Friday, April 19, 2024
Friday, April 19, 2024
Get the Daily
Briefing by Email

Subscribe

IDF CONTAINS THREATS FROM IRAN, HEZBOLLAH, HAMAS, AND CYBER-ATTACKS WITH CUTTING-EDGE TECHNOLOGY

 

 

The F-35 is a Supercomputer in the Sky: Anna Ahronheim, Jerusalem Post, 18 Dec. 2016— To the joy of many in Israel’s defense establishment, Israel’s most advanced piece of weaponry, a pair of F-35 stealth fighter jets, landed in Nevatim Air Base late Monday after a six-hour delay.

Bombs or Missiles – Which Way Should the IDF Go?: Yossi Melman, Jerusalem Report, Jan. 12, 2017— The defeat of the opposition rebels and the recapturing of Aleppo have boosted the morale of the regime of Bashar Assad and his Iranian, Hezbollah and Russian allies.

Israeli Defense in the Age of Cyber War: Gil Baram, Middle East Quarterly, Winter, 2017— From the early days of statehood, technology occupied a prominent place in Israel's national security concept as it sought to establish a qualitative edge over its vastly more populated and better endowed Arab adversaries.

Israel Divided Over Conviction of Hebron IDF Shooter: Ben Caspit, Al-Monitor, Jan. 4, 2017 — The fall of Aleppo just weeks before Barack Obama leaves office is a fitting stamp on his Middle East policy of retreat and withdrawal.

 

On Topic Links

 

In Israeli Military, Guarded Optimism for 2017: Barney Breen-Portnoy, Algemeiner, Dec. 30, 2016

Women, Faith and the IDF: Editorial, Jerusalem Post, Jan. 3, 2017

The Keyboard Warriors of the IDF: Ami Rojkes Dombe, Israel Defense, Jan. 5, 2017

The IDF’s New Social Contract: Caroline Glick, Breaking Israel News, Jan. 10, 2017

              

 

 

THE F-35 IS A SUPERCOMPUTER IN THE SKY

Anna Ahronheim

Jerusalem Post, 18 Dec. 2017

 

To the joy of many in Israel’s defense establishment, Israel’s most advanced piece of weaponry, a pair of F-35 stealth fighter jets, landed in Nevatim Air Base late Monday after a six-hour delay. But the jet fighters, which had been grounded in Italy due to fog, are only the beginning, with Israel expecting to receive a total of 50, two full squadrons, by 2022.

 

“Israel never had a stealth fighter before the F-35; it is a huge jump and will be a huge challenge,” Brig.-Gen. (res.) Abraham Assael told The Jerusalem Post before the planes landed, adding that “it is a very interesting time for our air force,” as the F-35 “is more like a system than a plane, and it will take time to fully understand the system.” The plane, he said, “is an enigma,” and after years of development of the most expensive plane in history, the advanced jet will, according to senior Israeli officials, give Israel complete air superiority in the region for the next 40 years. Lt.- Col. Yotam, the squadron commander of the Adir, as the Israeli version of the F-35 is called, added that the Adir was purchased “in order to attack places that we are not always able to attack.”

 

The fifth-generation jet “is a quantum leap in relation to the combat aircraft we have today,” according to Yotam, designed to fly longer and faster than most fighter jets. Its extremely low radar signature allows it to operate undetected deep inside enemy territory, evading advanced missile-defense systems like the Russian-made S-300s and S-400s deployed both in Syria and Iran. Those missile-defense systems pose an “obvious risk to Israel’s air force, and we cannot ignore their presence in the area,” Assael said.

 

But the need for the jet was also a subject of fierce debate in the government, where some wondered whether such an expensive jet was necessary, questioning whether Israel could have spent the $100 million plus per plane on hardware that could be more relevant to the current threats facing Israel. The next conflict that Israel will face against Hamas or Hezbollah is likely not going to be a full-fledged war, and the F-35 will likely not need to use its stealth technology to strike targets, unless Hezbollah gets its hands on Russian-provided S-300 or S-400 surface-to-air missiles in Syria, an unlikely scenario. But Hezbollah is Israel’s most dangerous enemy, known to have a massive arsenal of advanced weaponry, given to it by its Iranian patrons, and technological advances along with battlefield experience gained by the group in Syria.

 

Another terrorist group on Israel’s borders, Islamic State, continues to fight against Western air and ground forces relatively successfully, downing aircraft over Syria and Iraq. While Islamic State has been losing significant amounts of territory, its branch in the Sinai Peninsula is their strongest, having killed hundreds of Egyptian security forces, downed a Russian passenger plane, fired rockets toward Israel and released videos showing terrorists with man-portable air-defense systems.

