RSS
Hezbollah Has Secretly Been Preparing for All-Out War; Is Israel in Danger?
Smoke rises from Kfar Kila, amid cross-border hostilities between Hezbollah and Israeli forces, as pictured from Marjayoun, near the border with Israel, Lebanon, Aug. 6, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Karamallah Daher
On May 15, 2024, the IDF announced that a Hezbollah unmanned aircraft had hit the Israel Air Force facility that operated the Tal-Shamaim observation balloon. This strike was unusual, in that it took place deep in Israel. It drew Israel’s attention, and not only because it represented a gradual escalation in the reaction equation.
The fact that the aircraft accurately hit its target was not, in itself, the worst aspect of the incident. Hezbollah’s precision strike capabilities, including the killing of two reserve soldiers in Metula, are unfortunately not new. The new information was that the war of attrition in the north, as well as the Iranian attack on the night of April 14, serve another purpose. Those who follow the skirmishes between Hezbollah and the IDF can see patterns that indicate that the enemy is taking advantage of these exchanges of fire to study the performance of our air defense system and find its weaknesses.
Hezbollah’s favorite target is the air control base on Mount Meron, an essential facility and part of Israel’s air defense system. The enemy has attacked it dozens of times and with varied methods. The IDF has focused thus far on the limited scope of the damage and Israel’s relative success at intercepting the rockets and protecting the facility. However, it is quite possible that for the enemy, these attacks are part of a broader ongoing experiment designed to test the performance of Iron Dome. The strikes are also enabling Hezbollah to practice complex attack patterns to overcome our defenses that include coordinated UAVs, rockets, and anti-tank weapons. There is no doubt that the enemy is perfecting this technique and will use it to attack other vital targets.
For weeks there has been a trend of increasing rocket barrages on the north, many of which have hit Kiryat Shmonah and other areas. Hezbollah is undoubtedly closely monitoring the results and analyzing the capacity of Israel’s defense system to withstand large barrages for a long period. It could be that here too, the rocket barrages are intended not only to empty the Iron Dome launchers but also to serve as a diversion from the penetration of aircraft and anti-tank missiles.
The phenomenon of enemy aircraft appearing in the northern skies, some activating warnings and others not, is not accidental either. Nor are these aircraft being sent solely to conduct reconnaissance missions and detect new Israeli targets. It can be assumed that the flight paths of these aircraft are chosen to test our detection systems as well. According to reports, two aircraft participated in the attack on the Air Force facility at the Golani junction, only one of which was detected and shot down. It is possible that the downed aircraft was used as a diversion for the air defense formation while the other aircraft took a more secretive route that was analyzed by the enemy based on accumulated experience.
Hezbollah is suffering serious injuries in the war, but Israel’s intelligence and air superiority in the skies of Lebanon, however painful and harmful they may be to the enemy, are not a surprise. Hezbollah has prepared itself for war fully aware that Israel monitors southern Lebanon, mainly from the air, and will be able to locate and attack valuable targets and senior activists.
However, the importance of the weaknesses the enemy is gradually revealing in the Israeli air defense system cannot be overstated. This dangerous reality remains hidden from the Israeli eye, except perhaps for a very limited circle of air defense experts. As long as the war in the north remains an attrition campaign within a framework of reaction equations, attention is given primarily to those equations.
The IDF is not ignoring this entirely, of course. The IDF spokesman announced that in response to the attack on the Air Force facility at the Golani junction, Air Force planes had attacked a facility in the Lebanese Bekaa that is linked to Hezbollah’s precision missile program. From the report it is possible to learn not only the development of the reaction equations (a target deep in Lebanon against a target deep in Israel), but also that Israeli anxiety is growing over the precise and complex attack capability displayed by the enemy. The IDF had earlier publicized the existence of precision missile factories deep in Lebanon, but refrained from attacking them for seven months into the war. At that point, apparently, the IDF’s assessment of the situation changed. The reaction equations allowed, and the enemy’s audacity required, the attack on the precision missile factories at that time, but this was a case of shutting the stable door after the horse had bolted.
Over the months of war, the enemy has expanded not only the scope of its precise armaments and deepened its capabilities, but also – and most importantly – developed an advanced understanding of the Israeli air defense system and the operational techniques that could overcome it. If we return to the Tal-Shamaim balloon attack at the Golani junction, we can assume that the choice of target was not accidental. Anyone who studies air defense understands that such a detection balloon has one purpose: to detect cruising targets from relatively low-flying levels. The balloon’s location deep in Israel, on a plateau overlooking the Sea of Galilee, could indicate that it was intended to detect targets approaching from the east no less than those approaching from the north.
