Gadi Eisenkot - Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association

Analysis Iran’s Soleimani Seeks New Balance of Terror With Israel. For Now, He Failed

Amos Harel — Fri, 25 Jan 2019 11:34:09 +0000

Netanyahu and new army chief reap benefits from Syria strikes – but who will sound the alarm bells when Israel approaches the precipice of war?

Office of the Iranian Supreme Le

Political advisers in the country, currently busy promoting Knesset candidates, would give anything for someone to love their clients the way the Israeli media loves its chiefs of staff. The series of blows exchanged between Israel and Iran in Syria earlier this week was described by one newspaper as a resounding Israeli victory, and by another as a brilliant ambush that the new Israel Defense Forces chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Aviv Kochavi, set for his adversary, the Iranian general Qassem Soleimani. In Haaretz, too, cartoonist Amos Biderman depicted Kochavi piloting a warplane and bombing Soleimani with missiles, while the latter wonders whether this is what a vegetarian chief of staff looks like.

So, on the domestic propaganda front, the IDF chalked up a victory. That narrative was fondly adopted by the newspapers and the electronic media. Kochavi, who is far from enthusiastic about the frequent mention of his dietary preferences, set out to correct any false impression during the ceremony marking his installation, when he talked about his wish for the IDF to be a “lethal army, efficient and innovative.” The attacks in Syria and the reports that followed also helped the cause.

>> In its battle against Iran, Israel is dependent on Russia’s plans for Syria | Analysis ■ Why the rebuilding of Syria isn’t going to happen | Opinion ■ Israel hit several Syrian air defense batteries in Sunday’s strikes <<

The operation the Israel Air Force launched, according to Syrian sources, at midday on Monday in the vicinity of the Damascus airport was apparently based on intelligence received about concerning new Iranian arms shipments. The Revolutionary Guards’ Quds Force, of which Soleimani is the commander, responded with a move that had been planned some time in advance: by firing an intermediate-range, surface-to-surface missile into northern Israel. The IDF, too, appears to have planned for such a scenario: The Iron Dome system intercepted the lone missile successfully. A few hours later, there was a fierce Israeli response in the form of an extensive attack, in which various Iranian targets in the Damascus area were bombed and Syrian air-defense batteries were knocked out of action after they opened fire at the Israeli aircraft.

This sequence of events is not very different from what occurred last April-May, when the Iranians and the Syrians sustained casualties in a series of Israeli attacks. They tried to respond at that time, too, by means of a series of operations that the IDF preempted. And back then, as well, a final Iranian act of vengeance failed, when a volley of dozens of rockets aimed at Israel met a frustrating end, as far as Soleimani was concerned: Most of the rockets landed on the Syrian side of the border, on its part of the Golan Heights, and the few that got through were intercepted by Iron Dome.

Indeed, in May, the media also praised the heroism and wisdom of the army’s commanding officers – although it’s now all the more clear that nothing was decided: The Iranians did not abandon their efforts to smuggle weapons to Hezbollah in Lebanon via Syria, or to widen their military foothold in Syria. And then this week too Soleimani tried – and failed again – to impose a new deterrent balance in the area by signaling to Israel that when it decides to attack in Syria, it must take into account not only Syrian antiaircraft fire but also the possibility of a heavy missile being launched into Israeli territory.

Israel’s victory in May was thus less clear-cut than many tended to believe. Nothing has been settled yet. What’s underway now is an exchange of blows amid an overall, lengthy campaign, most of it at taking place at relatively low intensity, far from public scrutiny.

According to IDF Brig. Gen. (res.) Shimon Shapira, an expert on Iran and Hezbollah who is now a senior research associate at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, this week’s events show that the Iranians are willing to take risks against Israel, even to the point of precipitating a limited confrontation with the IDF.

“From Iran’s perspective,” Shapira says, “the Israeli attacks cannot be countenanced, certainly in light of the end of the Israeli policy of ambiguity and its readiness to assume direct responsibility for attacking targets in Syria.”

