It’s now been more than a decade since Hezbollah launched a cross-border attack on Israel and precipitated a war that devastated south Lebanon and parts of Beirut. That war ended with the acceptance of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701, which called for the “disarmament of all armed groups in Lebanon,” including Lebanese Hezbollah and the assertion of full control over Lebanese territory by the government of Lebanon.

Suffice to say, that hasn’t happened. Under the watchful eyes of well-paid United Nations observers, Iran has resupplied Hezbollah with an arsenal greater in both quantity and quality than that which was used against Israel in 2006. And, despite more than $100 million in U.S. military and financial assistance, the Lebanese Armed Forces have yet to disarm a single Hezbollah terrorist let alone truly secure Lebanon’s borders. Beirut International Airport remains under the de facto control of Hezbollah.

The problem isn’t just military: Since 2006, Hezbollah has launched itself into the driver’s seat. After turning its guns on fellow Lebanese in 2008 in a dispute over revenue sharing, Hezbollah successfully leveraged its disruptive ability into real power when Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, among others, acquiesced to the Doha Accords, granting Hezbollah a permanent veto over Lebanese politics in exchange for their quiet. That was bad on two levels: First, Hezbollah can prevent any serious Lebanese reform or investigation. Second, Hezbollah can do so as a minority stakeholder, meaning it will never be held accountable for governing even as it seeks the legitimacy associated with serving as a political party.

In the past year, it has augmented its control even more. The rise of long-term ally and Christian politician Michel Aoun to Lebanon’s president gives Hezbollah de facto control over the state. Any future conflict will be between Israel and Lebanon and not simply Israel and one particular group, as in 2006.

The chance any future war between Israel and Lebanon will be limited to the two states is unlikely. Hezbollah has always been a wholly-owned subsidiary of Iran. Now that Aoun is president, so, too, is the Lebanese state. Should Israel ever strike at Iran’s nuclear program, Iran’s chief means of retaliation would be Hezbollah’s arsenal.

Here’s the thing: If Hezbollah launches its arsenal and Israel is already paying the price for the international community’s fickleness, then there is no disincentive for Israel or others to take out Iranian suspect facilities once and for all. When the rockets once again fly—and with the current behavior of a resurgent Hezbollah, that becomes more a question of when rather than if—expect them to traverse not only Israel’s northern border but the entire Middle East.