What can be learned from all this?
First, Hezbollah is building up for an all-out war. In this scenario, the first effort will be to neutralize critical components of Israeli air defenses. Such a neutralization would allow not only a free and effective attack on essential facilities in Israel, but also the paralysis of elements of the command and control system of the ground defense battle on the northern border. The results of such a paralysis, which we saw on October 7, 2023, are well remembered by every Israeli.
Second, even if it were to be an attack by fire alone, the destruction of critical components of the Israeli air defense system would leave the country’s home front exposed to continued critical attacks. A situation in which the northern cities are exposed to intense barrages without protection and civilian infrastructure is sustaining serious damage would make it very difficult for Israel to continue the war. Another version of an all-out war scenario – a significant neutralization of the Israeli air defense system – would turn the Israeli home front into a collective hostage of Hezbollah. No need to take actual prisoners.
Third, the damage to the facility at the Golani intersection could indicate Hezbollah’s intention to neutralize those elements in Israel that are intended, perhaps only in its own eyes, to serve as protection against the Iranian threat. Was this an Iranian signal?
Fourth, while it seems that there is great satisfaction in Israel about the success of our defenses at stopping the Iranian attack of April 14, the enemy might view the event quite differently. The supreme concentration of effort that night on the part of countries of the region, the United States, and all the IDF’s air and intelligence assets might have taught the enemy that our defense capacity was stretched to the limit. If that was the conclusion, the enemy might be tempted to repeat such an attack but from Lebanon, with thousands more missiles, and for a longer duration.
Both sides understand that the current attrition is the prelude to an inevitable war between Israel, Hezbollah and Iran. It is not clear whether we will escalate to this war out of the current attrition or in the medium term. Either way, those who assume the quality of defense we have experienced in the war thus far can be maintained are making dangerous assumptions. Our air defense has not only been eroded by the continuation of the war, but has been studied by the enemy. Both sides can learn, of course, but in the equation of defender and attacker, the advantage of flexibility and surprise is on the attacker’s side. This is a perilous starting point for the next war.
What can be done?
First, after the October 7 massacre, it seems that among the general public and even among the decision makers, sensitivity to the strategic and tactical meanings of the threat of fire has decreased. This needs to be fixed.
Second, the assessment of the situation in preparation for the possibility of war in the north must bring to light the erosion of the effectiveness of our defenses under current conditions. One can understand the voices calling for an immediate military solution in the north, but the severe plight of the displaced is only one variable in the assessment.
Third, the ability in principle to mount an attack on the sources of fire must be built. Even under the laboratory conditions afforded by the current exhaustion of the IDF on the northern border, the enemy is mostly succeeding at combining different attack methods into one complex attack barrage without being detected while creating an operational redundancy that ensures that some of its armaments will overcome our defenses. The terrain in the north enables the establishment of immediate attack detection and interception capabilities that will destroy at least some enemy launchers as they are firing and intercept at least some missiles as they are taking off. Such a concept would not only serve as an additional front layer for the defense of the country but would also make the launching of missiles and rockets from Lebanon much more dangerous for Hezbollah. It would turn the attacker into the defender, the defender into the attacker, and transfer some of the attacker’s advantages to the IDF.
In light of October 7, it is essential that we maintain critical vigilance about our hidden assumptions. The focus on ground attack scenarios only, a misunderstanding of the connection between the fire threat and the ground threat, and the assumption that the Israeli defense system has passed the test and will continue to do so are all assumptions that require careful review under current circumstances.
Brig. Gen. (res.) Eran Ortal recently retired from military service as commander of the Dado Center for Multidisciplinary Military Thinking. He is a well-known military thinker both in Israel and abroad. His works have been published in The Military Review, War on the Rocks, Small Wars Journal, at the Hoover Institution, at Stanford, and elsewhere. His book The Battle Before the War (MOD 2022, in Hebrew) dealt with the IDF’s need to change, innovate and renew a decisive war approach. A version of this article was originally published by The BESA Center.
