Posted tagged ‘IDF’

Arab sources report Israel air strikes against Syrian-Hizballah missile bases, Hizballah arms convoys. DEBKAfile: Hizballah secret airstrip possible target

April 25, 2015

Arab sources report Israel air strikes against Syrian-Hizballah missile bases, Hizballah arms convoys. DEBKAfile: Hizballah secret airstrip possible target, DEBKAfile, April 25, 2015

Hizbullah_has_constructed_an_airstrip_in_the_northern_Bekaa_Valley_24.4.15Hizballah’s first drone airstrip in Beqaa Valley

Unofficial sources in Syria and Lebanon, cited by the Arab TV channels Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya, reported Saturday, April 25, that the Israeli Air Force struck Hizballah and Syrian military targets in the Qalamoun mountains on the Syrian-Lebanese border from Wednesday, April 22, to Friday night April 24. There is no official word on these reports from Israel or Syria.

In the Wednesday attack, one person was said to have been killed.

The picture taking shape from these reports shows the targets to have been the 155th, 65th and 92nd Brigades of the Syrian army and Hizballah, two Hizballah arms convoys and Syrian long-range missile bases or batteries.

DEBKAfile’s military sources add that it is hardly credible that Israeli air raids spread over three days went unnoticed by the Syrian and Lebanese media. The Arab TV reports if confirmed may therefore be exaggerated in scope.

Friday, our own sources reported that Syrian and Hizballah forces under Iranian Revolutionary Guards officers were fighting to flush out the last rebel pockets on the strategic Qalamoun mountains, to clear the highway to Lebanon for unhindered military movements – most importantly, the weapons and personnel flowing regularly across the border between the two allies.

In past reports, DEBKAfile disclosed that Hizballah had transferred the bulk of its personnel and a large store of missiles from northern Lebanon to a protected enclave in Qalamoun under its control. The Iranian-backed Lebanese militia calculated that this base would be safer from Israeli attack than in Lebanon. And, in the event of war, Israel would be obliged to extend its front to Syria. According to Western intelligence sources, long-range missiles are part of the store Hizballah relocated to the Syrian mountains, whence they can be aimed at Israel.

The putative Israeli air strikes this week would therefore have aimed at thwarting Hizballah’s scheme to set up another war base in the Syrian-Lebanese mountains area.

Another likely target would be Hizballah’s first air strip for drones established in the northern Lebanese Beqaa Valley south of Hermel.

Jane’s, a British publication specializing in military affairs, this week ran satellite images showing the airstrip to be 670 m long and 20 m wide, too short for most transport aircraft, excepting the Iranian Revolutionary Guards short take-off An-74T-200 transports, which carry arms for Hizballah – although landing with a load on this mountain strip would be considered dangerous. The runway was apparently built to accommodate drones, such as the Ababil-3 and Shahed-129 types which Iran has delivered to Hizballah.

IDF Strikes in Gaza Following Rocket Attack

April 24, 2015

IDF Strikes in Gaza Following Rocket Attack, Israel National News,  Elad Benari and Kobi Finkler, April 24, 2015

img517530Israeli airstrike in Gaza  Reuters

The IDF on Thursday night, shortly before midnight, launched an airstrike which targeted a “terrorist infrastructure” in northern Gaza, the IDF Spokesperson’s Unit said in a statement.

According to the statement, the airstrike was in retaliation for an earlier rocket attack by Gaza terrorists on southern Israel.

In addition, said the IDF, the entry of worshipers from Gaza into Israel will be prevented on Friday.

“The IDF will not permit any attempt to harm the security of the citizens of Israel,” the statement said.

The IDF confirmed earlier that at least one terrorist rocket had been fired from Gaza at southern Israel.

There were no reports of physical injuries or damage. The remains of one rocket were located in an open area in the Sha’ar Hanegev region.

The last time a Color Red siren was heard in the Gaza Belt region was in late December – four months ago. In response, IAF jets attacked Hamastraining grounds in Khan Yunis, in southern Gaza.

