long ago that Netanyahu and the radical right in control of Israel had plans to take everything from the Litani River south. I remember getting jumped and claims that they were only taking out the areas by the border. At about that same time there were cries from the Israeli hard right of "On to Beirut!!!!" but when I posted about that many didn't believe it.
They are now leveling and driving people out of areas north of the Litani. There is little reason to expect that they will ever withdraw. This will be like the West Bank only on a much more accelerated basis. They have also made cries of "On to Damscus!!!!" and we'll see how they make that move once they solidify their position in Lebanon. Or New Tel Aviv as it may become known. Once the situation in Lebanon allows the IDF to rearm and strategize their efforts for Syria the radical right will push for action. Even if they lose an upcoming election they will eventually get power back and continue on.
What astounds me is how docile Jordan is being about all of this because the radical Israeli right wing has also been talking about action to take the East Bank of the Jordan River and if the Litani is any example their desires likely go beyond that piece of geography as well.
As I've said before nobody is willing to stop them. Symbolic investigations/sanctions etc. are things they have plans to counter. The UN screwed this up many decades ago and it is nothing but a mess since. The subterfuge and pressure from the US during the pre "Independence" declaration regarding the assessment of plans for division of territory and approval were monstrous.
It was a shambolic proposal guaranteed to have no chance at being a "side by side" peaceful coexistence because of the division lines and kicking the can down the road on many issues by making false promises and phony assurances never meant to be kept.
There could have been a division of territory that had a much better chance of working but people need to understand that the US didn't want that. It wanted strife because that would mean there would always be a need for our involvement and we would have an outsized influence for a very, very long time and we would be able to do exactly as we have done and have our military bases all over the region and, between our air power, sea power, intelligence operations etc., we are the ones who call when the time is for massive destruction and when we stop and call it "peace". We call it peace but it is merely a temporary lull or decrease in our activities.
The strongest leader in the region that ever emerged was Nasser and the British and Americans were apoplectic about it and wanted badly for him to be killed. Even still today much of the information about what MI6 and the CIA did is still not released. What is openly known and acknowledged is how deeply the Dulles brothers hated him and viewed him as their biggest "problem" for their plans in the region.
https://dn790008.ca.archive.org/0/items/nsia-CIAAssassinations/nsia-CIAAssassinations/CIA%20Assassinations%2061_text.pdf
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2006/nov/04/featuresreviews.guardianreview5
= new reply since forum marked as read