The post Hezbollah Has Secretly Been Preparing for All-Out War; Is Israel in Danger? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Saudi Arabia Ups Anti-Israel Rhetoric Amid Iran Rapprochement, Raising Questions About Abraham Accords Expansion
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman attends a virtual cabinet meeting from his office in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, May 28, 2024. Photo: Saudi Press Agency/Handout via REUTERS
Saudi Arabia’s de facto ruler accused the Israeli military of committing “collective genocide” in Gaza while also pressing Israel to respect Iranian sovereignty, amid reports that Tehran has postponed its planned attack on the Jewish state.
Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s remarks, made in Riyadh on Monday during a summit of leaders of Islamic nations, underscored the evolving rapprochement between the erstwhile archenemies Iran and Saudi Arabia.
The crown prince, also known by his initials MBS, urged the international community to demand that Israel “respect the sovereignty of the sisterly Islamic Republic of Iran and not to violate its lands.”
The two regional heavyweights restored relations last year after decades of animosity.
MBS’s anti-Israel rhetoric came days after Donald Trump’s victory in the US presidential election. For Israel, the statement from Riyadh may signal a setback to the normalization process with Saudi Arabia, a long-sought goal within the framework of the Abraham Accords, brokered by Trump during his first term in the White House, that has seen Israel establish formal ties with several Arab states in recent years.
According to a Sky News Arabia report published two days later and citing Iranian officials, Tehran has shelved a planned third direct strike on Israel, with the delay attributed to possible forthcoming diplomatic talks with Trump. Israel Hayom published a similar report the following day, citing officials in Jerusalem familiar with the matter.
Iranian First Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref expressed his hope that the incoming Trump administration would put a stop to Israel’s campaigns against its terrorist proxies, Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon.
“The American government is the main supporter of the actions of the Zionist regime [Israel], and the world is waiting for the promise of the new government of this country to immediately stop the war against the innocent people of Gaza and Lebanon,” Aref said at Monday’s gathering.
Observers noted that Saudi Arabia’s shift could stem from both domestic and regional considerations. For the kingdom, improving relations with Iran is a strategic move to de-escalate conflicts in Yemen, where both countries have backed opposing sides. By opening diplomatic channels with Iran, Saudi Arabia also aims to reduce its dependence on Western security guarantees amid growing regional autonomy. According to Dr. Eyal Pinko, a Middle East expert who served in Israeli intelligence for more than three decades, Saudi Arabia is also under pressure from France, a major arms supplier, to maintain a moderate stance and promote regional peace.
“Saudi Arabia understands [it] cannot rely on the Americans” for arms, Pinko told The Algemeiner.
For its part, Iran may be seeking closer ties with the Gulf kingdom as a result of recent Israeli operations that have decimated the senior leadership of Hezbollah, Iran’s most influential proxy in the Arab world that has long served as a strategic partner.
“Iran is spreading its bets all around, not to be on one side or another,” Pinko said.
Hezbollah, along with Hamas in Gaza, had in the past been blacklisted as terrorist groups by Riyadh.
The New York Times last month cited a Saudi tycoon with ties to the monarchy as saying that the war in Gaza has “set back any Israeli integration into the region.”
“Saudi Arabia sees that any association with Israel has become more toxic since Gaza,” Ali Shihabi told the newspaper.
In another blow for Saudi-Israel relations, Riyadh announced it would revoke the license of the Saudi news broadcaster, MBC, after it labeled the late Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar a terrorist.
But according to Pinko, the chance of Saudi-Israel normalization is not entirely lost, pending a ceasefire.
“If nothing extreme happens with Iran until Jan. 20 [when Trump takes office], I believe that the Abraham Accords will come back to the table,” he said.
The post Saudi Arabia Ups Anti-Israel Rhetoric Amid Iran Rapprochement, Raising Questions About Abraham Accords Expansion first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Germany Opposes EU Foreign Policy Chief’s Proposal to Suspend Dialogue With Israel
German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock speaks during a session of the lower house of parliament Bundestag, in Berlin, Germany, Oct. 10, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Lisi Niesner
German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock on Thursday publicly rejected a proposal by the European Union’s foreign policy chief to suspend regular political dialogue with Israel in response to the Jewish state’s ongoing military campaign against the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas in Gaza.
“We are always in favor of keeping channels of dialogue open. Of course, this also applies to Israel,” the German Foreign Office said of top EU official Josep Borrell’s plans, according to the German news agency dpa.
The Foreign Office added that, while the political conversations under the EU-Israel Association Council provide a regular opportunity to strengthen relations and, in recent months, discuss the provision of humanitarian aid to Gaza, severing that mechanism would be counterproductive.
