Uneven Battlefield: How Gaza And Lebanon’s Resistance Adapts To Israeli Military Superiority

Empowering Weak & Oppressed

Elijah J. Magnier

Jumada' al-Ula' 29, 1446 2024-12-01

News & Analysis

by Elijah J. Magnier (News & Analysis, Crescent International Vol. 54, No. 10, Jumada' al-Ula', 1446)

The ongoing brutal and destructive war between Israel and resistance forces in Gaza and Lebanon encapsulates the complexities of modern asymmetrical warfare. Resistance groups like Hamas and Hizbullah face significant disadvantages compared to Israel's military might but leverage unconventional tactics, geographical advantages, and resilience to counterbalance this disparity.

While Israel leverages the support of superpowers’ advanced technology, intelligence-sharing with allies, and precision weaponry, the resistance relies on its rooted ideology in the indigenous population, innovative strategies, and decentralised leadership to sustain its operations. This analysis explores the operational mechanics behind Israel’s targeting methods, examines the strengths and weaknesses of resistance forces, and evaluates the effectiveness of their respective strategies and arsenals in the ongoing conflict.

The Precision of Israeli Targeting

Israel's ability to target resistance leaders relies on a sophisticated intelligence ecosystem combining human intelligence (HUMINT), signals intelligence (SIGINT), imagery intelligence (IMINT), and artificial intelligence (AI). Drones, satellite imagery, and advanced listening devices enable real-time tracking and precision strikes.

HUMINT involves infiltrating local communities through agents to gather actionable intelligence on resistance leaders’ movements and safe houses. In densely populated areas like Gaza and southern Lebanon, these networks can provide critical insights but often require additional support from technological surveillance. SIGINT capabilities, mainly through the Israeli intelligence Unit 8200, allow Israel to intercept communications and monitor metadata, revealing movement patterns or operational planning. AI algorithms enhance these efforts by analysing vast datasets and predicting potential targets’ movements.

Uncrewed aerial vehicles (UAVs) and satellite surveillance continuously monitor Gaza and Lebanon in the service of Israel, updating a comprehensive “bank of objectives.” These capabilities are bolstered by intelligence-sharing agreements with the United States, NATO, and CENTCOM, which supply Israel with advanced surveillance data and analytical tools. Approximately 80% of flights over conflict zones in Gaza and Lebanon belong to US and NATO allies, with Israel leveraging this support to enhance its situational awareness.

AI is pivotal, integrating data from various platforms to identify anomalies and relatively optimise targeting operations. Predictive analytics allow Israel to launch preemptive strikes, disrupting resistance activities before they materialise.

Resistance Countermeasures

Despite Israel’s technological edge, Hamas and Hizbullah have implemented new strategies to counter Tel Aviv’s advanced technology to protect their leadership and maintain operational continuity. Decentralised command structures empower local commanders to operate autonomously on the battlefield, ensuring resilience even if senior leaders are lost. Each commander has a designated second-in-command, strategically placed to avoid being targeted alongside their superior.

Communication protocols minimise electronic communication, favouring face-to-face meetings and couriers. When devices are used, they are frequently changed to evade detection. Resistance forces also employ extensive tunnel systems in Gaza and Hizbullah’s fortified bunkers in Lebanon, shielding leaders, strategic missiles, and supplies from aerial and satellite surveillance.

Deception plays a crucial role in countering Israeli targeting. Resistance groups use decoy convoys, fake communication trails, and dummy infrastructure to mislead surveillance efforts. Essential electronic warfare tools are also deployed to disrupt Israeli UAV operations, limiting their effectiveness in specific zones.

The Resistance’s Strengths and Challenges

Resistance forces in Gaza and Lebanon benefit from natural defensive advantages provided by their environments. Gaza’s dense urban landscape complicates Israeli operations, while Lebanon’s rugged mountains and valleys offer ideal terrain for ambushes, supply routes, and fortified positions. Hizbullah, in particular, uses Lebanon’s topography to establish concealed defensive points and mobile positions, forcing Israel into costly and protracted engagements.

Asymmetrical warfare is a hallmark of resistance strategy. Small, mobile units employ hit-and-run tactics, ambushes, and improvised explosive devices (IEDs) to disrupt Israeli advances. These methods prioritise attrition over territorial control, aiming to exhaust Israeli forces and undermine their morale. Resistance fighters, familiar with the terrain, exploit their agility to neutralise Israel’s conventional military advantages.