 

But it’s not only terrorist groups that pose a threat to Israel. According to a senior IDF officer, the military buildup in the Middle East is a significant problem. “We see arms deals totaling $200 billion in weapons in the Middle East. We are a small country with a lot of strategic targets, and that is clear to everyone.” In addition to the S-300s and S-400s on Israel’s northern border, to the south, Egypt has signed a deal with France to buy 24 Rafale fighter jets. The Saudis and Qataris have also bought the latest, most sophisticated F-15s, and Iran has expressed interest in purchasing Russian- made Sukhoi Su-30SM multi-role fighter jets.

 

According to Yiftah Shapir of the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv, it was crucial for Israel to refurbish its fleet of aircraft, as the IAF currently relies on the F-15 Baz and F-16 Barak. Israel received the first F-15s in 1977 and the first F-16s in 1980, and the first squadron of F-15s are due to be pulled from service next year. “These planes have now flown for close to 40 years,” Shapir told the Post, and the IAF has chosen the F-35 to replace them. “If you think about our security, we are currently relying on an airplane that is 40 years old. And since we get foreign military aid from the United States, we cannot even think about buying planes from somewhere else.”

 

Because Israel buys its aircraft using the Memorandum of Understanding signed between Jerusalem and Washington, there was no option to consider buying cheaper jets from European countries, and the possibility of buying from Russia or China is out of the question. As Israel awaited the arrival of the jets, US President-elect Donald Trump said that he would completely reevaluate the costly aircraft program, once he takes office on January 20. Taking to Twitter, Trump said the cost of the Lockheed Martin program was too high and that billions would be saved once he takes office. “The F-35 program and cost is out of control. Billions of dollars can and will be saved on military (and other) purchases after January 20,” Trump posted.

 

And if Trump cuts the F-35 program, the cost of the plane would skyrocket, and so would Israel’s bill.

 

The F-35 is a controversial plane with an expensive price tag of close to $100m. per plane, delays and at least 27 serious safety failures as of the end of October 2015, including one where flaws in the plane’s coolant system led to the United States Air Force grounding the jet a mere two months after they were declared combat ready in August. Eight of the planes grounded by the USAF belong to Israel…

[To Read the Full Article Click the Following Link—Ed.]

 

 

Contents

 

BOMBS OR MISSILES – WHICH WAY SHOULD THE IDF GO?

Yossi Melman

Jerusalem Report, Jan. 12, 2017

 

The defeat of the opposition rebels and the recapturing of Aleppo have boosted the morale of the regime of Bashar Assad and his Iranian, Hezbollah and Russian allies. Now they are contemplating their next move in Syria’s bloody civil war, which in March will mark its sixth year, having already resulted in over 450,000 dead, nearly one million wounded, and 10 million who have been uprooted from their homes. Assad’s victory in what used to be Syria’s largest city increases the chance of reducing the war to a manageable crisis, though all experts tend to believe that the rebels, especially the Islamist groups, are not going to lay down their arms and thus the war is far from over.

 

Israel is already very concerned about the emerging reality on its northern border. The worries derive from two related aspects: one is the possibility that Assad’s army will try to regain control of the border region, which at the moment is predominantly under the control of various rebel groups. Of even greater concern to the IDF is that the new developments in Syria will allow Hezbollah to return its focus to the Lebanese arena.

 

The Shi’ite Lebanese movement has been diligently maintaining the cease-fire along the Lebanese-Israeli border for the past decade, since the war of 2006. It has done so for two reasons: first and foremost, the heavy blow it suffered at the hands of the IDF in that war. Despite the misplaced claims at the time that the war was an Israeli failure, its deterrence has continued to hold.

 

The second reason is Hezbollah’s preoccupation with the Syrian civil war, in which it has suffered heavy losses – some 1,700 combatants killed and a further 6,000 wounded. This is a heavy toll for an army of 40,000 (the Israeli military considers Hezbollah an army for all intents and purposes, and no longer just a militia or a terrorist organization). It means that nearly 20 percent of Hezbollah troops were disabled in the war. On the other hand, Hezbollah gained valuable military experience and practice, as well as improving its capabilities and preparedness for a future battle with Israel.