Hizballah copycats Hamas’ terror tunnels for Lebanese-Galilee border. No IDF solutions yet

April 21, 2015

Hizballah copycats Hamas’ terror tunnels for Lebanese-Galilee border. No IDF solutions yet, DEBKAfile, April 20, 2015

Gaza-Terror-Tunnels_4.15A Hamas terror tunnel – a model for Hizballah

Anxiety about the new terror tunnels they sense Hamas is excavating under their feet is no longer confined to Israelis living in proximity to the Gaza Strip, or the soldiers serving there. Israel’s northern borderland dwellers, who can see Hizballah’s yellow flags in from their balconies, have the same concerns. Their reports of mysterious underground explosions are confirmed by thousands of Israeli troops conducting field exercises in the neighborhood. The soldiers attest to heavy earthmoving equipment, explosions, burrowing, and shaking ground on the Lebanese side of the border, giving the area the appearance of a huge subterranean building site.

The Lebanese Shiite Hizballah group, Iran’s Lebanese surrogate, has clearly taken a leaf out of its Palestinian ally, Hamas’ book, for a fully mobilized terror tunnel project against northern Israel. Its manpower, including engineering units, is working under the guidance of Iranian Revolutionary Guards officers to sink a large network of tunnels leading under the border into Galilee. They are working efficiently and at top speed with the aid of modern Western-made earthmoving equipment and foreign professionals paid top dollar to manage the project.

Israel seems to be curiously passive in the face of its enemy’s ambitious enterprise. Only last week, the Defense Ministry’s Political Coordinator Amos Gilad denied any knowledge of terrorist tunnels reaching Israel from Lebanon.

However, Brig. Gen. Moni Katz, commander of the IDF’s Division 91, which is responsible for security of the Galilee region, told a different story: “To me it is obvious that the other side is busy digging tunnels. I don’t need intelligence to tell me this. Intuition is enough. There is no denying that this is what they are up to. Can I say they have completed a tunnel?” The general went on to reply: “I must assume they have. I can’t prove it or say for sure a tunnel has crossed into our territory. But my basic premise is that this is so and it is up to us to make plans to fit this case.”

Putting those plans into practice – which would necessitate destroying the tunnels either before they were built or at their entry-points – faces four major difficulties:

1. Close surveillance and first-class intelligence are required to keep track of hostile tunnel projects starting from the planning stage, the recruitment of manpower, the acquisition of engineering technology and equipment and registering the quantity of earth displaced and removed from the underground burrow.

2.  The digging process, which sound sensors should have no difficulty in detecting, is a relatively short and irregular process which can just as easily be camouflaged by surface activities.

3.  Locating a finished tunnel at the stage when it is still unused and relatively quiet calls for pinning down a number of variables, such as the type of soil, the depth, length, breadth and lining material used in building the tunnel, humidity, weather conditions on the surface as well as its environment, whether urban or rural.

4.  Locating such a tunnel – even when it is already in operational use by an enemy – poses another set of difficulties. In combat conditions, electronic listening devices would be drowned out by the fire and explosions of battle and, in the confusion of war, enemy troops would be hard to intercept as they moved in and out the tunnels.

A glance at the map shows that the danger of tunnel warfare should also be taken into account on Israel’s eastern front – where it would just as hard to detect as in the north and the southwest: The Arab populations inhabiting the West Bank and the Israeli side of the border – only hundreds of meters apart – are similar enough to keep counter-terrorism authorities on a high level of alert for the construction of tunnel links between the two territories.

Perhaps a succession of military chiefs should be held accountable for letting the tunnel terror peril develop to its current proportions. But it must also be said that no silver bullet has so far been invented to counter this primitive vehicle of terror, including the methods tried till now, such as buried microphones, optical fibers sensitive to seismic tremors, deep trenches along the border and an assortment of off-beat inventions.

In the view of our military analysts, any solutions would have to vary from sector to sector, adapted to the military and topographical features in each case and an intelligence assessment of the level of risk involved in counteraction. This effort would have to be directed by an interdepartmental, interagency administration directly answerable to the prime minister or defense minister.