Community support is another pillar of resistance operations. In Gaza, civilians provide logistical and intelligence assistance and cover to Hamas fighters. Hizbullah’s integration into Lebanon’s social and political fabric ensures widespread backing, complicating Israeli decision-making and enhancing the resilience of resistance activities.

However, resistance forces face significant challenges. Israel’s technological superiority, including surveillance systems, precision-guided munitions, and the Iron Dome, limits part of the impact of resistance missile campaigns. The blockade on Gaza further exacerbates resource constraints, forcing Hamas to rely on smuggling networks and homemade weapons. Hizbullah, while better equipped, remains relatively vulnerable to Israel’s air dominance but succeeded in home-building drones and rockets and managed to smuggle strategic weapons from Iran via Syria.

Weaponry and Tactical Innovation

Both Hamas and Hizbullah possess diverse arsenals ranging from rudimentary rockets to advanced precision-guided missiles and drones. Hizbullah’s Iranian-supplied missiles are capable of penetrating Israel’s interception systems, hitting the Israeli advance invasion with laser-guided anti-tank missiles and employing saturation tactics to overwhelm the Iron Dome. Its UAVs equipped with improvised explosives add another dimension to their capabilities, forcing Israel to adapt its defences continually.

Israel’s multi-layer interception missile systems, Iron Dome, David’s Sling, and Arrow systems, are effective against short- and medium-range projectiles but face challenges during saturation attacks. Resistance forces launch volleys of rockets to overwhelm interception systems and develop drones with erratic flight paths to evade radar detection. However, these strategies strain their limited stockpiles, highlighting the resource asymmetry between the resistance and unlimited Israeli supply line.

The blockade on Gaza severely restricts Hamas’ access to military-grade equipment, compelling it to manufacture most of its weaponry locally. In contrast, Hizbullah benefits from external support, primarily from Iran and Syria, allowing it to maintain a more sophisticated arsenal. Nonetheless, both groups face challenges in sustaining long-term conflicts, necessitating careful rationing of resources and innovative tactics to prolong their operational endurance.

Israel’s Technological Superiority

Israel’s military dominance stems from its US-supplied advanced air force, precision-guided munitions, and surveillance capabilities. The F-35 stealth fighter, equipped with state-of-the-art targeting systems, enables Israel to strike with minimal risk to its pilots. UAVs provide continuous reconnaissance, while naval assets enforce blockades and target coastal installations.

However, Israel’s high-tech systems’ effectiveness diminishes when confronted with the unpredictability of resistance tactics and their will to fight for their lands. Asymmetrical warfare, decentralised leadership, and the use of terrain challenge Israel’s ability to achieve decisive victories. While technology provides an edge, it cannot fully mitigate the resilience and adaptability of resistance forces.

Future Outlook

The military landscape in Gaza and Lebanon remains defined by the asymmetry between resistance forces and the Israeli military. While Hizbullah and Hamas have demonstrated remarkable adaptability, their long-term effectiveness depends on maintaining external support, innovating in weaponry, and sustaining public backing.

In Gaza, Hamas faces the dual challenge of operating under a severe blockade while contending with Israel’s superior firepower. Its reliance on smuggling networks and homemade weapons underscores its ingenuity but highlights the resource gap it must continually overcome. Hizbullah, with its established base in Lebanon, enjoys more excellent stability but faces the risks of broader regional conflicts involving Iran and Israel.

Both groups aim to exploit Israeli vulnerabilities, such as the difficulty of sustaining prolonged military campaigns and the political divisions within Israeli society. Their focus on attrition and psychological impact underscores a long-term strategy aimed at deterring Israeli aggression rather than achieving outright military victories.

Conclusion

In military terms, the resistance forces in Gaza and Lebanon face substantial disadvantages, including technological inferiority, limited resources, and vulnerability to Israeli air and naval dominance. However, their strategic use of terrain, expertise in asymmetrical warfare, and capacity for innovation provide notable advantages, enabling them to counterbalance Israel’s military superiority.

These groups have evolved into resilient adversaries through continuous adaptation, external alliances, and an emphasis on psychological and physical endurance. Despite their limitations compared to the Israeli Occupation Forces, their ingenuity ensures their relevance in the region’s volatile military landscape.

Israel’s advanced surveillance capabilities, precision weaponry, and intelligence-sharing with allies provide notable strategic advantages. However, resistance forces counterbalance these through decentralised leadership, innovative tactics, and the strategic use of geographical advantages, presenting a persistent challenge to Israeli operations. Ultimately, the resistance’s objective is not outright victory but to deny Israel a decisive win while continually harassing occupation forces, inflicting casualties, and sowing uncertainty among its troops and illegal squatters (aka settlers).