“Breaking off dialogue, however, will not help anyone, neither the suffering people in Gaza, nor the hostages who are still being held by Hamas, nor all those in Israel who are committed to dialogue,” the statement continued.
Borrell on Wednesday proposed the suspension of dialogue in a letter to EU foreign ministers ahead of their meeting this coming Monday in Brussels, citing “serious concerns about possible breaches of international humanitarian law in Gaza.” He also wrote, “Thus far, these concerns have not been sufficiently addressed by Israel.”
The regular dialogues that Borrell is seeking to break off were enshrined in a broader agreement on relations between the EU and Israel, including extensive trade ties, that was implemented in 2000.
“In light of the above considerations, I will be tabling a proposal that the EU should invoke the human rights clause to suspend the political dialogue with Israel,” Borrell wrote.
A suspension would need the approval of all 27 EU countries, an unlikely outcome. According to Reuters, multiple countries objected when a senior EU official briefed ambassadors in Brussels on the proposal on Wednesday.
While some EU countries, such as Spain and Ireland, have been fiercely critical of Israel since the outbreak of the war in Gaza, others such as the Czech Republic and Hungary have been more supportive.
Hamas, which rules Gaza, launched the ongoing conflict with its invasion of southern Israel last Oct. 7. During the onslaught, Hamas-led Palestinian terrorists murdered 1,200 people, wounded thousands more, and kidnapped over 250 hostages while perpetrating mass sexual violence and other atrocities.
Israel responded with a military campaign aimed at freeing the hostages and dismantling Hamas’s military and governing capabilities in neighboring Gaza.
Israel says it has gone to unprecedented lengths to try and avoid civilian casualties, noting its efforts to evacuate areas before it targets them and to warn residents of impending military operations with leaflets, text messages, and other forms of communication. However, Hamas has in many cases prevented people from leaving, according to the Israeli military.
Another challenge for Israel is Hamas’s widely recognized military strategy of embedding its terrorists within Gaza’s civilian population and commandeering civilian facilities like hospitals, schools, and mosques to run operations, direct attacks, and store weapons.
Israeli Ambassador to the UN Danny Danon said last month that Israel has delivered over 1 million tons of aid, including 700,000 tons of food, to Gaza since it launched its military operation a year ago. He also noted that Hamas terrorists often hijack and steal aid shipments while fellow Palestinians suffer.
The Israeli government has ramped up the supply of humanitarian aid into Gaza in recent weeks under pressure from the United States, which has expressed concern about the plight of civilians in the war-torn enclave.
Meanwhile, Borrell has been one of the EU’s most outspoken critics of Israel over the past year. Just six weeks after Hamas’s Oct. 7 attacks, he drew a moral equivalence between Israel and Hamas while speaking to the European Parliament, accusing both of having carried out “massacres” while insisting that it is possible to criticize Israeli actions “without being accused of not liking the Jews.”
Borrell’s speech followed a visit to the Middle East the prior week. While in Israel, he delivered what the Spanish daily El Pais described as the “most critical message heard so far from a representative of the European Union regarding Israel’s response to the Hamas attack of Oct. 7.”
“Not far from here is Gaza. One horror does not justify another,” Borrell said at a joint press conference alongside then-Israeli Foreign Minister Eli Cohen. “I understand your rage. But let me ask you not to let yourself be consumed by rage. I think that is what the best friends of Israel can tell you, because what makes the difference between a civilized society and a terrorist group is the respect for human life. All human lives have the same value.”
Months later, in March of this year, Borrell claimed that Israel was imposing a famine on Palestinian civilians in Gaza and using starvation as a weapon of war. His comments came a few months before the United Nations Famine Review Committee (FRC), a panel of experts in international food security and nutrition, rejected the assertion that northern Gaza was experiencing famine, citing a lack of evidence. Borrell’s comments prompted outrage from Israel.
In August, Borrell pushed EU member states to impose sanctions on some Israeli ministers.
Monday’s meeting in Brussels will be the last that Borrell will chair before ending his five-year term as the EU’s foreign policy chief.
The post Germany Opposes EU Foreign Policy Chief’s Proposal to Suspend Dialogue With Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Pro-Hamas Groups Planting Seeds of Domestic Terrorism in US, New Report Says
Pro-Hamas activists gather in Washington Square Park for a rally following a protest march held in response to an NYPD sweep of an anti-Israel encampment at New York University in Manhattan, May 3, 2024. Photo: Matthew Rodier/Sipa USA via Reuters Connect
Domestic terrorism may be the end game for the over 150 pro-Hamas groups operating on colleges campuses and elsewhere across the US to foster anti-Israel demonstrations, according to a new report by the Capital Research Center (CRC) think tank.