 

Not that another round between Israel and Hezbollah is expected soon. Israeli intelligence believes that Hezbollah is not ready yet, and as a matter of policy is not interested in renewing hostilities in the foreseeable future. Not to mention that a decision to start a new war with Israel will be made primarily in Tehran. Hezbollah, as perceived by Iran, is basically an extension of Iranian power, an advanced post on the Mediterranean shores and a constant threat against Israel.

 

Nevertheless, the IDF continues to prepare for a future conflict in Lebanon. The biggest threat facing Israel is Hezbollah’s huge arsenal of rockets and missiles of all sorts and ranges. This arsenal is estimated to number between 80,000 and 100,000 rockets, most of which is made up of shortrange rockets of up to 40 kilometers. But Hezbollah also has a substantial number (more than 1,000) of long-range missiles that can reach up to 300 kilometers with heavy loads – warheads of 200 to 300 kilograms. Even worse, from the Israeli perspective, is the tremendous effort by Iranian and Hezbollah experts to improve the accuracy of the missiles. Israeli intelligence already knows that most of Israel’s strategic sites – including the nuclear reactor in Dimona, power stations, airports, water plants, as well as IDF bases including IAF air fields and emergency depots – are covered by these missiles.

 

Against this background, an important and interesting debate is taking place among the top echelon of the IDF and the Defense Ministry. At its center is the question whether to increase the number of IDF rockets and missiles as a response to the expected future scenario of a war with Hezbollah. The debate is primarily a matter of operational considerations, but it also has a financial dimension. The debate emerges more than six months after new Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman took office. Liberman is trying to make his imprint on Israel’s defense doctrine and the IDF’s operational plans. The new debate can be defined in short: “Bombs or rockets and ground missiles.”

 

Liberman knows that the next war with Hezbollah will be very tough, especially in the north. According to IDF war scenarios, the north – roughly defined as an area within the range of 40-60 kilometers from the border – will be heavily hit by thousands of rockets. The IDF estimates that in the first five days of the war a daily average of 1,000 rockets and missiles will be fired against Israel. They will kill dozens, if not hundreds, of people, cause heavy damage to property, and rural communities are expected to be evacuated.

 

Among the targets likely to be hit are IDF bases and, in particular, air force bases. Under such a heavy bombardment, the Israel Air Force may face operational limitations. In that event, less IAF sorties mean less bombs and less firepower to be directed at Hezbollah. Therefore, Liberman believes that the IDF has to diversify the range of measures at its disposal in order to punish the enemy and inflict on it the necessary firepower.

 

For such a purpose today, the main, if not only, meaningful arm for both strategic and tactical aims available to the IDF is the air force. But a senior Israeli security official has told The Jerusalem Report that under heavy rocket fire, the air force may not be sufficient to empower the IDF with the requisite operational freedom and maneuverability. The official adds that the IDF needs to increase its arsenal of mid-range rockets and missiles – up to 200 kilometers. The proposal advanced by the senior official is that in the coming years, the IDF will purchase hundreds of such rockets which are capable of carrying warheads of 200-250 kilograms of explosives.

 

Both Israel Military Industries (IMI) and Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) have already produced families of rockets and missiles, which are mainly for export to foreign armies. Firing them against Hezbollah concentrations can be a proportional and suitable response to the expected launching of rockets and missiles against Israel, and can fill in the gap, which may be created if IAF will face its limitations.

 

Extended and impressive firepower doesn’t have only military implications but also psychologically on the civilian population, as Israel itself witnessed in the 1991 Gulf War against Iraq. Not only was the Israeli public taken by surprise but also the defense establishment, when at around 2 a.m. on January 18 Tel Aviv and Haifa were hit by a salvo of Iraqi Scud missiles. It was the first time the Israeli home front had become a war zone since the 1948 War of Independence…

[To Read the Full Article Click the Following Link—Ed.]

 

                                                           

Contents                                                                                                                               

ISRAELI DEFENSE IN THE AGE OF CYBER WAR                                                                           

Gil Baram                                                                                                              

Middle East Quarterly, Winter, 2017

                       

From the early days of statehood, technology occupied a prominent place in Israel's national security concept as it sought to establish a qualitative edge over its vastly more populated and better endowed Arab adversaries. In the past few years, a new technological challenge, that of cyber warfare, has grown to the point of becoming among the most critical threats to Israel's vital infrastructures in both the civil and the military-security sectors. Energy, water, communications and traffic networks, and an economy that relies heavily on computers must be viewed as being at risk. To respond to the new, evolving threats, Jerusalem must revise certain aspects of its security concept so as to ensure cyber superiority as an inseparable part of its national defense capabilities.

