IMRA Middle East News Updates

Weekly Commentary: Defense Without Offense Recipe For Disaster

Tue, 08 Oct 2019 00:40:36 +0000

Weekly Commentary: Defense Without Offense Recipe For Disaster
Dr. Aaron Lerner 6 October, 2019

Iran's strike against Saudi targets was certainly stunning.

And as is unfortunately typical, this is yet another case that the military
apparently was only able to appreciate what an enemy could do with a
collection of technology they were known to posses AFTER the enemy
DEMONSTRATED what it could do.

I daresay that the apparently one-dimensional response to this development
reflects this.

I term the response one-dimensional because we are apparently going to pour
billions of dollars into detecting and intercepting the equipment that was
employed in the attack against the Saudis without any significant investment
in upgrading our ability to carry out offensive operations to address the
threat that the Jewish State faces.

This is pretty much what happened with Iron Dome.

It could have been used to reduce our exposure to attack as we carried out
operations decimating our enemy's offensive capabilities but instead Iron
Dome has acted as a crutch to enable us to indefinitely postpone addressing
ever growing security threats.

Suffice it to say that even in an ideal world, a detection/interception
system can only intercept as many incoming platforms as it has interceptors.
And in the case of enemy platforms that feature guidance systems every
incoming platform must be intercepted.

So the a one-dimensional detection/interception response would be doomed to
failure.

Let's not forget: we are talking about platforms that are delivering
conventional warheads.

The damage that x kilograms of explosives delivered by these particular
precision guided Iranian platforms can also be caused by an equal quantity
of explosives delivered by other precision guided platforms launched from
Lebanon or even the Gaza Strip.

Yes. We need to invest heavily today in upgrading the IDF.

But a holistic approach is crucial.
________________________________________
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

US Ambassador Friedman: Israeli Pubic Can't Have A Say In Major Matters (Via Elections)

Sat, 05 Oct 2019 22:45:58 +0000

US Ambassador Friedman: Israeli Pubic Can't Have A Say In Major Matters (Via
Elections)
Dr. Aaron Lerner 6 October, 2019

Makor Rishon reporter Michael Tuchfeld: Wouldn't it be more appropriate to
publish the "Deal of the Century" before the elections in Israel, so that
the Israeli voter can know what is in the offing?

US Ambassador to Israel David Friedman: No. I don't think so. We maintain
that this is a matter of the long term. That it should be considered in an
apolitical discerning and encompassing atmosphere, because Israeli long term
interests are involved. During an election campaign, and without being
critical towards politicians, the candidates always seek short term
opportunities to convince their electorate and get elected. This is not a
healthy atmosphere for carrying out discussions of such long term serious
matters."
Makor Rishon 4 October, 2019

Put in plain English: according to this approach the citizens of Israel
should NOT have the right to weigh in on "long term serious matters".

When they vote for a party they should be clueless what the leadership of
the party they vote for actually intends to do after they are elected.

In all due respect to Ambassador Friedman, I wonder what he would think if
an ambassador serving in Washington would suggest denying Americans the
opportunity to have their say on "long term serious matters".

________________________________________
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

Weekly Commentary: Kick The Can? Former COS Eisenkot's Guidelines for Israel's National Security Strategy

Fri, 04 Oct 2019 14:19:26 +0000

Weekly Commentary: Kick The Can? Former COS Eisenkot's Guidelines for
Israel's National Security Strategy
Dr. Aaron Lerner 4 October, 2019

Here's the description of Guidelines for Israel's National Security
Strategy - Lt.-Gen. (ret.) Gadi Eisenkot and Col. (res.) Gabi Siboni
(Washington Institute for Near East Policy)
https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/uploads/Documents/pubs/PolicyFocus160-EisenkotSiboni.pdf

"Israeli military experts examine the current map of Israel's threats and
propose principles to address them as the basis for a comprehensive national
security strategy, emphasizing the importance of the "campaign between
wars."
Gadi Eisenkot, who served as IDF Chief of Staff from 2014 until 2019, is
currently a military fellow at The Washington Institute.
Gabi Siboni is a senior research fellow at the Institute for National
Security Studies.

Here we are facing a tremendous security challenge whose details cannot be
shared yet with the Israeli public. Suffice it to say that there are major
elements of this challenge that developed thanks to a "quiet for quiet"
(Q4Q) policy both vis-a-vis Lebanon and the Gaza Strip. Under Q4Q the enemy
can literally make any and every build up in forces and capabilities as long
as it doesn't use them yet against the Jewish State.

Q4Q aka kick the "enemy force/capabilities build up" can down the road
policy is thus something that one would expect to be subject to considerable
examination and discussion in "Guidelines for Israel's National Security
Strategy ". This particularly in light of the dramatic exception recently
made to Q4Q in Syria and Iraq.

Unfortunately, instead of a serious discussion there is this one-liner:

"Proactive damage to the enemy's force buildup. Israel can initiate actions
to damage the enemy's force buildup through both the campaign between the
wars and as part of a wider campaign aimed at thwarting the enemy's
strategic capabilities"

I am disappointed and concerned.

