web analytics
October 21, 2014 / 27 Tishri, 5775
At a Glance

Posts Tagged ‘enemy’

IDF Intelligence Chief: Instability Changes Our Military Options

Thursday, May 10th, 2012

The regional instability has changed Israel’s security outlook in a number of ways, most notably in recent months in the Sinai Peninsula, said IDF Chief Intelligence Officer Brigadier General Ariel Karo.

Karo spoke this week at the 2012 Miltech Conference outside Ben Gurion airport, addressing the intelligence challenges currently facing the Israel Defense Forces.

“We see the activities of international terrorist groups and weapons dealers in [the Sinai],” Karo said. “There is a risk for other regional developments like this, which are becoming significant challenges that are growing.”

Currently, Karo said, it is important to understand trends in the masses, a more complex task than in the past when it was important to uncover the hidden secrets of regime leaders.

“We are in the midst of deep changes in our strategic environment,” Brig. Gen. Karo said, adding that the IDF will likely be dealing with this changing environment for more than a few years. “The need is to understand and respond faster than in the past.”

Moreover, he said, the nature of the IDF’s enemies is not always entirely clear, with the lines between military and terrorist groups blurred.

“Hezbollah, which has a larger array of missiles and rockets than most armies in the world, has adopted its own structure,” Karo said. “Most of its fighters wear uniforms during times of emergency and they are arranged in an hierarchical structure like an army. Even so, [Hezbollah] has many characteristics that are different entirely from an army.”

Hezbollah has grown since the early 1980s to become an organization with seats in the Lebanese government, offering its own radio and satellite television, as well as programs for social development.

In the 2006 Lebanese War, Hezbollah was able to sustain continuous, 34-day military conflict in Lebanon and northern Israel, facing the IDF. Hezbollah launched thousands of Katyusha rocket attacks against Israeli civilian towns. The generally accepted results of the fighting were 1,200 Lebanese and 158 Israelis dead.

It could be argued that Hezbollah has done better against the IDF in 2006 than has any other enemy of Israel.

Brig. Gen. Karo also described the missile threats facing the IDF.

“The number of missiles is growing significantly,” he said. “An arsenal of dozens became an arsenal of thousands.”

“In the next war, the enemy wants to reach all depths of the country,” Karo warned. “The size of warheads is increasing and there is a desperate attempt to increase accuracy.”

Other challenges facing the IDF include anti-tank and anti-aircraft threats. Karo also discussed the complexity of intelligence operations in urban warfare environments.

“The bottom line is that the future is already here,” Brig. Gen. Karo said. “The challenges are already before us. We can improve the IDF’s effectiveness, its deterrent capabilities, and especially its decisive powers.”

Currently, Karo said, it is important to understand trends in the masses, a more complex task than in the past when it was important to uncover the hidden secrets of regime leaders.

“We are in the midst of deep changes in our strategic environment,” Brig. Gen. Karo said, adding that the IDF will likely be dealing with this changing environment for more than a few years. “The need is to understand and respond faster than in the past.”

This article used content provided by the IDF Spokesperson’s office.

Khaled Abu Toameh: What the Palestinians Want

Friday, May 4th, 2012

No matter how much the US tries to help the Palestinians, it will always be viewed by many of them as an enemy.

Last week, President Barack Obama gave $147 million to the Palestinians. A few days later, Palestinians demonstrated in Ramallah against the US and boycotted a ceremony held by the US Consulate-General. The protesters carried placards which read: “USAID go out!” and “We reject aid from those who deny our people the right to self-determination.”

USAID is the leading provider of bilateral development assistance to the Palestinians. This agency has given the Palestinians more than $3.5 billion since 1994 for programs in the areas of democracy and governance, education, health, humanitarian assistance, private enterprise, and water resources and infrastructure. The demonstration in Ramallah was held outside a hotel where US officials organized a ceremony marking World Press Freedom Day.

Palestinian Authority policemen were deployed outside the hotel to prevent angry demonstrators from disrupting the ceremony. The protesters chanted slogans denouncing US “bias” in favor of Israel. They accused the US of “covering up” for Israeli “war crimes” and blocking the Palestinian leadership from receiving UN recognition of a Palestinian state.

More than 20 Palestinian professional unions and other organizations announced a boycott of the US-sponsored event for the same reason.

Many Palestinian journalists who were invited to cover the event also decided to stay away. Their representatives accused the US of supporting Israel and working toward “normalizing” relations between Israelis and Palestinians.

In a similar show of hostility, US diplomats who visited Ramallah several months ago had shoes thrown at their vehicles.

As far as most Palestinians are concerned, the “friend of my enemy is my enemy.” Palestinians hate the US because of its continued support for Israel. The Palestinians want the US to endorse all their demands and force Israel to give them everything.

As one of the leaders of the demonstrators explained, “The US will remain our enemy for as long as it does not fully support the Palestinians.”

US threats to veto Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’s statehood bid at the UN have only intensified anti-US sentiments among the Palestinians.

The Americans can pour billions of dollars on the Palestinians every year, but that won’t change their hearts and minds, especially toward the US. The same applies to the rest of the Arab world, where the masses continue to strongly detest the US.

