Israel and Lebanon agreed to a ceasefire three weeks ago. The violence, however, hasn’t stopped. In recent days, Israeli airstrikes have killed at least 40 people and the military has issued evacuation orders for residents of ten villages and towns in southern Lebanon, where it has established a security buffer zone.According to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, this zone is needed to protect Israel from future attacks by the Hezbollah militant group. He said it is “much stronger, more intense, more continuous, and more solid than we had previously”. Critics, however, contend Israel is adopting the “Gaza playbook” in this buffer zone, mirroring its actions in Gaza after a fragile ceasefire was agreed to last October. Militarily, Israel is hitting an already-weakened Hezbollah as hard as it can to deplete its capabilities and force it out of its southern Lebanon stronghold. Israel calls this strategy “mowing the grass”. It has long viewed this strategy as the best way to establish a level of deterrence against Hamas and Hezbollah, which cannot be defeated through conventional military means.Like it did in Gaza, Israel is also aiming to make the buffer zone uninhabitable for residents. In late March, Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz declared: All houses in villages near the Lebanese border will be destroyed, in accordance with the model used in Rafah and Beit Hanoun in Gaza, in order to permanently remove the threats near the border to northern residents. As part of this, Israel has destroyed all the bridges across the Litani River, effectively isolating southern Lebanon from the rest of the country. It is also systematically destroying or severely damaging towns, villages and infrastructure in the region.This “Gaza playbook” has come with a significant human cost. Since this latest conflict with Hezbollah began in early March, Israel’s attacks have killed more than 2,600 Lebanese and displaced another 1.2 million from their homes. Read more: Israeli threats to occupy or annex south Lebanon dust off a decades-old playbook Netanyahu is becoming trappedYet, despite achieving many successes against Hezbollah, Netanyahu is in danger of overreaching in his claims to be able to defeat one of Israel’s nemeses. For decades, successive Israeli governments, particularly those headed by Netanyahu, have convinced the Israeli public that Israel and Hezbollah are engaged in an existential struggle. Many Israelis now expect Netanyahu to deliver on his promise and finally rid them of this threat forever. In a recent poll conducted by the Israel Democracy Institute, 80% of respondents supported continuing the fight against Hezbollah irrespective of any possible peace deal between the US and Iran, and even if this created tensions with the Trump administration.This poses a political threat to Netanyahu as he faces becoming trapped between two opposing realities. Delivering on a false promiseThe first centres on the “mowing the grass” strategy. This strategy has long served as good propaganda and as an exemplar of the government protecting its people. But it was never intended to completely defeat the threats posed by Hezbollah or Hamas.When it comes to Hezbollah, Israel’s military simply cannot completely defeat a resistance movement that is so embedded in the social, political and cultural fabric of Lebanon. This would require not just a military victory, but the subjugation of its supporters and the delegitimisation of its ideology.The intention of the “mowing the grass” strategy is to manage the threats posed by Hezbollah and Hamas, not destroy them. If Israel is able to cause substantial damage to their political and military capabilities – in addition to destroying local infrastructure – the groups are then forced to focus on survival and revival, rather than on threatening Israel. From Israel’s perspective, this provides some breathing room until the threat reemerges and it is time to “mow the grass” again. From a political perspective, this strategy also allows Israel to justify its continuous military operations. This has been the cornerstone of Netanyahu’s political revival since the Hamas attacks of 2023, allowing him to maintain a constant sense of crisis that requires ever-increasing levels of violence. But Netanyahu has changed the narrative, shifting from just “managing” Israel’s conflict with both Hezbollah and Hamas, to “dismantling” the groups and “finishing the job”.It is clear the Israeli public wants Netanyahu to deliver on this promise. Trump forcing his handThe second reality facing Netanyahu is the potential that US President Donald Trump will agree to a permanent ceasefire with Iran that forces Israel to cease its hostilities against Hezbollah. Since the tentative ceasefire between the US and Iran, Netanyahu has been trying to separate Israel’s conflicts with Iran and Hezbollah. This would allow him to continue the military’s operations against Hezbollah and claim a key strategic victory. But Iran is demanding that any ceasefire it reaches with the US include Hezbollah. This places Netanyahu in a bind. If he does agree to a permanent peace deal, this would leave a severely wounded but not-yet-destroyed Hezbollah in place. With Hamas and the Iranian regime also still intact (albeit severely wounded), this would represent a triple disaster for Netanyahu. The backlash is already starting. Last month, Israeli opposition leader Yair Golan accused Netanyahu of lying: He promised a historic victory and security for generations, and in practice, we got one of the most severe strategic failures Israel has ever known.Criticism like this could have a huge effect on the Israeli elections, due before the end of this year. Netanyahu is desperate to win these elections to forestall his long-running corruption trial. As such, he would be loath to risk breaking with the Israeli public on his promise to finish Hezbollah. However, that may mean breaking with the US and its essential military, political and diplomatic support.While the “mowing the grass” strategy gave Netanyahu new political life after Hamas’s October 7 attacks, his failure to match his rhetoric to actual results may now prove to be his Achilles’ heel.Martin Kear does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.