Political security

Another puzzling issue concerns the scale of Iran’s arms-smuggling efforts and its attempt to entrench itself in Syria. Just last month, the IDF claimed that those efforts had been substantially diminished, in the wake of pressure from Moscow on Tehran. Russia, it was explained, is apprehensive that military friction between Iran and Israel on Syrian soil will hinder the continued stabilization of President Bashar Assad’s regime. Accordingly, the Russians were said to be trying to restrain both Iran and Israel. Now we’ve had two Israeli attacks in the Damascus area within 10 days. Was this an urgent operational need in light of a change that occurred on the ground, or an attempt to change the rules of the game (and preserve freedom of maneuver) in the skies of the north?

For some months, the chiefs of staff – first Gadi Eisenkot and now his successor, Kochavi – have appeared to be fully coordinated with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Initially, this situation prevailed to the chagrin of the defense minister, Avigdor Lieberman, who subsequently resigned. Lieberman pushed for a broad operation against Hamas in the Gaza Strip; Netanyahu and Eisenkot preferred to focus on the north, first in Operation Northern Shield, to destroy the attack tunnels dug by Hezbollah below the Lebanon border, and afterward in the ongoing resoluteness in Syria.

The developments of the past few months in the north benefited Netanyahu throughout: The situation did not lurch out of control and so far things have not deteriorated to the brink of war. The security-based agenda serves him vis-a-vis the public, given the double challenge he faces of the police investigations and the looming election. The IDF, too, would like to maintain good working relations and common interests with the prime minister, especially considering he is also the defense minister. Just as the operation against the underground tunnels supplied something of a militant finale to Eisenkot’s tenure, the attacks in Syria are now helping to establish an aggressive image for his successor.

AFP

This is all the more pertinent with Kochavi facing a more important and more urgent mission, for which he will need Netanyahu’s full support: the formulation of a new force-building plan for the IDF. There are multiple advantages inherent in close cooperation between the political and military arenas. Yet, a different question arises: With the continuation of the attacks in Syria being convenient to both of them, will there be someone to sound the alarm if the confrontation with the Iranians escalate to the point at which we are liable to lose control?

On Wednesday, following two days of silence, a spokeswoman for the Russian Foreign Ministry condemned the latest attack in Syria and called on Israel to desist from further such operations. It’s possible that these bombing runs – and the scrapping of the policy of ambiguity, in the form of declarations by Eisenkot and Netanyahu (the latter even tweeted that he had “renovated the airport in Damascus”) – went too far from the perspective of Moscow and Tehran. The result could be a strategic misstep, to which the IDF will also have contributed its part.

A very similar process, in which a security problem is intertwined with political needs, is also underway with regard to the Gaza Strip. Neither the prime minister nor the army want a war there and therefore both agreed to an arrangement whereby Qatar would inject $15 million a month into the Strip – even though it’s clear that part of that money ultimately makes its way to Hamas. But Netanyahu wants to be elected to a fifth term as premier, and Lieberman’s persistent sniping about how Israel is paying protection money to Hamas doesn’t help him among right-wing voters.

As a result, the latest monthly transfer of Qatari money, which is brought in in the form of cash in suitcases, was delayed for two weeks. Then this week, Islamic Jihad, for reasons of its own, initiated two attacks along the Israel-Gaza border fence and exacerbated the dilemma. It was even less convenient for Israel to approve the transfer of the money following the shooting incidents, but a delay in delivery would increase the chance of a violent clash with Hamas, which is also dangerous for Netanyahu during an election campaign. (Late Thursday, the cabinet approved a transfer of funds to Hamas, which immediately announced its refusal to accept it.)

Missed opportunities

Stanley McChrystal, the retired U.S. Army general who was commander of American forces in Afghanistan and before that of special ops in Iraq, apparently didn’t read the latest reports from Israel about Qassem Soleimani’s painful defeat. An article he published this week in Foreign Policy contains surprising praise for the Iranian general.

The tone McChrystal takes in writing about Soleimani, who is responsible for the deaths of no few Americans and Israelis, borders on admiration: “The humble leader’s steady hand has helped guide Iranian foreign policy”; and also, “there is no denying his successes on the battlefield”; and even, “Soleimani is running the Syrian civil war.” “Arguably,” McChrystal adds, the Quds Force commander is “the most powerful and unconstrained actor in the Middle East today.”

The American general describes the Iranian adversary as a combined product of the Islamic Revolution in his country and of the protracted Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s. Iran’s complex political arena has allowed him to head the force for 21 consecutive years. His success is due to his skills, but also to the stability afforded by such a lengthy tenure, the kind that American commanders can only envy. Soleimani, McChrystal writes, is an extraordinarily dangerous person – and he occupies a position that could affect the future of the Middle East.