The $147 million that Obama released to the Palestinians will probably help pay salaries of civil servants and improve infrastructure in Palestinian cities and villages, but the aid will surely not change the Palestinians’ attitudes toward the US.

The anti-US sentiments are the direct result of incitement by the Palestinian Authority and other Palestinians against the US. Palestinians are reminded almost every day that the US, which has been providing them with billions of dollars, as a foe rather than friend, although no one seems to ask how come a foe is so generous.

US aid should be conditioned not only on transparency and accountability in the Palestinian Authority, but also on an end to the campaign of hatred and incitement, as officially agreed in the Oslo Accords, but never implemented.
Originally published by Gatestone Institute http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org

Rationality, Irrationality, And Madness Core Enemy Differences For Israeli Nuclear Deterrence (First of Three Parts)

Thursday, April 26th, 2012

Over the years, in several of my columns in The Jewish Press, I have examined the critical bases of Israeli nuclear deterrence. Recently, in consequence of the growing threat of Iranian nuclearization, increasing attention has been directed toward pertinent issues of enemy rationality. With this in mind, the following three-part column will seek to explain the impact of “irrationality” on Israel’s deterrence posture, and also the vital differences between prospective Iranian irrationality and “madness.”

For all states in world politics, successful strategies of deterrence require assumptions of enemy rationality. In the absence of rationality – that is, in those relatively rare or residual circumstances where an enemy country would rank certain values or preferences more highly than staying alive as a nation – deterrence could fail. In those potentially more serious situations involving nuclear deterrence, the direct consequences of any such failure could be catastrophic, stark, and even unprecedented.

Significantly, irrationality is not the same as “crazy” or “mad.” An irrational enemy leadership would still have a distinct and identifiable hierarchy of preferences, albeit one in which national survival does not always rank at the top. In more technical terms, analysts would say that these irrational state actors still have an order of preferences that is “consistent” and “transitive.”

A “crazy” or “mad” leadership, however, would have no discernible order of preferences; its actions, for the most part, would be random and unpredictable. It goes without saying that facing a mad adversary in world politics is worse than facing a merely irrational adversary. In different terms, although it might still be possible and purposeful to try to deter an irrational enemy, there would be little point to seeking deterrence against a mad one.

“Do you know what it means to find yourselves face to face with a madman?” asks Luigi Pirandello’s Henry IV. “Madmen, lucky folk, construct without logic, or rather with a logic that flies like a feather.”

What is true for individuals is sometimes also true for states. In the sometimes-unpredictable theater of modern world politics, a drama that often bristles with genuine absurdity, decisions that rest upon ordinary logic can quickly crumble before madness. Dangers may reach the most portentous level when madness and a nuclear weapons capability come together.

Enter Israel and Iran. Soon, because not a single responsible member of the international community has demonstrated a determinable willingness to undertake appropriately preemptive action (“anticipatory self-defense,” in the formal language of law), the Jewish state may have to face an expressly genocidal Iranian nuclear adversary. Although improbable, a potentially suicidal enemy state in Iran, one animated by graphically precise visions of a Shiite apocalypse, cannot be dismissed out of hand.

Iran’s current leadership, and possibly even a successor reformist government in Tehran, could, at some point, choose to value Israel’s physical destruction more highly than even its own physical survival. Should this happen, the play would almost certainly end badly for all actors. In theatrical terms, exeunt omnes.

Nonetheless, Israel’s ultimate source of national security must lie in sustained nuclear deterrence. Although still implicit or ambiguous, and not yet open or disclosed, this Israeli bomb in the basement could crumble before madness.

Though the logic of deterrence has always rested upon an assumption of rationality, history reveals the persistent fragility of any such understanding. We already know all too well that nations can sometimes behave in ways that are consciously, and even conspicuously, self-destructive.

Sometimes, mirroring the infrequent but decisively unpredictable behavior of individual human beings, national leaders can choose to assign the very highest value to certain preferences other than collective self-preservation – a Gotterdammerung scenario.

For the moment, no single Arab or Iranian adversary of Israel would appear to be authentically irrational or mad. Harsh enemy rhetoric notwithstanding, no current adversary appears ready to launch a major first strike against Israel using weapons of mass destruction, due to the expectation that it would thereby elicit a devastating reprisal.

Of course, miscalculations and errors in information could still lead a perfectly rational enemy state to strike first, but this decision, by definition, would not be the outcome of irrationality or madness. In strategic thinking, judgments of rationality and irrationality are always based upon prior intent.

Certain enemy states, most likely Iran, could one day decide that excising the “Jewish cancer” or the “enemies of Allah” from the Middle East would be worth the most staggering costs. In principle, at least, this genocidal prospect could still be avoided by Israel using pertinent “hard target” preemptions. Increasingly, however, any such once-reasonable expressions of anticipatory self-defense are now difficult or impossible to imagine. Operationally, a successful preemption is now almost certainly too late.

All pertinent Iranian nuclear assets have likely been deeply hardened, widely dispersed, and substantially multiplied. For Israel, there would also be considerable political costs to any preemption. A preemptive attack, even one that becomes an operational failure, would elicit overwhelming public and diplomatic condemnation.

