Israel are bloodthirsty – and mainstream media are backing them

The legacy media are fluffing their Israel reporting again. The Guardian reported on 8 March 2026 that “Israel hits Lebanon with massive wave of airstrikes amid ceasefire uncertainty”. This is, at best, a half truth.

There’s uncertainty about the ‘when’ of the tentative ceasefire between Iran and the US, sure. Not least on the ground in the affected countries. As Al Jazeera’s Heidi Pett reported:

The Israeli army launched what it said were 100 air strikes at multiple locations across Lebanon in a span of 10 minutes.

I am at the scene of one of them in central Beirut. The devastation is extraordinary. These strikes came without warning. They came at a moment of confusion across Lebanon as to whether the regional ceasefire applied here.

But the ‘what’ of Israel’s plans in Lebanon is as clear as day and at least as old as Israel itself: Zionism demands the settler-colonial state batters Lebanon into submission and colonises large swathes of it. How’s that for ‘uncertainty’?

And the current assault, it is being reported, rivals the 1982 war for violence:

Al Jazeera Arabic’s bureau chief in Lebanon, Mazen Ibrahim, says that many in the capital have been reminded today of Israel’s invasion of Beirut in 1982.

Israel, America’s attack dog in the region, could well wreck this fragile ceasefire. You can read our analysis of the scale and scope of the current attack here.

Israel: the ‘ceasefire’ terms are clear

The Iranian terms for a two week cessation of hostilities, which have been accepted by the US in a Pakistan-China brokered deal, contain a number of points. One of these is:

Halting the war on all resistance fronts, “including against the heroic Islamic resistance of Lebanon” (Hezbollah)

A later version of the demands reportedly expands this slightly:

The “necessity to end the war” against all Resistance axis factions – fronts listed in the document include Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, Palestine (occupied territories) – described as the “historic defeat of the child-killing Israeli regime’s aggression”

Read for yourself:

Now, you can quibble over the wording but an end to Israel’s attack on Lebanon is a load-bearing strut in this ceasefire.

So what was Israel’s response to this chance for even a moment of respite? In the Israel Occupation Forces’ (IOF) own words:

the largest coordinated strike across Lebanon since the start of Operation Roaring Lion.

The fact that Israel remains the primary aggressor – even at the potential cost of wrecking a fragile ceasefire – should be central to ANY reportage. That Israel might wreck the tentative agreement intentionally is a whole other can of worms. One that we – and any media outlet worth its salt – should have the courage to crack open.

Israel’s ambition in Lebanon

Al-Jazeera reported on 8 March that Israeli military chief Lieutenant General Eyal Zamir said:

We will continue to strike the terrorist organisation Hezbollah and seize every opportunity.

We will not compromise on the security of the [Israeli] residents of the North. We will continue to attack without pause.

And Israeli Defense Minister Katz said:

Hundreds of Hezbollah terrorists were attacked in a surprise strike on headquarters across Lebanon in the largest concentrated blow Hezbollah has absorbed since Operation Buzzers… We warned Naim Qassem that Hezbollah will pay a very heavy price for attacking Israel on Iran’s behalf – and Naim Qassem’s personal turn will come too.

Underneath the usual reference to ‘terrorists’ and ‘security’ the same old colonial ambitions are what drives the Israeli state machine.

And within hours of the ceasefire plan being publicised, Iran – which had to some degree reopened the vital oil channel through the Straits of Hormuz – reportedly closed it in direct response to the Israeli attack on Lebanon:

Underpinning colonial ambitions

Israel are not getting it all their own way. As the Canary reported on 4 April, the settler-colonial state could still face humiliation:

Israel’s invasion and attempted annexation of southern Lebanon has been portrayed as a sideshow to the war in Iran. And legacy media coverage has tended to miss out details of stubborn resistance to the Israeli military campaign.

Meanwhile, Israel’s far-right finance minister Bezalel Smotrich made it very clear that the Israeli invasion has colonialist, expansionist aims.

Reuters reported on 23 March 2026:

Smotrich told an Israeli radio program that the military campaign in Lebanon “needs to end with a different reality entirely, both with the Hezbollah ​decision but also with the change of Israel’s borders.”

Smotrich added:

I say here definitively…in every room and in every discussion, too: the new Israeli border must be the Litani.

Foiled for the moment in the long-dreamed-of war with Iran it helped push the erratic US president into, Israel is still eager to pursue its ambitions in Lebanon – even at the risk of wrecking the ceasefire and re-igniting the hot war with Iran.

Featured image via the Canary