In 2007, McChrystal relates, U.S. forces under his command tracked a convoy in which Soleimani was traveling from Iran to the Kurdish city of Erbil in northern Iraq. “There was good reason to eliminate Soleimani,” whose troops were building the roadside bombs that were activated by Shi’ite militias and ravaging American convoys in Iraq at the time. In the end, however, the decision was made not to liquidate him. The Americans observed the convoy until it reached Erbil, by which time “Soleimani had slipped away into the darkness.”

That wasn’t the only time Soleimani was in the crosshairs of either the Americans or other foes. A year later, in February 2008, Imad Mughniyeh, who was described as the commander-in-chief of Hezbollah, was assassinated in Damascus. In 2015, The Washington Post quoted American intelligence personnel as saying that Soleimani had been standing next to Mughniyeh when the latter got into a jeep in which a bomb had been planted. According to the paper, the assassination was a joint Israeli-American operation, and it was the Americans who at the last minute vetoed the killing of Soleimani as well, on the grounds that he was not an original target of the operation.

In his exit interviews with Israel’s TV news programs, Gadi Eisenkot was asked over and over about the possibility of Israel deciding to assassinate Soleimani. Eisenkot chose not to respond.

Source: https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-iran-s-soleimani-seeks-new-balance-of-terror-with-israel-for-now-he-failed-1.6872615

[Disclaimer]

The post Analysis Iran’s Soleimani Seeks New Balance of Terror With Israel. For Now, He Failed first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

Opinion: Citizens of Israel, Get the Bomb Shelters Ready

Israel Harel — Thu, 15 Nov 2018 10:47:09 +0000

In Iran, Syria, Lebanon and beyond, they’re watching, listening and drawing conclusions from Israel’s conduct during the last round of hostility with Gaza.

REUTERS/Amir Cohen

Avigdor Lieberman cannot pretend his hands are clean. Contrary to his public disavowals, he was a full partner (“a responsible policy is needed”) in the policy of permissiveness being carried out, for quite some time now, by Benjamin Netanyahu and the defense establishment.

As defense minister, Lieberman did not put up a real fight against the prime minister, who declined to task the IDF with destroying the terror infrastructure and capacities in Gaza. In his meetings with the military chiefs, Lieberman did not ask them to come up with creative ways to destroy the weapons factories and take the leaders of the armed terror forces out of action.

He did not say to them: You’re against conquering Gaza? Then use your imaginations and come up with smart, sequenced operations that don’t require Gaza’s conquest. You have all the means and manpower necessary, and more. Get to work.

Many have heard Gadi Eisenkot say that if Hezbollah were to fire even a fraction of its 150,000 rockets, the results would be catastrophic. But the IDF chief of staff has also reassured his audiences that the army has trained and is prepared to confront such a danger, and that the enemy will be very sorry if it dares fire rockets at Israel. For many years now, the IDF has been contending rather continuously with the danger of the Hamas rockets, and fierce warnings have been issued to that terrorist group as well. In these years, Eisenkot could have proven in the south – to Iran, Hezbollah and the Israeli public – that his warnings regarding rockets in the north are credible.

Has he proven this? Do Hamas and Islamic Jihad have reason to be “very sorry,” or sorry at all, for the thousands of rockets they’ve fired? The air force may bomb “quality targets,” but how could 470 rockets have fallen on southern Israel this past week? If Eisenkot can’t prevent rocket barrages on this front, where the resistance is much less potent that what would be expected in the north, then why should Hamas (or we) believe him when the day comes – and it surely will come – that Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah’s fate will be any different than that of Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar?

In an ongoing failure that could cost us thousands of casualties and damage to the most vital infrastructure, we’ve allowed Hezbollah to arm itself with a huge trove of missiles, including strategic ones, without any real effort to prevent it. Hamas has learned from this and armed itself with thousands of rockets too. While Hezbollah restrains itself for the time being, Hamas goes on firing them at civilian targets in Israel.

In Iran, Syria, Lebanon and beyond, they’re watching, listening and drawing conclusions from all this. Whenever Iran decides, it could instruct Hezbollah to fire rockets at Israel, and not just at the north.

