Via
NC Links and Thinks
The Iron Dome saved many lives, but has other effects as well.
The
author is an Intelligence analyst specializing in Israeli affairs at
Max Security Solutions , a geo-political risk consulting firm based in
the Middle East. He is also an active reservist in Israel’s Air Defense
Command
During last week’s Operation Defensive Pillar, Israelis and the
world at large witnessed the unprecedented success of the Iron Dome air
defense system. After all was said and done, Iron Dome operators
successfully shot down more than 87 percent of incoming Grad, Katyusha,
and Qassam rockets over Israeli urban centers, potentially saving
countless lives.
However, this new capability may cost Israel and
its grand strategy for achieving a lasting peace with defensible borders
in the long term. Ultimately, the Iron Dome’s success may have limited
the Jewish State's ability to act against terrorist groups, inciting
such groups to execute more innovative methods of attack, thus making a
sequel for operation Pillar of Defense ever more imminent.
After witnessing the tactical, operational, and strategic
advantages
the Iron Dome provided during eight days of heavy rocket fire, the
debate over how the system affects Israel's grand strategy continues
nevertheless.
One of the more compelling arguments against wide
scale use of the Iron Dome is rooted in the nature of the war that is
fought between Israel and Palestinian Arab terrorists. Israel, like many
Western countries, fights post-heroic warfare, characterized by the
disinclination to make sacrifices, or to endanger. On the other hand,
the actions of the terrorists can be differentiated as so called
'heroic' warfare in that sense, due to the high level willingness to
target civilian population and yes, even to die for their cause.
By
largely neutralizing the threat posed by rocket fire on civilians, the
Iron Dome thus prevented Israeli decision-makers from engaging in a
diplomatically and politically costly ground operation, as the needed
justification for such action has mitigated along with the risk posed by
rockets slamming into Israeli urban centers.
That said, the apparent
overall
success of the Iron Dome has in fact also counterproductive effects. In
low-intensity conflicts between a state and non-state actor, victory is
determined mostly by perceptions as opposed to military gains. By
utilizing the Iron Dome, Israel has significantly lowered the potential
for casualties on its side, while continuing to inflict casualties on
the other side. As a result, and in an attempt to display themselves as
victors in the new environment created by the Iron Dome, Hamas
terrorists intensified both the rate and range with which they fired
missiles.
This is also likely to continue in the future, as
promised shortly after the cease fire enacted on November 21 by a
top terrorist leader who said that next time they will have longer range
rockets with bigger warheads.
Iron Dome’s success also bore clear negative implications in the
international arena, highlighted by the immense international
pressure against a ground operation, yet coupled with support for
Israel’s right to defend itself. In the next round of hostilities,
Israel will have even more difficulty garnering international support for operations against terrorists from both the air, and on ground than it had in the latest operation.
If
this new environment is to persist,
world leaders will likely have
trouble seeing Israel's justification for wide-scale operations with an
extremely low casualty rate among the Israeli citizenry, and the high
civilian cost on the other side.
*Don't think y'all would have any trouble if it was a member of your family. Morons.
