While the Lebanese army's condemnation of Israeli attacks makes headlines, critics argue that such statements have little practical effect on changing Israeli military behavior. Israel's strikes are often driven by its own security calculations regarding Hezbollah, and a verbal protest from the Lebanese army is unlikely to alter that calculus.
Furthermore, the condemnation highlights the army's weakness: it is unable to prevent Israeli operations or to control Hezbollah's activities in the south. This raises questions about whether the army's deployment can be credible if it cannot secure its own area from both Israeli strikes and Hezbollah's armed presence.
Some analysts warn that the statement could be seen as political posturing rather than a serious demand for action. The Lebanese government, led by a caretaker cabinet, lacks the political consensus to back the army with concrete measures, such as taking the issue to the UN Security Council in a more forceful manner.
In the end, civilians remain caught between two powerful armed forces. Without a genuine political resolution and a unified security strategy, condemnations may only serve to document grievances without delivering protection.