Security Challenges of the New Israeli Government

March 21, 2015

Security Challenges of the New Israeli Government, Middle East Forum, Efraim Inbar, March 19, 2015

1111Israel lies at the center of the territorial caliphate envisioned by ISIS – and that’s only it’s second greatest security concern.

The US is racing toward an agreement that will legitimize the nuclear threshold status of Iran

Israel’s main challenge is to maintain its freedom of action, while on a collision course with current American policy.

Israel must prepare for worst-case scenarios, not best-case dreams.

 

************************

A new Likud-led government will take office in Jerusalem in the upcoming weeks. The government will have to face many security challenges emerging from the turbulent strategic environment.

The most important issue is Iran. The US is racing toward an agreement that will legitimize the nuclear threshold status of Iran. Many key Mideast powers have signaled their displeasure with the nascent accord, as well as their desire to develop uranium enrichment capabilities on par with Iran.

The American attempt to offer a nuclear umbrella to forestall regional nuclear proliferation – which is a strategic nightmare – is doomed to failure. No Arab leader trusts President Obama. Therefore, only a military strike to destroy the Iranian capability to produce fissionable material needed for nuclear bombs can stop nuclear proliferation in the region.

The only country with ‘enough guts’ to do this is Israel. This decision must be taken by the next Israeli government. The timetable for such a strike is not to be determined by additional Iranian progress on the nuclear path, but by the perceptions of regional leaders of Iranian ambitions and power. The expansion of Iranian influence to Iraq and Yemen, in addition to its grip over Syria and Lebanon, has heightened threat perceptions. American willingness to accept a greater Iranian regional role undermines American credibility and underscores the need for Israeli action in the near future.

An Israeli strike is needed to prevent nuclear proliferation and to prevent imperial and Islamist Iran from acquiring hegemony in the Middle East. History indicates that such Israeli actions are not welcomed by American administrations, but are highly appreciated later on. In this case, it is Israel that will have to save the Americans from themselves.

Israel’s main challenge is to maintain its freedom of action, while on a collision course with current American policy. This is not an easy endeavor, but Israel has large reservoirs of goodwill in the US that should allow Israel to act on its cardinal security interests against the will of an unpopular American president.

Despite the fact that some of the Arab armies that posed a threat to Israel have largely disintegrated and the power differential between Israel and its Arab neighbors grows constantly, the Jewish state still faces great hostility from Islamist sub-state armed groups. Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad cannot conquer Israel, but have acquired impressive capabilities to cause massive damage to Israel. Large armored formations are still needed to tackle those challenges. In addition, Israel’s active defense missile capabilities must be augmented.

Unfortunately, the IDF is underfunded, which has led to cuts in ground forces and in training for the regular army and its reserves. Whoever will be the new defense minister has the task of securing a much larger, multi-year military budget on which the IDF can definitively plan a sustained force build-up. Israel’s strong economy can definitely sustain larger defense layouts.

Another area that needs attention is the navy. Over 90 percent of Israel’s exports travel via the East Mediterranean. Moreover, this area is rich in energy resources that are vital for Israel’s future prosperity. Yet, the East Mediterranean is increasingly becoming an Islamic lake.

Turkey under Erdogan grows more hostile every month. Syria is an Iranian ally, and its civil war has brought about the rise of Islamist militias of all kinds. Lebanon is largely ruled by Hezbollah – a Shiite radical organization aligned with Iran. Hezbollah occasionally perpetrates attacks against Israel and has threatened to hit Israel’s gas rigs at sea. Hamas, a radical Sunni terrorist group linked to Iran, has taken over Gaza. It has launched thousands of rockets into Israel and staged attacks on Israeli gas installations in the Mediterranean. In Sinai, a plethora of Islamist armed groups are challenging the sovereignty of Egypt and even attacked targets along the Suez Canal. Libya is no longer a real state and the Islamist militias are fighting to carve out areas of influence. In short, we may soon see real piracy and terrorist attacks in the East Mediterranean.

Israel’s responses must include a larger and stronger navy. This is an expensive project that has already started. Hopefully, all budgetary problems will be overcome. Fortunately, some of the vessels needed for this are procured in Germany (not the US), while others can be built in Israel if enough money is allocated.