I am disappointed that the man who served as IDF Chief of Staff from 2014
until 2019 doesn't use this opportunity to address a policy that now could
cost us dearly.

I am concerned because if Lt.-Gen. (ret.) Gadi Eisenkot doesn't apparently
feel that Q4Q is a problem, that the people now in charge may share this
view.

________________________________________
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

Commentary: Is Time Running Out For Jonathan Pollard?

Thu, 03 Oct 2019 16:51:29 +0000

Yisrael Beiteinu Spokesman: Even if Religion State Demands Met Won't Sit With Ultra Orthodox

Thu, 26 Sep 2019 20:03:25 +0000

Yisrael Beiteinu Spokesman: Even if Religion State Demands Met Won't Sit
With Ultra Orthodox
Dr. Aaron Lerner 26 September 2019

The following is a translation of a Hebrew SMS exchange today.

IMRA: Is it true to say that if the right-wing "bloc" adopts the principles
of passing the Recruitment Law, along with English and mathematics studies
in all the educational institutions in Israel that Yisrael Beiteinu is
willing to join a government formed by that "bloc"?

Arye Vishnevetski, spokesperson for Yisrael Beiteinu: No. Only the unity
government - Yisrael Beiteinu, Likud, Blue and White

IMRA: I want to be precise: even if the ultra-Orthodox accept the demands of
Yisrael Beiteinu do you rule out joining a government that is not a unity
government?

Vishnevetski: Everything is clear by us. Everything we said before the
election we say even now. There is no change. Only a unity government

IMRA: In an interview today on Radio Rekah, Liberman said: "There are no
prerequisites. If the Likud contacts us officially, we are ready to
negotiate with them."

Vishnevetski: One sentence cannot be taken from an entire interview.
"Lieberman also spoke on radio radio: If there is a formal appeal, Yisrael
Beiteinu will negotiate with the Likud only and not with the halakhic bloc
Netanyahu brings with him. There will be no change in the party's position,
which will not sit with the ultra-Orthodox or the Messianic (and the Joint
[Arab Party] or Meretz). We will not give up our demands on religion and
state, security, immigration and absorption, and only within the framework
of a liberal national unity government."

IMRA: I understood from this that the negotiations are with Likud to
summarize the fulfillment of the requirements regarding religion and state.
And, as the saying goes, if the haredim agree then they are no longer the
same haredim and it is possible to sit with them.

Vishnevetski: In short, I sent everything in black and white. You can also
look at Liberman's Facebook. Nice weekend and a happy new year
________________________________________
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

Weekly Commentary: Mr. Netanyahu Don't Screw Around - Give Chance To Forming National Camp Coalition Government

Wed, 25 Sep 2019 18:58:07 +0000

Weekly Commentary: Mr. Netanyahu Don't Screw Around - Give Chance To Forming
National Camp Coalition Government
Dr. Aaron Lerner 25 September, 2019

Dear Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu,

As the leader of the national camp, you have an obligation to make a good
faith effort to try to form a ruling coalition of the national camp.

And such a coalition could be formed if Yisrael Beiteinu, that is part of
the national camp, joins the coalition.

Yes. There's bad blood between you and Liberman.

Yes. There's a narrative that Liberman's motives begin and end with making
sure you aren't prime minister.

But that's not the explanation Liberman has given for his actions.

He's cited religion-state issues. And the truth is that since the
elections the red lines that he's mentioned on religion-state issues are
something that a round table of representatives of Yisrael Beiteinu and the
religious parties could resolve.

To be clear: I'm not suggesting a round table just so that we can document
who is responsible for the failure of the effort - though there would be a
place for that for the sake of history and out of respect for your
constituents. I have every reason to believe that such a move would
succeed.

You cited security challenges and the so-called opportunity of the "deal of
the century" to justify a unity government rather than a national camp
coalition government.

The Nation can stand together without representatives of Blue White in the
cabinet.

What the Nation needs is an indication that the ruling coalition recognizes
the severity of the situation and acts accordingly.

Which brings us back to the round table of representatives of Yisrael
Beiteinu and the religious parties.

I cannot think of a stronger message that the ruling coalition recognizes
the severity of the situation than an historic breakthrough on
religion-state issues for a House United rather than a House Divided.

Suffice it to say that this message would be reinforced by the contours of
the security emergency budget that will apparently be required.

Again - a tangible breakthrough in state-religion issues which facilitates
Yisrael Beiteinu joining the ruling coalition followed by passage of a
security emergency budget would create an environment in which almost all
Israelis, regardless of who they voted for, would feel a part of.

Suffice it to say that in the event that we are compelled to engaged in a
major military campaign that the leadership of Blue White, sitting in the
opposition, can be counted on to put the nation ahead of petty politics for
the duration.

This is not the time for time consuming and potentially disastrous political
chess playing.

Again. The national camp has enough seats to form a ruling coalition.

It is most likely just a round table away.
________________________________________
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