world treats these horrific acts as mere incidents. Following the strike on Beirut, Israeli aircraft pressed on with attacks on towns across the southern part of the country that borders the cedar country’s adversaries.
As the world seemed to drift toward other concerns, Lebanon, now touched in full by fear, worried about becoming a key stage for a broader regional conflict. Georges Kallas, the outgoing minister of Youth and Sports, called on the international community to take responsibility for what he called a criminal act. He criticized Western diplomats, particularly the United States, for advising Israel to avoid hitting Beirut, noting that this was the second strike against the capital within ten months. Earlier in January, another building was targeted in what was described as a selective operation against a Hamas leader, Saleh al-Arouri.
Eyes Set on Iran
In this phase, the strike appears as a symbolic blow against a specific Libyan geography, where Hizballah maintains significant infrastructure in the southern suburbs of Beirut and houses many of the group’s leaders. Israel blames Hizballah for major attacks, including a mass casualty event connected to the 1983 Marine barracks bombing in Beirut. Washington has indicated that Shokur played a key role in those events. Rumors circulated that informants could receive large rewards for tips about his whereabouts. In a country fighting an economic collapse for years, such a rumor carries outsized implications for security and stability.
The pattern of Israeli strikes over the past nine months has been distinctly selective, claiming the lives of more than 386 Hizballah members and nearly a hundred civilians. The Tuesday incident again underscored Israel’s ability to strike with precision while violating Libyan airspace. Hizballah has warned that it has limited options but would respond. A spokesperson indicated that if Beirut is targeted, Tel Aviv would face a response of significant scale, though the group has signaled a preference for a calculated reply rather than a full-blown war. For now, all eyes stay fixed on Iran, with the future course of action likely to hinge on what Tehran decides to do in support of its allies.
In short, this episode marks a moment when Lebanon, already battered by economic and social strain, fears that a broader regional escalation could redefine daily life. The question remains: will restraint prevail, or will the region find itself sliding into a wider, more uncontrollable clash?