The Pros and Cons, for Israel, of the U.S. Withdrawal from Syria

The American decision to remove its troops from Syria benefits Iran to Israel’s detriment, writes Yaakov Amidror, but there is also a potential upside for the Jewish state:

Israel must operate on the . . . assumption that has always been the foundation of [its] defense doctrine: that Israel will defend itself. This is the country’s raison d’être as well as the outcome of geopolitical realities. . . .

With respect to [Israel’s] battles against Iran, there will be no change after the withdrawal of American forces, for the simple reason that the American forces have not taken part in these battles. The U.S. did not even once act against the Iranian war machine that is emerging in Syria. All U.S. forces and efforts were invested in the elimination of Islamic State (IS). . . . [Nevertheless], the withdrawal of American forces will immediately open up new maneuvering possibilities for the Iranians, which were previously denied them due to the presence of the important American base in the region on the main transportation route connecting Iraq and Syria, close to the Jordanian border.

The Iranian dream of a land corridor from the Persian Gulf to the Mediterranean which will serve their logistic needs will quickly be realized after the American withdrawal. Such a move will make it much easier for Iran to transport equipment and forces by land, and therein lies its importance both to Hizballah and to the project of building an Iranian military infrastructure in Syria. . . . There is no doubt that this will pose a greater challenge to Israel. . . .

From Israel’s point of view, [however], there are [also] two possible benefits arising from the president’s decision. Once the U.S. has left the region, there will be one fewer player that Israel must consider when planning its operations in Syria. In general, an equation with fewer variables is easier to understand and deal with. . . . The withdrawal of the U.S. leaves Israel as the strongest and most stable country in the region and the only serious player with which the main Arab countries can cooperate in the confrontation with Iran and IS. The extent to which Israel’s position is strengthened as a result of the vacuum left by the Americans is difficult to assess, but the potential benefits are significant.

Read more at Jerusalem Institute for Strategic Studies

More about: Iran, Israel & Zionism, Israeli Security, Syria, U.S. Foreign policy

Hizballah Is Learning Israel’s Weak Spots

On Tuesday, a Hizballah drone attack injured three people in northern Israel. The next day, another attack, targeting an IDF base, injured eighteen people, six of them seriously, in Arab al-Amshe, also in the north. This second attack involved the simultaneous use of drones carrying explosives and guided antitank missiles. In both cases, the defensive systems that performed so successfully last weekend failed to stop the drones and missiles. Ron Ben-Yishai has a straightforward explanation as to why: the Lebanon-backed terrorist group is getting better at evading Israel defenses. He explains the three basis systems used to pilot these unmanned aircraft, and their practical effects:

These systems allow drones to act similarly to fighter jets, using “dead zones”—areas not visible to radar or other optical detection—to approach targets. They fly low initially, then ascend just before crashing and detonating on the target. The terrain of southern Lebanon is particularly conducive to such attacks.

But this requires skills that the terror group has honed over months of fighting against Israel. The latest attacks involved a large drone capable of carrying over 50 kg (110 lbs.) of explosives. The terrorists have likely analyzed Israel’s alert and interception systems, recognizing that shooting down their drones requires early detection to allow sufficient time for launching interceptors.

The IDF tries to detect any incoming drones on its radar, as it had done prior to the war. Despite Hizballah’s learning curve, the IDF’s technological edge offers an advantage. However, the military must recognize that any measure it takes is quickly observed and analyzed, and even the most effective defenses can be incomplete. The terrain near the Lebanon-Israel border continues to pose a challenge, necessitating technological solutions and significant financial investment.

Read more at Ynet

More about: Hizballah, Iron Dome, Israeli Security