“The movement contains militant elements pushing it toward a wider, more severe campaign focused on property destruction and violence properly described as domestic terrorism,” researcher Ryan Mauro wrote in the report, titled “Marching Toward Violence: The Domestic Anti-Israeli Protest Movement,” which was published last week. “It demands the ‘dismantlement’ of America’s ‘colonialist,’ ‘imperialist,’ or ‘capitalist,’ system, often calling for the US to be abolished as a country.”
He continued, “These revolutionary goals are held by the two different factions of the anti-Israel extremist groups. The first faction combines Islamists, communists/Marxists, and anarchists. The second faction consists of groups with white supremacist/nationalist ideologies. They share Jew-hatred, anti-Americanism, and the goal of sparking a revolutionary uprising.”
The group that is most responsible for the anti-Israel protest movement is Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), according to the report.
Drawing on statements issued and actions taken by SJP and their collaborators, Mauro made the case that toolkits published by SJP herald Hamas for perpetrating mass casualties of civilians; SJP has endorsed Iran’s attacks on Israel as well as its stated intention to overturn the US-led world order; and other groups under its umbrella have called on followers to “Bring the Intifada Home.” Such activities, the report explained, accelerated after Hamas’s massacre across southern Israel last Oct. 7, which pro-Hamas groups perceived as an inflection point in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and an opportunity. By flooding the internet and college campuses with agitprop and staging activities — protests or vandalisms — they hoped to manufacture a critical mass of youth support for their ideas, thus creating an army of revolutionaries willing to adopt Hamas’s aims as their own.
The result has been a series of the kinds of incidents seen in academia during fall semester.
Last month, when Jews around the world mourned on the anniversary of Oct. 7, a Harvard University student group called on pro-Hamas activists to “Bring the war home” and proceeded to vandalize a campus administrative building. The group members, who described themselves as “anonymous,” later said in a statement, “We are committed to bringing the war home and answering the call to open up a new front here in the belly of the beast.”
On the same day, the Harvard Palestine Solidarity Committee (PSC) issued a similar statement, saying “now is the time to escalate,” adding, “Harvard’s insistence on funding slaughter only strengthens our moral imperative and commitment to our demands.”
More recently, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) student wrote a journal article which argued that violence is a legitimate method of effecting political change and, moreover, advancing the pro-Palestinian movement.
In September, during Columbia University’s convocation ceremony, Columbia University Apartheid Divest (CUAD), a group which recently split due to racial tensions between Arabs and non-Arabs, distributed a pamphlet which called on students to join Hamas.
“This booklet is part of a coordinated and intentional effort to uphold the principles of the thawabit and the Palestinian resistance movement overall by transmitting the words of the resistance directly,” said the manifesto, distributed by CUAD, an SJP spinoff, to incoming freshmen. “This material aims to build popular support for the Palestinian war of national liberation, a war which is waged through armed struggle.”
Other sections of it were explicitly Islamist, invoking the name of “Allah, the most gracious” and referring to Hamas as the “Islamic Resistance Movement.” Proclaiming, “Glory to Gaza that gave hope to the oppressed, that humiliated the ‘invincible’ Zionist army,” it said its purpose was to build an army of Muslims worldwide.
“Groups in the pro-terrorism, anti-Israel movement co-exist as our concentric circles of increasing malevolence,” Mauro said of the level of support for revolutionary violence on college campuses. “Groups in the outermost circle avoid risks as they recruit new protest members and seek to integrate as many political causes as possible under the anti-Israel umbrella … Some militants aspire to incorporate the campaign into a broader wear on law enforcement if not an insurgency.”
As The Algemeiner has previously reported, pro-Hamas activists have already demonstrated that they are willing to hurt people to achieve their goals.
Last year, in California, an elderly Jewish man was killed when an anti-Zionist professor employed by a local community college allegedly pushed him during an argument. At Cornell University in upstate New York, a student threatened to rape and kill Jewish female students and”“shoot up” the campus’ Hillel center. Violence, according to a report by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), was most common at universities in the state of California, where anti-Zionist activists punched a Jewish student for filming him at a protest.
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post Pro-Hamas Groups Planting Seeds of Domestic Terrorism in US, New Report Says first appeared on Algemeiner.com.