It is with a great relief that the awkward war of Israel on the militia of Hizbollah (and due to the extent of the retaliations, a sheer aggression to Lebanon) has come to an end after a month and after a dreaded escalation that would have involved the whole Middle East did not happened. Of course if we have to draw some conclusions from this incident, the first of them would be to lament the victims, that apparently were uselessly sacrified for none of the contenders reached their outspoken goals, wether the destruction of the military power of Hizbollah or the destruction of Israel (obviously a retoric and irrealistic goal), and if a winner should come out, it would be indeed Hizbollah, who managed to stand to the massif attack of Israel, keeping its air attacks unchecked until the ceasefire (Resolution 1701) and thus having acquired a huge political capital as the new heroes of the opposition to Israel. The claim of Israel´s prime minister, Ehud Olmert, that the waged offensive would have nearly destroyed the stocks of Hizbollah´s rockets along with its launching facilities are nothing less than propaganda to counter critisicism of a bold and failed attack; if people would end up believing this version, they should rather thank Hizbollah´s keeping up to the ceasefire and not showing the opposite by resuming its attacks, which is indeed quite paradoxal. However the situation that comes out from this new "mini arab-israeli" war is more complex than propaganda (whatever the side) would like, and it might be Lebanon the winner, if both Hizbollah and Israel will abstain from undermining a process to be that could develop in the present context.