The IDF is also studying the situation and drawing conclusions, we’re told. Maybe. But when it comes to Hezbollah and Hamas, we can plainly see that such statements don’t mean much.

Residents near the Gaza border, already anticipating the coming rounds of rocket attacks, are venting their fury. Opposition leaders say Netanyahu should be ashamed. Yet they refrain from directing the same criticism at the ones backing – and some say leading – the policy of permissiveness: the defense establishment.

This is the truth, and it is known to all, particularly to the enemy. Citizens of Israel, get the bomb shelters ready.

Source: https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-citizens-of-israel-get-the-bomb-shelters-ready-1.6657196

[Disclaimer]

The post Opinion: Citizens of Israel, Get the Bomb Shelters Ready first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

Israeli military chief wants closer Saudi ties as Iran tensions rise

Peter Beaumont — Fri, 17 Nov 2017 22:29:24 +0000

In ‘unprecedented’ interview, Gen Gadi Eisenkot said moderate Arab states must collaborate to ‘deal with’ Tehran

Israeli tanks take part in a training session. Gadi Eisenkot, the chief of general staff of the Israel defence forces, gave the interview to Elaph. Photograph: Atef Safadi/EPA

Israel’s military chief has given an “unprecedented” interview to a Saudi newspaper underlining the ways in which the two countries could unite to counter Iran’s influence in the region.

Speaking to the Saudi newspaper Elaph, Gen Gadi Eisenkot described Iran as the “biggest threat to the region” and said Israel would be prepared to share intelligence with “moderate” Arab states like Saudi Arabia in order to “deal with” Tehran.

The interview, however, is particularly striking in its very public and confrontational messaging: an appeal by Israel to Riyadh for a joint action on Tehran, delivered by Israel’s most senior soldier.

It is the latest dramatic twist in weeks of turmoil in the region, which followed an unexpected purge of Saudi princes and officials by crown prince Mohammad bin Salman, who has also increasingly locked Saudi Arabia on a path to confrontation with Iran.

While Israel and Saudi Arabia do not have diplomatic relations, they have been edging closer recently, including a visit last year by a retired Saudi general heading a delegation seeking to encourage better relations.

Eisenkot told Elaph that the two countries agree about Iran’s intentions and that Israel is increasingly “highly regarded by the moderate countries in the region”. Asked about Israeli intelligence sharing with Saudi Arabia, he insisted: “We are prepared to share information if it is necessary. There are many mutual interests between them [Saudi Arabia] and us.”

The interview – described by the Israeli newspaper Haaretz as “unprecedented” – would have required Israeli political approval at the highest level, given the lack of diplomatic relations with Saudi Arabia. It is significant for its intended symbolism, designed to show off a warmer relationship with Riyadh in public, not least the emerging US-backed axis against Iran.

“There’s an opportunity to form a new international coalition in the region with President Trump,” Eisenkot added. “We need to carry out a large, comprehensive strategic plan to stop the Iranian threat.”

Last week Saudi Arabia ordered its citizens to leave Lebanon immediately, escalating a regional standoff with Iran centred on the fragile state, which it claims is being run by Tehran’s proxy, Hezbollah. The move followed the unexpected resignation of Lebanon’s prime minister, Saad Hariri, citing Iranian influence across the region and claiming he feared for his safety.

Tensions have also been rising over the conflict in Yemen, where a Saudi-led coalition is fighting against Iranian-backed Houthi rebels.

Echoing the recent rhetoric of Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Eisenkot charged Iran with “seeking to take control of the Middle East creating a [Shia] crescent from Lebanon to Iran and then from the Gulf to the Red Sea,” adding that “we must prevent this from happening”.

“In this matter there is complete agreement between us and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, which has never been our enemy. It has not fought us nor have we fought it.

“When I was at a meeting of the [US] joint chiefs of staff in Washington and heard what the Saudi representative had to say, I found it identical to what I think in the need to confront Iran and its expansion in the region.”

Eisenkot added that at present Israel has no intention of attacking the Iranian-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon. “We have no intention of attacking Hezbollah in Lebanon leading to a war,” he told the paper. “However we will not accept a strategic threat to Israel.”

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/nov/17/israeli-military-chief-wants-closer-saudi-ties-as-iran-tensions-rise

[Disclaimer]

The post Israeli military chief wants closer Saudi ties as Iran tensions rise first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.