Israeli opposition to ceasefire spans political spectrum

The opposition in Israel to the American-French initiative this week for a three-week ceasefire in Lebanon covered almost the entire political spectrum.
Most militant were the voices from prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s far-right coalition partners, who also led the opposition to a deal to end the Gaza war. Bezalel Smotrich, head of the Religious Zionism party said: “The campaign in the north must end with one scenario: smashing Hizbullah. We mustn’t give the enemy time to recover from the severe blows it has sustained.”
National security minister Itamar Ben-Gvir said: “If a temporary ceasefire is signed, Otzma Yehudit [Jewish Strength party] won’t be committed to the coalition. If the temporary ceasefire becomes permanent, we’ll resign from the government.”
But, significantly, there was also opposition from within Mr Netanyahu’s own Likud party, with a number of lawmakers legislators to vote against the budget if a ceasefire is agreed.
Even left-wing and centrist politicians criticised the American-French proposal which emerged at the United Nations General Assembly in New York. The most problematic issue is the three-week truce period, which is considered long enough to allow Hizbullah to partially recover from its military setbacks.
The Israeli military also wants the war against Hizbullah to continue. “We must keep attacking Hizbullah. We’ve been waiting for this opportunity for years,” said army chief Lt Gen Herzl Halevi.
Residents of northern Israel are the most vociferous in opposing a ceasefire. “Don’t even think about it because we are not prepared for anything less than the thorough defeat of Hizbullah and pushing it back north of the Litani [river]. Otherwise, we will not be able to continue existing in the north,” said Michael Kabessa, council leader for Hatzor Haglilit in Northern Israel.
The events of October 7th – when Hamas militants crossed from Gaza and killed about 1,200 people according to official tallies – have had a profound impact on Israel. Residents of the north fear a repeat scenario, with Hizbullah’s Radwan strike force crossing the border. Some 60,000 people have fled northern Israel since October, when Hizbullah began firing from Lebanon in support of Hamas in Gaza.
Until the possibility of a Gaza-style attack occurring along the Lebanese border is removed, the Israeli evacuees from the north will not return to their homes. The capabilities of the Radwan units have been significantly reduced in 10 days of Israeli strikes. But the threat still remains, and includes attack tunnels that Israel believes Hizbullah has built close to the border.
Northern residents believe that only a ground operation, even if limited in time and scope, removing Hizbullah infrastructure from Shia villages, can end the threat of a repeat of October 7th.
But opinions about a ground operation are more divided, and many view it as a last resort. If Hizbullah will agree to an arrangement under which its fighters will withdraw from the border there will no need to send troops into Lebanon.
If not, Israel may feel there is no other option.