The strategic landscape of the Middle East is begetting new leaders and new ruling elites. Israel’s intelligence apparatus faces a difficult job in identifying the important players and their modus operandi. Many of the devils Israel knew are no longer in power. This means greater uncertainty and higher chances of surprises. Since Israel cannot prevent all surprises (that is their nature), it must prepare for worst-case scenarios rather than be tempted by best-case, rosy dreams.

Book review: The Islamic War

March 16, 2015

The Islamic War: Book review, Dan Miller’s Blog, March 16, 2015

(The views expressed in this article are mine and do not necessarily reflect those of Warsclerotic or its other editors. — DM)

The Islamic War, Martin Archer, 2014

The novel begins with a terror attack on a residential area in Israel, resulting in multiple causalities. It may, or may not, have involved members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. Menachem Begin is the Israeli Prime Minister and Ariel Sharon is the Defense Minister. The story begins immediately after the (postponed?) end of the Iran – Iraq war in 1988.

A massive armor, infantry, artillery and air attack on Israeli positions in the Golan follows the terrorist attack. The Israelis are outnumbered and suffer many thousands of casualties.

Israel had anticipated a simultaneous attack via Jordan, so most Israeli tank, infantry and air resources are deployed there, rather than in the Golan, to conceal themselves and await the arrival of Iranian, Iraqi and Syrian forces. They come and are defeated, most killed or fleeing. The Israeli forces then move into Syria and have similar successes there as well.

As the story evolves, it becomes evident that Israel must have known that the Iran – Iraq war had been allowed to fester to permit Iran, Iraq and Syria to develop a well coordinated plan to dispose of Israel, in hopes that a surprise attack could be made as soon as the Iran – Iraq war ended. Other events also suggest that Israel had prior notice:

Nuclear facilities of several hostile nations explode mysteriously.

The Israeli Navy had managed to infiltrate Iranian oil ports — apparently before the attack on the Golan — without being noticed. Then, at a propitious moment near the end of the fighting elsewhere, they destroyed all oil tankers in, entering or leaving port, along with all Iranian oil storage facilities.

The Israel Navy, which had suffered no losses, then moved to Saudi Arabia to protect her oil ports and ships coming to buy her oil and leaving.

As these events unfold, Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Turkey* are negotiating a united front against Iran, Iraq and Syria, much to the displeasure of the U.S. Secretary of State, who wants a cease fire and return to the status quo ante. Fortunately, the U.S. President favors Israel and her coalition and generally ignores his SecState.

I won’t spoil the story by relating what happens at the end, but it’s very good for Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and the Kurds, and very bad for Iran, Iraq and Syria. The novel is well worth reading, perhaps twice.

_____________

*Historical note: Turkey in 1988 was reasonably secular and also in other ways quite different from now. Egypt under President Al-Sisi is, in some but not all respects, similar to Egypt in 1988 under President Mubarak. Beyond a good relationship with Israel, Al-Sisi is working to modernize and reform Islam by turning it away from the violent jihad which drives both the Islamic State (Sunni) and the Islamic Republic of Iran (Shiite). Egypt remains under fire from the Obama administration due to the “coup” which ousted President Morsi, who had made Egypt essentially an arm of the Muslim Brotherhood. Egypt now helps to protect Israel with her military presence in the Sinai to oppose Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood activities there. Saudi Arabia and Jordan, like most countries in the Middle East, look out for the interests of their rulers first and are quite concerned about both the Islamic State and Iran.

ISIS-Sinai Is packing large water tankers with explosives

March 14, 2015

ISIS-Sinai Is packing large water tankers with explosives, DEBKAfile, March 14, 2015

(Please see also, IDF braces for Islamic State attack on Israel-Egypt border. — DM>

Egyptian military sources report that the ISIS Sinai affiliate has been discovered rounding up a large fleet of water and fuel tankers and big lorries and packing them with explosives for large-scale terrorist attacks on Egyptian and Israeli targets. The group which calls it’s the Sinai Province of the Islamist Caliphate tried the method out on March 4, using an explosives-packed water tanker to storm an Egyptian military compound in the Kawthar district of the northern Sinai town of Sheikh Zuweid. On March 10, they seized another water tanker at al-Towil east of El Arish, and on March 11, in the same area, they captured two large trucks of the Egyptian electricity company and pushed the drivers out.
Thursday, March 13, Col. Arik Hen of the IDF’s 80th Division said the military was on the alert for a major coordinated ISIS attack on Eilat from Sinai and the sea.

