JNS.org – Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah delivered a speech in June with threats aimed at the East Mediterranean, causing concern in Israel that the Iran-backed terror group based in Lebanon could try and copy Houthi tactics in the Red Sea.

Nasrallah emphasized potential attacks on Israeli assets in the Mediterranean, highlighting the vulnerability of military and commercial shipping, as well as offshore gas facilities.

Jonathan Ruhe, director of foreign policy at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America (JINSA), told JNS that if Hezbollah shuts down the Eastern Mediterranean to ship traffic, it could impact Israel’s trade and the economy “almost as negatively as attacks on Haifa itself, since this port is a major Israeli lifeline and hub.”

Ruhe said it would “impose yet more strains on the U.S. Navy, which is already extending its deployments and burning through costly, precious munitions as it tries to maintain freedom of navigation across the region.”

“More broadly,” he added, “it could scare off much-needed energy production and exploration in the East Med that benefits the U.S., Israel and their European partners.”

In his speech, Nasrallah referenced past conflicts where Hezbollah surprised Israel with naval strikes, suggesting similar tactics could be employed again.

During the 2006 Second War in Lebanon, Hezbollah damaged the INS Hanit, a Sa’ar 5-class corvette of the Israeli Navy’s 3rd Flotilla, after attacking it with a C-701 anti-ship missile.

Israel apparently did not have the appropriate defensive systems activated at the time.

Hezbollah is believed to have an arsenal of more than 150,000 missiles, including long-range and precision-guided ones that could reach anywhere in Israel and the Eastern Mediterranean.

Efraim Inbar, president of the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security, dismissed the idea that Hezbollah could block naval traffic in the Eastern Mediterranean.

“I’m not sure Hezbollah has the capability,” he said, unless it coordinates with the Turks.

He suggested that Hezbollah could try to use precision-guided munitions against ships, but pointed out that Israel has defensive capabilities against such threats.

At the end of the day, according to Inbar, Israel isn’t worried that Hezbollah can achieve this.

Nasrallah also warned that Hezbollah would target Cyprus if it allows Israel to utilize its military facilities in any future conflict with Lebanon.

Hanin Ghaddar, Farzin Nadimi and David Schenker of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy wrote in June that Nasrallah’s threat toward Cyprus was not arbitrary, but rooted in longstanding ties between Nicosia and Jerusalem, which have included joint military exercises focused on countering threats from Hezbollah and Iran.

Cyprus has affirmed its neutrality despite hosting British military bases, including RAF Akrotiri, which contribute to regional security. The 1960 Treaty of Establishment grants Britain sovereignty over these bases, with obligations for Cyprus and cooperation mandates for Greece and Turkey in its defense. Cyprus’s E.U. membership could potentially trigger collective defense measures if Hezbollah attacks the island.

Currently, Cyprus lacks a robust air and missile defense network, although plans to acquire Israeli Iron Dome systems have been discussed.

The vulnerability of the island to Hezbollah missile attacks underscores concerns, particularly given its significant allied military presence, including British and U.S. forces and logistical support during regional conflicts.

If Israel lost access to its runways due to Hezbollah bombing and were to launch attacks out of RAF Akrotiri, for example, then it would essentially be launching from British soil, and this would apply if Hezbollah attacked that base, as well.

But according to Inbar, the U.K.—certainly under the current government led by Prime Minister Keir Starmer—would not allow Israel to use its bases in Cyprus, and Hezbollah would not target its bases.

Ruhe agreed, though he cautioned “Never say never about anything after October 7, but likely never.”

Ruhe said the British “have been admirably ready to use their Cyprus bases to help defend the region against missiles and drones, and to resupply Israel.”

But, he noted, these are “indirect moves” and “can be framed as defensive, unlike letting Israel use those same bases for offensive operations against Hezbollah, even if Hezbollah fires the first shots in that larger war.”

Israel has no real alternative options if its airfields are neutralized in a Hezbollah strike, and for this reason, according to Ruhe, “the IDF is expected to prioritize its air defenses to protect its airbases in a major war with Hezbollah, even at the cost of leaving much of the rest of country exposed.”

Even if Israel wanted to use Cyprus to attack Hezbollah, Ruhe said, there are complications involved.

“There’s the potential diplomatic blowback of risking a conflict that the E.U., and even NATO via the British bases, want no part of,” he said. “This would be especially true if it looks like Israel launches ‘unprovoked’ attacks from the island, given the world’s eagerness to unfairly and prematurely condemn anything Israel does at this point.”

Ruhe also said that using Cyprus “complicates the Israeli Air Force’s ability to generate the massive number of sorties it’d have to conduct in a big war with Hezbollah, given that the island is farther from Lebanon and wouldn’t have the logistical setup, amenities, etc., of IAF bases at home.”

Ruhe said that if Hezbollah did attack Royal Air Force bases in Cyprus, “it would mean bringing a NATO member into the mix, and threatening an E.U. member, as well.”

He noted that it could “quickly widen a conflict that Hezbollah (and Iran) would rather wage against an Israel that is isolated diplomatically and encircled militarily.”

In addition, Ruhe said, attacking Cyprus “would pose a tradeoff for Hezbollah.”

“Every long-range missile and drone they send toward Cyprus is one less they can use to threaten catastrophic damage on Israel, which is the force-planning construct around which Iran assiduously built Hezbollah into the world’s best-armed non-state actor,” he said.

Ruhe stated that Nasrallah’s threat against Cyprus “underscores two big priorities.”

The first, he said, is that the U.S. “needs to be urgent and serious when it comes to ensuring Israel can wage a major conflict as decisively and swiftly as possible.”

The second, and in tandem, is that “the U.S. needs to clearly warn Tehran and its proxies against trying to broaden any conflict with Israel.”

There are reports that U.S. Special Envoy Amos Hochstein is close to brokering a deal between Israel and Lebanon.

According to Ruhe, the British, like the Americans, “don’t want to assume any more risk in the Middle East, and currently their thinking appears to be that they could still avert, or at least avoid, a major Israel-Hezbollah war.”

The post Hezbollah Unlikely to Attack Cyprus and East Med first appeared on Algemeiner.com.