 

Cyber warfare is commonly defined as "the actions by a nation-state or international organization to attack and attempt to damage another nation's computers or information networks through, for example, computer viruses or denial-of-service attacks." A virus or a worm is essentially a program, often self-replicating and usually destructive, loaded onto a computer without the user's knowledge or wishes. A denial-of-service attack is a disruption to a user's access to a computer network caused by malicious intent. Advanced cyber capabilities are an effective way to deter Israel's enemies. One such example was the "Stuxnet" virus, attributed to a U.S. and Israeli operation, in which the functioning of centrifuges belonging to Iran's nuclear program was disrupted. Computers in other countries were also affected.

 

Countries conduct cyber-attacks mainly for political reasons to achieve strategic, economic, diplomatic, or military advantages by attacking military, government, or civil computer infrastructures. Cyber-attacks, like kinetic attacks, have a range of options—including denial of service attacks, vandalizing websites, espionage and information gathering, as well as attacks that can cause physical damage as did the Stuxnet worm that hit the Iranian centrifuges and was exposed in 2010.

 

The vast progress made in computer and information networks has created a new reality in which military communications infrastructures are often connected to their civilian counterparts. Both infrastructures are increasingly dependent on computers, and their protection is critical for both civilian and national security purposes. Once it was recognized that computers were weak points, cyber warfare technologies began to emerge, designed to attack an adversary's data assets and even cause significant physical damage remotely to systems without employing conventional or non-conventional weapons or sending soldiers into the battlefield. At the same time, security agencies and armed forces worldwide have been developing cyber defense capabilities to protect these vital infrastructures.

 

This dependence on cyber technologies is a global phenomenon and has put at risk national and public infrastructures that were once regarded as inaccessible and well-protected. Israel, which has been under threat since its inception, has needed to adapt its national security posture accordingly.

 

In the traditional Israeli approach to security, much effort is invested in intelligence, early warning, and deterrence so as to minimize the expenditure involved in maintaining a continuous state of alert. In this context, three problems that underlie every cyber-attack should be mentioned. The first is the problem of attribution, i.e., who ordered the attack and who launched it? The second is the difficulty in establishing the results of the attack and determining the extent of its success. The third problem is that of evidence: It is often difficult to determine whether the event under investigation occurred due to a technical failure or as a result of a cyber-attack.

 

The formulation of Israel's national security concept dates back to the pre-state era and continued to evolve in the face of the many threats that the nascent state had to address after its war of independence. Having concluded that the threat posed by its Arab adversaries was a given and persistent reality with which Israel was destined to contend in the foreseeable future, in October 1953, Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion presented a document to the cabinet regarded ever since as Israel's official national security doctrine.

 

Peace was the ultimate strategic goal of Ben-Gurion's security concept. However, since peace was likely to remain elusive, he argued that the proposed security concept would at least make the Arab states accept the existence of a Jewish state, if only begrudgingly. Essentially, the Israel that Ben-Gurion envisioned strove to have long periods of quiet and to hold off military confrontations as much as possible. However, if the need arose, it had to win a quick victory because of its small size and limited human resources…

[To Read the Full Article Click the Following Link—Ed.]

           

                                                                       

Contents

 

ISRAEL DIVIDED OVER CONVICTION OF HEBRON IDF SHOOTER

Ben Caspit

Al-Monitor, Jan. 4, 2017

 

The morning of Jan. 4 saw the end — for now at least — of an egregious incident, which sent shockwaves through the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), the political system and Israeli society in general over the past 10 months. A military tribunal convicted Sgt. Elor Azaria of manslaughter for the killing of a Palestinian terrorist, Abdel Fattah al-Sharif, after Sharif and another terrorist attacked an IDF post in Hebron on March

 

The entire incident was captured on film by volunteers from B’Tselem human rights organization and others on the scene. Azaria arrived several moments after the conclusion of the incident, when Sharif was already immobile and lying in a puddle of blood on the ground; he had been shot by an IDF soldier in order to prevent the attack. Azaria can be seen taking two steps forward, aiming his gun and shooting Sharif in the head at close range. One of the video clips went viral, resulting in an almost unprecedented blast of responses. The IDF spokesman, chief of staff and minister of defense were all quick to condemn the soldier’s actions, and the military police launched an investigation. Azaria claimed that he felt threatened by the wounded terrorist, and that he was worried he might have an explosive device. So he shot him.