Hamas’ revamped naval commandos could pose a problem for Israel

March 14, 2015

Hamas’ revamped naval commandos could pose a problem for Israel, Ynet News, Alex Fishman, March 14, 2015

Although all unit members were killed during last summer’s infiltration attempt at Zikkim, Hamas viewed this as a massive achievement and subsequently trained a new force whose role will be to carry out mass attacks on the Israeli home front.

Palestinian Islamist organization Hamas has completed the reconstruction of its naval commando force, consisting of dozens of trained divers, in order to hit strategic sites, Israeli and others’, in the Mediterranean Sea.

With the development of its underwater unit, Hamas aims to compensate for the failure of the offensive tunnels from the Gaza Strip, which it rules, which were supposed to reach into Israel. From just a handful, the force has grown into many dozens of fighters trained to strike the Israeli home front via abductions and killings.

Hamas’s operational approach sees the naval commandos as one long “tunnel”, extending from Gaza in Israel’s south to Rosh Hanikra in the north, through which it could hit any target along the entire Israeli coast. These could be strategic objectives such as power plants, coal terminals, gas rigs and so on. However, using Operation Protective Edge as a model, it seems that Hamas is training its commandos to create a continuous shockwave for Israeli society through the mass murder of civilians and soldiers.

Hamas diversHamas’ infiltration attempt at Zikim during Protective Edge (Photo: IDF)

The Israeli defense establishment sees the strengthening of Hamas’ underwater activity – through the establishment of a large and professional commando unit – as one of the main lessons Hamas took from last summer’s conflict.

The Hamas commandos’ successful penetration a kilometer deep within Israeli territory, near Kibbutz Zikkim, is one of the organization’s major achievements during the 50 days of fighting, as this was the only time when Hamas special unit members managed to infiltrate Israel. If not for Israeli intelligence, it is likely the commando unit would have been able to penetrate the community or a nearby IDF base and carry out the mass murder it wanted.

Earlier this week, Egyptian newspaper “Al-Akhbar” reported that the creation of the naval commando unit was intended to harm Egypt’s facilities in the Mediterranean. The Egyptians, who have signed a gas deal with Israel, are worried about damage to the Tethys Sea group’s installation, while accusing Hamas of conducting sea-based attacks on Egyptian naval forces.

In November 2014, an Egyptian patrol boat was attacked as it conducted an operation against smuggling from the Gaza Strip. The attack was carried out by three rubber boats in the Egyptian Delta, near the port of Damietta. The perpetrators seized control of the ship, killed 13 Egyptian soldiers and hoisted the Islamic State flag.

The Egyptians blamed Hamas for supporting and being party to attacks of this kind, and significantly changed the security measures on their ships. Even the commands to open fire have changed, and the Egyptians shoot to destroy Gazan fishing boats that approach them without prior coordination.

In light of the accusations, Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar was quick to issue a denial in the Al-Quds newspaper, saying that Hamas was not planning to wave underwater warfare in the area.

It was until Operation Pillar of Defense in November 2012 that the Hamas naval force was viewed as amateurish. But since that operation, Hamas was been working on setting up a large professional unit – its people were sent abroad for training, most likely to Iran, and it procured military-grade diving equipment.

During last summer’s infiltration at Zikkim, Israel registered the use of military standard systems, which prevent bubbles from surfacing during a dive. Hamas also has a small underwater craft, known as a “scooter”, for individual divers, and has even published pictures of them for propaganda purposes. It appears that following the collapse of diving tourism in Sinai, the club owners were happy to sell some advanced diving equipment.

