There is a vast literature available that narrates the determinants of the 34-day standoff. The reality is that, the impact of the war went beyond the two countries to affect countries within the region and the world as a whole. Effectively, the coming into effect of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701 on Augbrought the 34-day war to an end with the expectation that a permanent ceasefire agreement between Israel and Lebanon was in sight.Ĭoncerns about the adverse global effects of the 2006 summer time conflict between Israel and Lebanon have scarcely been documented. For the very first time post the gulf war, the world media was embedded with both warring factions and carried the war live on television showing detailed movements of Israeli forces' advancement into Lebanon, the bombing of civilian positions and Hezbollah rocket hitting northern Israel and Haifa.
This war defied a typical conventional warfare between states to exhibit a new prototype of asymmetrical war featuring a legitimate state of Israel on one hand and a militant, illegitimate, religious fundamentalist group Hezbollah on the other. Įvents of 12th July, 2006 prepared the ground for yet another fierce battle between old foes, Israel, largely supported by the West and Hezbollah-led Lebanon that derives its strength from Syria and Iran. Meanwhile, the Israelis also suffered some casualties with a reported death toll of 43 Israeli civilians in addition to 116 soldiers and the displacement of almost 300,000 Israelis, especially in the northern part of the country. Unfortunately, at the end of the war in August 2006, nearly 1,200 Lebanese had lost their lives over 4,000 wounded about one million displaced and nearly 15,000 homes destroyed.
For the first time, since the unilateral withdrawal of Israel from southern Lebanon in 2000, Israeli ground troops entered southern Lebanon and resumed large scale military operation in the very heart of Lebanon.Ĭonsequently, the ensuing conflict resulted in the substantial loss of lives on both sides, reignited the possibility of a wider regional war (following incessant warning of possible attacks from Iran and Syria) and increased the volatility within the Lebanese territory. The resultant tugs and pulls deteriorated into the 34-day fierce battle between Israeli Defense Force (IDF) and Hezbollah. Israel saw Hezbollah’s action as an ‘act of war’ an unpleasant incident that forced the Israeli army chief of staff, Dan Halutz, to declare that Israel would “turn back the clock in Lebanon by 20 years.” The response from Israel was swift and top-heavy, and it was largely accused of displaying its military strength by destroying infrastructure, killing innocent civilian, arousing local political anger and shattering the growing Lebanese economy. In the ensuing battle, an Israeli tank and platoon crossed into Lebanon with the aim of rescuing their captured colleagues, but this was met with some resistance an exchange that led to the death of five more Israeli soldiers. On the 12 of July 2006, a division of the militant group Hezbollah based in southern Lebanon crossed the blue line and attacked an Israeli army convoy patrolling the border, killing three Israeli soldiers instantly and capturing two others. Given the nature of the July 2006 war, the number of casualties reported and the number of infrastructure destroyed, a central issue for many of the countries within the region has been the use of brut disproportional force to achieve the desired goals. The seventh anniversary of the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah conflict provides a critical opportunity to evaluate the global effect in a number of dimensions. The Army will continue to test the Trophy systems on the ground, but hopes are high that this countermeasure could improve the strength and resiliency of its fighting forces.The Lebanon-Israel War of 2006: Global Effects and its Aftermath Navy already uses a similar technology on warships but integrated these systems onto land vehicles is more complicated due to the weight and more unwieldy natures of the tanks. The Trophy system is completely automated, so it can respond much faster to an incoming projectile than a human could. The U.S.
Essentially, this system (the Trophy Active Protection Systems) could track and destroy any incoming missiles or RPGs with a turreted shotgun before they could make contact.Īside from the obvious risk in driving tanks in combat zones for the human operator, tanks can also cost millions of dollars which is yet another reason why the military is looking to protect their investment. Well, now this force field-like technology is being tested on American M1 Abrams tanks, as well as Stryker vehicles. Many years ago, an Israeli defense outfit developed a “bubble shield” for military vehicles.