What the U.S., and Its Next President, Can Learn from Israel about Responding to Disaster

Oct. 21 2016

Between terrorism and outright warfare, Israel has developed a good deal of finesse in dealing with crisis. Such finesse can be seen both in the policies of the government and its officials and, more importantly, in the resilience of the citizenry. Tevi Troy draws some lessons for America and its leaders:

First, resilience is not a given; it can and should be built and enhanced continuously in advance [of disaster]. . . . [S]trong societal resilience provides the primary leverage for countering terror and attenuating its intended impact.

The preparation and thought Israel puts into resilience means that the kind of citywide shutdowns that took place after the Boston marathon bombings would be unthinkable in Israel. Attacks take place, and far too often, but the citizens move on. The American president must lead by example and make sure that even if the U.S. is attacked, life goes on, and [show] that terror cannot defeat the will to live, and to fight.

Cyber-attacks are another reality of modern life—and of disaster preparedness. A massive cyber-attack on America’s power grid or transportation network could have devastating consequences nationwide. Here again, Israel can provide a model. Israel regularly experiences attempted cyber disruptions during flare-ups in conflicts with terror groups like Hamas. . . . The Israeli Defense Forces even have a division specifically dedicated to cyber defense. According to the unnamed head of that division, in [the 2014 Gaza war], “for the first time, there was an organized cyber-defense effort alongside combat operations in the field. This was a new reality.”

Welcome to Mosaic

Register now to get two more stories free

Register Now

Already a subscriber? Sign in now

Read more at Jerusalem Post

More about: Cyberwarfare, Israel & Zionism, Terrorism, U.S. Security

A Lesson from Moshe Dayan for Israel’s Syria Policy

Dec. 11 2019

In the 1950s, Jerusalem tasked Moshe Dayan with combating the Palestinian guerrillas—known as fedayeen—who infiltrated Israel’s borders from Sinai, Gaza, and Jordan to attack soldiers or civilians and destroy crops. When simple retaliation, although tactically effective, proved insufficient to deter further attacks, Dayan developed a more sophisticated long-term strategy of using attrition to Israel’s advantage. Gershon Hacohen argues that the Jewish state can learn much from Dayan’s approach in combating the Iranian presence in Syria—especially since the IDF cannot simply launch an all-out offensive to clear Syria of Iranian forces:

Sign up to read more

You've read all your free articles for this month


Sign up now for unlimited access to the best in Jewish thought, culture, and politics

Already have an account? Log in now

Read more at BESA Center

More about: Iran, Israeli Security, Moshe Dayan, Palestinian terror, Syria