Israel continued with its military operation in southern Lebanon on Wednesday (June 3), after it partially walked back threats to attack Beirut following an intervention by US President Donald Trump.In a statement, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel would “continue to operate as planned in south Lebanon”. “I spoke with President Trump tonight, and told him that if Hezbollah doesn’t cease its attacks on our cities and civilians, Israel will strike terror targets in Beirut,” Netanyahu said. “This position of ours remains.”US President Donald Trump on Monday announced that Israel and Hezbollah had agreed to cease their attacks. According to an Axios report, this came after a terse phone call between Trump and his ally, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, about the latter’s military escalation in Lebanon.Earlier on Monday, Iran threatened to abandon negotiations with the US over Israel’s continued actions in Lebanon despite a ceasefire being in place. Iran has repeatedly linked progress in talks with Washington to an end to fighting across the region, including in Lebanon.Over the weekend, Israel reoccupied Beaufort Castle, a 12th-century fortress in southern Lebanon that has long been a military flashpoint between Israel, Palestinian groups and Hezbollah, despite a fragile US-brokered ceasefire that has become entangled with wider US-Iran negotiations.We explain the history of Beaufort Castle, its past siege by Israel, and why its latest capture is politically and militarily contentious.Story continues below this adBeaufort Castle, also known as Qalaat al-Shaqif, is a medieval fortress located in southern Lebanon, near the Litani River and overlooking parts of the Israeli-Lebanese border region. Its elevated position gives it a commanding view of the surrounding valleys and approaches, making it strategically valuable during successive conflicts.Although originally built as a Crusader-era fortress, Beaufort’s modern significance comes less from its medieval history and more from its role as a military position during the Lebanese Civil War, Israel’s invasions of Lebanon, and later confrontations involving Hezbollah.Recalling Israel’s past invasionsThe capture of Beaufort Castle should be understood in the broader context of the Lebanese Civil War, which lasted from 1975 to 1990. During the civil war, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and its local allies took over Beaufort Castle, using the prominent hilltop base to launch attacks against Israel.This made the castle one of Israel’s prominent targets during its 1978 invasion of southern Lebanon, known as Operation Litani.Story continues below this adNewsletterFollow our daily newsletter so you never miss anything important. On Wednesday, we answer readers' questions.SubscribeThe invasion was launched following the Coastal Road massacre near Tel Aviv, where Palestinian militants based in Lebanon killed 38 Israeli civilians. Israel’s primary objectives were to push the PLO fighters away from the northern Israeli border, stop cross-border attacks, and establish a security buffer zone. The castle was repeatedly bombed, but it was not captured at that time.Israel invaded Lebanon again in 1982, during what came to be known as the First Lebanon War. Israel referred to this campaign as Operation Peace for Galilee.The immediate trigger for this invasion was the attempted assassination of Israel’s ambassador to the United Kingdom, Shlomo Argov, on June 3, 1982. The attack was carried out by members of the Abu Nidal Organization, a Palestinian splinter group hostile to the PLO. However, then-Prime Minister Menachem Begin blamed the PLO and used the shooting as their justification for war. Ariel Sharon near the Beaufort Castle, 1982 (Wikimedia Commons)The main objective behind this operation was to push Palestinian militant forces 40 km north of the Israeli border. Israeli forces attacked and captured the fortress from the PLO during the war, after which Israel built a military base on the site and occupied the location for the next 18 years.Story continues below this adIsrael eventually withdrew from southern Lebanon in 2000. However, Beaufort Castle continued to carry symbolic and strategic weight because it was closely associated with Israel’s long occupation of the region and the rise of Hezbollah as a resistance force against that occupation.Why is its recapture contentious today?Twenty-six years after withdrawing from southern Lebanon, Israel captured Beaufort Castle once again. This time, Israel has framed the operation as an effort to reduce Hezbollah’s ability to launch attacks on northern Israel from southern Lebanon.Netanyahu presented the capture as both a military and symbolic achievement. In a video statement, he said Beaufort had become a “symbol of deep division” in Israeli society after its capture during the 1982 Lebanon War. Contrasting that period with the present, he said Israel had returned to Beaufort “united, determined, and stronger than ever”. He also described the capture as a “dramatic shift” in Israeli policy and argued that Israel needed to create security zones beyond its borders to protect its communities.Also Read | Familiar foes: As war widens in West Asia, why Israel-Hezbollah conflict has regained focusThe language used by Israeli leaders has revived comparisons with the earlier occupation of southern Lebanon. Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz has said troops will remain at Beaufort as part of a “security zone” in Lebanon, directly invoking a concept associated with Israel’s 18-year occupation of the country’s south.Story continues below this adLebanon’s Prime Minister, Nawaf Salam, has accused Israel of “pursuing a scorched-earth policy and collective punishment” by “destroying towns and villages, and forcing their inhabitants into exile” in southern Lebanon.As in 1982, the current fighting has imposed heavy civilian costs, including displacement and widespread destruction across Lebanon.Israel’s 2026 occupation of Beaufort Castle has revived comparisons with the 1982 “security zone” approach, when Israel occupied southern Lebanon for nearly two decades. The reference is particularly significant because Israeli leaders themselves have invoked the language of security zones while celebrating Beaufort’s recapture.The situation reflects a recurring pattern: efforts to establish security through military dominance and security zones have often generated deeper resistance and instability rather than achieving lasting peace.Story continues below this adRepeated contestation over Beaufort Castle over the course of decades illustrates that territorial control alone cannot resolve underlying political conflicts. Instead, it often leads to cycles of confrontation, as seen in both 1982 and the ongoing tensions in 2026.Abhishek Nair is a student who is an intern with The Indian Express.