Weekly Commentary: Reconsider "Quiet For Quiet" In The Wake of Regional
Developments
Dr. Aaron Lerner 16 October, 2017

"Quiet for quiet" has been Israel's operative policy ever since PM Ehud
Barak's hasty retreat from Lebanon. Israel limits itself to attacks in the
north against equipment still in Syria. "Quiet for quiet" applies once
equipment reaches Lebanon, regardless of its nature.

That same policy, according to which the enemy can literally do anything and
everything in preparation to attack Israel without being subject to an
Israeli response, was extended to the Gaza Strip after PM Sharon's retreat.

Defense ministers, IDF chief of staff's and prime ministers all embraced
"quiet for quiet", confident that it would be child's play for the mighty
IDF to neutralize whatever assault capabilities the enemy managed to amass
under "quiet for quiet".

But that was only part of the story.

The worst case outcome was not seen as particularly costly for the Jewish
State: a photo op temporary Hezbollah flag planting in some Israeli border
community and some dead Israelis and Israelis taken hostage in the south.

Unpleasant yes. But not critical.

The problem with this approach is that it assumed that, at most, the IDF has
to deal with two fronts - Hezbollah in the north and Hamas etc. in the
south.

But now there's actors, especially Iran, to take into account.

With a very real possibility that things may get a lot worse in the
neighborhood before it gets better.

Back to "quiet for quiet".

The longer we postpone demolishing the military threat that has built up
during "quiet for quiet" the greater the danger that attack capability is
used as part of a larger operation against us.

As costly as it may be to act now, it could very well be the best choice of
action.

________________________________________
IMRA - Independent Media Review and Analysis

Since 1992 providing news and analysis on the Middle East with a focus on
Arab-Israeli relations

Website: www.imra.org.il