The training of the reinvigorated commando unit is largely reminiscent of the training for elite units in conventional armies, including the ability to withstand physical and mental pressure that is customary within professional naval commando units in the region.

The defense establishment and the IDF are preparing for an increased threat from this underwater force. It should be noted that during Protective Edge, this unit only sustained partial damage, and in any future conflict its infiltration efforts will be a force to be reckoned with for Israel.

IDF braces for Islamic State attack on Israel-Egypt border

March 13, 2015

IDF braces for Islamic State attack on Israel-Egypt border, Israel Hayom, Lilach Shoval and Daniel Siryoti, March 13, 2015

(Please see also IDF on alert for coordinated ISIS assault on Eilat or vicinity. — DM)
142623927595729064a_bSouthern Border Brigade Deputy Commander Col. Arik Hen | Photo credit: Yehuda Ben Itach

Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis released a video Thursday in which its operatives claim to have fired three rockets at the Eilat port last week. The group claimed it plans to fire up to 150 rockets daily at Egyptian security forces in Sinai and the Eilat port.

*********************

The Israel Defense Forces is said to be preparing for the possibility that one of the Sinai-based terrorist organizations affiliated with the Islamic State group will carry out a massive attack on the Israel-Egypt border.

It is believed that Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis, the largest Islamic State-affiliated jihadi group in Sinai, will attempt to target Egyptian security forces along Israel’s southern border using what has become its signature modus operandi — surprise attacks by dozens of terrorists on several targets simultaneously.

The military believes these terrorists will attempt to disguise themselves as smugglers, or perhaps even as Egyptian security forces, so they would be able to approach Israeli troops in the sector.

Earlier this week, Southern Border Brigade Deputy Commander Col. Arik Hen said the threat was a priority for the IDF, and that “it affects military readiness for various scenarios that may develop” near or on the border.

Meanwhile, the military is said to be outlining its defense of the Timna Airport, the new international airport currently under construction in southern Israel, which is expected to become operational in 2017.

As part of the planned defenses, a 30-kilometer fence is being designed to encompass the airport and adjacent area.

Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis released a video Thursday in which its operatives claim to have fired three rockets at the Eilat port last week. The group claimed it plans to fire up to 150 rockets daily at Egyptian security forces in Sinai and the Eilat port.

U.S. Generals: Israeli Military Restraint Bolstered Hamas

March 9, 2015

U.S. Generals: Israeli Military Restraint Bolstered Hamas

Report rejects American adoption of Israeli level of restraint

BY:
March 9, 2015 5:00 am

via U.S. Generals: Israeli Military Restraint Bolstered Hamas | Washington Free Beacon.

 

Israel’s military restraint during the conflict in Gaza last summer “unintentionally empowered Hamas” by allowing the terror group to distort international law and secure a public relations victory by exploiting the media, according a task force of retired U.S. generals.

The task force also warned that Hamas’ disinformation strategy could be replicated against the U.S. military and advised the U.S. government to institute a plan to combat similar media campaigns in the future.

“Hamas supported false claims against the [Israel Defense Forces] by distorting stories and images to serve the organization’s narrative, and by manipulating stories in the international media,” said the Gaza Conflict Task Force in a report commissioned by the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs and released on Monday.

The report, titled “The 2014 Gaza War: Observations and Implications for U.S. Military Operations,” concluded that Hamas was not aiming for a military victory but instead put Gaza’s civilians at risk in order to increase casualties and damage the global standing of the Israel Defense Forces.

The main goal, according to the report, was to build international pressure on Israel.

“Hamas proved very effective at exploiting images of civilian deaths, particularly children, to gain international sympathy to their cause and a high degree of international opposition to the Israeli cause,” said the report. “Further, Hamas was effective at not allowing access to their more brutal and illegal actions, beyond what they published themselves as part of their internal intimidation efforts.”

According to the task force, the techniques used by Hamas “represent an evolution in unconventional warfare, and will probably be imitated and improved upon by America’s enemies.”

The report recommended that the United States should institute a “whole-of government approach” to countering such efforts.