Alternative Reality – Destabilizing Morality on Memorial Day

Tuesday, April 24th, 2012

This Wednesday marks Israel’s Memorial day for those who fell founding and defending the State of Israel, as well as civilians murdered by Arab terrorism. It is one of the most solemn days in Israel, even known as the “secular Yom Kippur” — and most of Israel’s population observes the day and respects it. Israel collectively embraces the families of the fallen, and air raid sirens commemorate the day with a gut piercing sound as Israel grinds to a halt and we recall those who gave their lives fighting against the Arab enemies of Israel.

And yet, there exists a new type of Israeli, who sees a moral equivalence between Israel’s fallen, and those of the enemy. The IDF soldiers who died defending Israel and Israel’s civilians who were brutally slaughtered by Arab terrorists are now commemorated in a morally-agnostic “Memorial Day Alternative Ceremony” — sponsored by “Combatants for Peace”

“For the last 6 years “Combatants for Peace” has been holding a joint memorial event, to commemorate the Israeli and Palestinians victims of the conflict. This memorial service is attended by bereaved Israeli and Palestinian families and accompanied by artists.” (CFPeace)

This “alternative ceremony” intertwines the truth with lies, fact with fiction, and morality with evil, by jointly memorializing the “Israeli and Palestinians victims of the conflict,” and disgraces the memory of those who fought for the Jewish State.

Contorting history to “morally understand” the “Palestinian Narrative” for the sake of a possible peaceful dialogue is bad enough. Jointly memorializing IDF soldiers and victims of Arab terror, with “Palestinian victims of the conflict” is simply too offensive to comprehend.

Those who wish to create such an alternative reality have no moral compass whatsoever.

IDF Chief of Staff: Covert Ops, War Readiness Up

Monday, April 23rd, 2012

Israeli Chief of Staff Major General Benny Gantz has ordered Israel Defense Force soldiers to ramp up their covert operations in enemy countries, according to an interview published in Israel’s Yediot Ahronot newspaper.

“You almost won’t find a point in time where something isn’t happening somewhere in the world,” the Associated Press quoted him as saying. “I am escalating all those special operations.”

Gantz also stressed the critical nature of dealing with the Iranian nuclear program in 2012. “In principle, we are ready to act,” Gantz told Yediot Ahronot, ahead of Israel’s 64th Independence Day. “We are preparing our plan accordingly.”

Gantz called the possibility of Israel entering into war “higher than in the past” due to regional instability,” but also said there are no indications that any war is imminent.  And while Gantz believes a future war would involve missiles falling in Israel, “I don’t advise anyone to test us on this front,” he said.

“When (Hezbollah leader Hassan) Nasrallah comes out of his bunker, he’s concerned – and rightfully so,” Gantz said.  He saw what happened to Lebanon last time, and it won’t be close to what will happen to Lebanon next time.”

GSS Exposes Plot by Terrorist Released in Shalit-Deal to Kidnap IDF Soldiers

Wednesday, April 18th, 2012

Hamas terrorist Omar Abu Sanina was released from Israeli jail last year, as part of the deal to free Gilad Shalit from Hamas captivity. Formerly a Fatah operative, Abu Sanina was sentenced to life in prison for murder. While in prison, he was recruited by Hamas agents, writes the new website Hamas Terorism 101, which is published by IDFBlog.com.

Recently, Abu Sanina sent a memory stick to his family in Judea and Samaria, detailing instructions for how to kidnap an Israeli soldier. Abu Sanina intended for the information to reach operatives who he had recruited, but the memory stick was captured by the Shin Bet. It included the following excerpts:

One should avoid hiding [the kidnapped soldier] in deserted places such as caves or forests, unless it’s their body or severed head. If dealing with a live person, which will need to be visited at least once a week (for supplying food etc.) it is best to hide them in a house, a farm, a workplace or similar.

Resources, weapons, and explosives should be prepared ahead of time. This with extreme caution and in the proper methods. It is possible to obtain weapons from the enemy, even if it necessitates the use of “cold” weaponry [knives, blades] first.

The first stage is to build a small team according to the orders, equipping its members with all the equipment, and training them in executing uncomplicated attacks.

We will be informed of the kidnapping only after its successful execution, and only through an encrypted channel. One must not talk openly or give away details, except in face-to-face meetings. We will officially announce the kidnapping via the Supreme Military Council.

Islamic Jihad Says Abbas Should Quit Talks with Israel

Monday, April 9th, 2012

The Palestinian news agency Ma’an reprts that Islamic Jihad leader Sheikh Nafeth Azzam on Monday urged PA President Mahmoud Abbas to walk out on negotiations with Israel.

Addressing relatives of detainees at a demonstration outside Red Crescent headquarters in Gaza City, Azzam said it made no sense for Abbas to be sending a letter to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in an attempt to break the deadlock in peace negotiations.

“We tell the president that there is no point in sending a letter to the enemy,” Azzam said.

“We hope that the president will be clear about his positions and give up on the approach of the negotiations with Israel,” he added.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/islamic-jihad-says-abbas-should-quit-talks-with-israel/2012/04/09/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: