The Situation Room - November 12th

Good morning everyone,

I’m Atlas, and welcome to The Situation Room! We cover the most high impact geopolitical developments every Wednesday!

Today’s topics:

• Analysis: Gaza Ceasefire Could Mirror Lebanon’s ‘No War, No Peace’ Model

• Analysis: What A U.S. Green Light For South Korean Nuclear-Powered Submarines Would Mean

• Former Ukrainian PM: Treat Energy Infrastructure Attacks As War Crimes

Analysis: Gaza Ceasefire Could Mirror Lebanon’s ‘No War, No Peace’ Model

_{By: Atlas}

Israel’s pattern of limited strikes and ground raids during lulls in Gaza resembles the post-2006 Lebanon front, where a formal ceasefire coexists with recurring violations and low-intensity clashes. Without a broader political deal, experts say a Gaza “calm” is likely to mean continued Israeli operations against perceived threats, intermittent rocket fire, and prolonged civilian displacement.

What “no war, no peace” looks like in Gaza

Israel has continued targeted operations in Gaza during localized pauses and after short-lived truces, saying it is responding to rocket launches, militant activity, or specific intelligence leads, according to statements reported by Israeli authorities and major wire services. During the one-week truce in November 2023, and in later “tactical pauses” for aid convoys, fighting paused in some areas but resumed elsewhere as both sides accused the other of violations. The Israeli military has also relied on its long-standing “campaign between wars” approach—frequent, limited strikes intended to prevent adversaries from rebuilding—an approach documented by Israeli and international security analysts. The practical effect is that even with a ceasefire on paper, operations can continue at a lower tempo, complicating humanitarian access and preventing any clear end to hostilities for civilians.

The Lebanon precedent since 2006

UN Security Council Resolution 1701, adopted on August 11, 2006, ended the Israel–Hezbollah war but did not eliminate hostilities; it expanded UNIFIL’s mandate and set rules that both sides have accused the other of breaching. Israeli overflights, cross-border fire, and Hezbollah’s entrenchment north of the Litani River have persisted, and since October 2023 there have been near-daily exchanges across the border. Reuters and other major outlets have tallied tens of thousands displaced on both sides, with hundreds of Hezbollah fighters and scores of Lebanese civilians reported killed, and casualties also reported in northern Israel. The pattern is clear: a ceasefire framework without a political settlement produces a managed standoff, not durable peace.

Human costs and daily life under an unresolved truce

Gaza’s 2.2 million residents have faced repeated displacement, with the UN reporting that the vast majority—over 1.7 million people at various points—were forced from their homes as infrastructure, hospitals, and schools suffered extensive damage. Aid access has been limited by insecurity and closed crossings; Israeli forces took control of the Palestinian side of the Rafah crossing in May 2024, and deliveries through Kerem Shalom have been subject to periodic closures, bottlenecks, and fighting nearby, according to the UN and humanitarian groups. In northern Israel, entire communities near the Lebanon border have lived in prolonged evacuation, affecting schools, farming, and local businesses; southern Lebanon’s border villages have faced fires, unexploded ordnance, and damage to homes and fields. For ordinary families, a “pause” without a settlement means living in limbo—unable to return, rebuild, or plan beyond the border.

The risks of a frozen conflict

A Gaza ceasefire that mirrors the Lebanon model could harden a long-term security gray zone: low-level clashes that deter full-scale war but normalize routine strikes, displacement, and blockade conditions. That scenario raises risks of miscalculation involving Hezbollah and Iran-backed groups, strains international aid operations, and undermines regional economic initiatives that depend on stability. It also keeps pressure on Egypt, which controls the Rafah frontier, and on the United States and European partners that are underwriting humanitarian relief and pressing for a hostage–prisoner deal. The longer the ambiguity persists, the harder it becomes to fund reconstruction, restore education and health services, and safely reopen border communities in the months ahead.

Diplomatic efforts and what to watch next

Diplomatic efforts led by Egypt, Qatar, and the United States have focused on a phased deal involving hostage releases, Palestinian prisoner exchanges, Israeli withdrawals from parts of Gaza, and security guarantees—with sequencing and verification remaining the key sticking points. Indicators of whether Gaza will follow the Lebanon pattern include the presence or absence of a robust monitoring mechanism, agreed rules for border security and overflights, and clear timelines for displaced civilians to return. Another marker is whether Israel continues regular “between-wars” strikes after any formal ceasefire, and whether armed groups in Gaza halt rocket fire and rearmament. If these issues are deferred rather than resolved, experience from the Israel–Lebanon front suggests a long, uneasy equilibrium—no full war, but no real peace.

Subscribe to The Situation Room to read the rest.