“The U.S. government and military must come to grips with the increased importance and use of the information domain in war,” said the task force. “They must develop effective countermeasures to this enemy advantage, as it threatens to exploit a strategic vulnerability for the United States and its allies.”

One issue that Hamas exploited in Gaza, according to the report, was the lack of clarity between international laws of war and military policy.

The task force argued that the IDF exceeded the Laws of Armed Conflict by using restraint during times when it was legally unnecessary. This created a precedent that could open Israeli civilians up to increased risk, according to the report.

“Unless there is a clear demarcation between law and policy-based restraints on the use of combat power, raising standards in one instance—even if done as a matter of national policy and not as the result of legal obligation—risks creating a precedent to which military forces will likely be expected to adhere in the future,” said the report.

“We do not believe the Israeli level of restraint should be considered the standard for U.S. armed forces in future conflicts,” the report concluded

The task force, which traveled to Israel while conducting the assessment, included General Charles Wald, Lieutenant General William B. Caldwell IV, Lieutenant General Richard Natonski, Major General Rick Devereaux, and Major General Mike Jones.

Former IDF chief hints he stood in way of Iran attack

March 2, 2015

Former IDF chief hints he stood in way of Iran attack

In television interview, Benny Gantz reveals arguments between army and government over strike

By Lazar Berman March 1, 2015, 9:52 pm

via Former IDF chief hints he stood in way of Iran attack | The Times of Israel.

 

Israeli Chief of Staff Benny Gantz (right) listens as US Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin E. Dempsey answers a question during their joint news conference at the Pentagon, January 8, 2015. (photo credit: AP/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)
Israeli Chief of Staff Benny Gantz (right) listens as US Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin E. Dempsey answers a question during their joint news conference at the Pentagon, January 8, 2015. (photo credit: AP/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

 

Israel’s recently retired chief of staff hinted that he helped prevent a possible Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear program.

Speaking to Ilana Dayan, host of Channel 2’s Uvda newsmagazine, Lt. Gen. (res.) Benny Gantz said he felt that without his presence and input in high-level government discussions, other decisions might have been made.

“It never reached, ‘OK, take off and fly,’” said Gantz in the interview, which is set to air Monday night in Israel. But he added: “I want to believe they listened and took into consideration what I have to say.”

Gantz, who retired in February after 38 years of service, also revealed a dispute between the political leadership, which was moving toward a military strike, and the IDF, opposed to such a move.

Despite the disagreement, the army would implement such a strike if ordered to do so by the political leadership, Gantz affirmed.

Gantz’s period as chief of staff was a tumultuous one, as he found himself shepherding the IDF through the instabilities caused by the Arab uprisings, the rise and fall of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, the cyclonic civil war in Syria, and the ever deteriorating security situation along Israel’s northern and southern borders.

But his legacy may be shaped by inaction against Iran’s nuclear program. The decision to strike was not his to make, but his opposition to a strike during this period, together with the reported opposition of several other security chiefs in recent years, may have helped prevent the political decision to carry it out.

Last year Gantz said that a resolution to the standoff over Iran’s nuclear program was “preferable without force, but if there’s no choice then it can [be done] with force.”

He said then that Israel “unequivocally” had the capacity to strike Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, and that “we’ll know how to act when needed.”

Like his predecessor Gabi Ashkenazi, though, Gantz did not believe that the midnight hour had arrived during his four-year term. He apparently disagreed with former defense minister Ehud Barak, who asserted in January that Israel’s capacity to act militarily against Iran’s nuclear program is “declining and in danger of eroding.”

Striking a rogue nuclear program belonging to a state with a powerful military that was openly at odds with the West for decades was difficult but doable, Barak seemed to be arguing; striking the infrastructure of a state that has been welcomed back into the family of nations, that has agreed to the demands of the United States and which is ostensibly in lockstep with the International Atomic Energy Agency is another matter entirely. It is a difference that the military echelons did not fully grasp, Barak has argued.

Gantz’s successor, Lt. Gen. Gadi Eisenkot is of a similar mind regarding Iran: the time for action, Eisenkot reportedly believes, has not yet come.

Mitch Ginsburg contributed to this report.