 

Masses of Israelis came out in support of the soldier. A popular movement emerged in support of him, with the backing of right-wing politicians. The most prominent of these was Avigdor Liberman, who was then just a member of the opposition. The public spat has continued until now. This is the first time the Israeli public has turned against the IDF’s top brass en masse, condemning even Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Gadi Eizenkot, who was, until then, a sacrosanct figure in Israeli society.

 

The social and moral extremes of Israeli society came out against each other in full force. On one side were the “values of the IDF” (a term much used in Israel to demonstrate the high morals of its army), orders for opening fire (only when the target presents a danger for human lives) and the moral superiority that the IDF and Israel have prided themselves on for generations. On the opposing side were the uncompromising support of the people for its soldiers, the popular belief that “any terrorist who attacks Jews deserves to die” and the way that a growing sector of the Israeli public has come to demonize human rights organizations, the far left and various iterations of political correctness.

 

This conflict is also reminiscent of what happened in the recent election campaign in the United States, in which Donald Trump, a man driven by his most primal instincts, defeated the intellectually oriented Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton. In Israel, it was a conflict between gut and the head, and in the military court in Tel Aviv on Jan. 4 the head won — at least for now. The IDF can continue to take pride in its claim that it is “the most moral army in the world.” It is hard to imagine that many other armies would do the same as the IDF and try its soldiers for simply killing a terrorist who stabbed their friends a few minutes earlier. In many cases, incidents like this are whitewashed. In other cases, they end with some symbolic disciplinary hearing. This week, Azaria was convicted of manslaughter…

[To Read the Full Article Click the Following Link—Ed.]

 

Contents     

      

On Topic Links

 

In Israeli Military, Guarded Optimism for 2017: Barney Breen-Portnoy, Algemeiner, Dec. 30, 2016—While war will continue to rage in much of the region writ large, Israeli military forecasts for 2017 are cautiously optimistic that the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) may get through the year that began Sunday without having to wage major combat operations.

Women, Faith and the IDF: Editorial, Jerusalem Post, Jan. 3, 2017—The rise in the number of religious male soldiers being drafted into the IDF threatens to clash with another significant trend: the increasing integration of females in all areas of IDF service, including in many combat roles. As The Jerusalem Post’s Military Correspondent Anna Ahronheim reported this week, there has been a steady rise in the number of women being drafted into combat units and more are expected to be integrated in coming years.

The Keyboard Warriors of the IDF: Ami Rojkes Dombe, Israel Defense, Jan. 5, 2017—Over the last few years, IDF have experienced a substantial technological revolution. Warfare has become network-based, combat operations have evolved into combined-arms operations and the offensive layouts of IDF have come to rely on cutting-edge technology in order to close their strike loops and 'incriminate' targets within a matter of seconds. This is complemented by the trend within IDF in the last two years toward independent (in-house) development and maintenance of computer systems based on open-source code.

The IDF’s New Social Contract: Caroline Glick, Breaking Israel News, Jan. 10, 2017—Sgt. Elor Azaria, who was convicted of manslaughter Wednesday for shooting a terrorist in Hebron last March, is a symptom of what may be the most dangerous threat to Israeli society today. Azaria, a combat medic from the Kfir Brigade, arrived at the scene of an attack where two terrorists had just stabbed his comrades. One of the terrorists was killed, the other was wounded and lying on the ground, his knife less than a meter away from him.

 

 

 

 

Donate CIJR

Become a CIJR Supporting Member!

Most Recent Articles

Day 5 of the War: Israel Internalizes the Horrors, and Knows Its Survival Is...

0
David Horovitz Times of Israel, Oct. 11, 2023 “The more credible assessments are that the regime in Iran, avowedly bent on Israel’s elimination, did not work...

Sukkah in the Skies with Diamonds

0
  Gershon Winkler Isranet.org, Oct. 14, 2022 “But my father, he was unconcerned that he and his sukkah could conceivably - at any moment - break loose...

Open Letter to the Students of Concordia re: CUTV

0
Abigail Hirsch AskAbigail Productions, Dec. 6, 2014 My name is Abigail Hirsch. I have been an active volunteer at CUTV (Concordia University Television) prior to its...

« Nous voulons faire de l’Ukraine un Israël européen »

0
12 juillet 2022 971 vues 3 https://www.jforum.fr/nous-voulons-faire-de-lukraine-un-israel-europeen.html La reconstruction de l’Ukraine doit également porter sur la numérisation des institutions étatiques. C’est ce qu’a déclaré le ministre...

Subscribe Now!

Subscribe now to receive the
free Daily Briefing by email

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

  • Subscribe to the Daily Briefing

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.