iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
P.J. Dermer

GET UPDATES FROM P.J. Dermer
 

Israel's Human Calculus in the Equation to Attack Iran

Posted: 02/10/2012 7:53 pm

Will Israel attack Iran on a large operational scale? The debate has once again come center stage thanks to what is perceived in Israel as a lack of a clear message emanating from Washington. The plain message Israeli leaders seek is whether or not Washington has actual intentions behind its own hyperbole to stop Iran's march to nuclear weapons capability. Israeli interlocutors have made it known they would rather not act on their own. But if her leadership perceives that the international community, and the United States in particular, IS NOT going to take real action to stop Iran's quest, Israel will act in her own interests for two main reasons. First, concluding they have been left with no other choice. Second, due to influences and internalization of her unique set of "human cultural factors".

Understanding and assessing human cultural factors is important for US policy makers and intelligence community. In my first hand experience, they are often not weighted properly by intelligence analysts. Too much focus is placed on the objective technical aspects; the order of battle or various strike scenarios. While necessary, these don't paint a full picture.

What do I mean by human cultural factors and how do I assess them?

First, there is the influence of historical precedent. Israel's two previous unilateral attempts against Iraq and Syria, nuances aside, worked out in her favor.

Second, is the character of the key relevant political personalities involved. There could not be a more challenging lineup of political egos in Israel's national body politic than at present. Prime Minister Netanyahu's interests lie in sealing his place in Israel's history books. If he cannot do this via the vaunted Peace Process, like the majority of his predecessors have sought, then being remembered for launching one of the boldest and likely most controversial pre-emptive strikes in Israel's history is the next best thing. Minister of Defense Barak, once clearly singled out for his military achievements but reduced in stature for his overwhelming political failures, is in the same vein. Last, but not least is Foreign Minister Lieberman, whose cold and unemotional Russian based calculations and demonstrated passion to disdain logical analysis of actions and reactions make his predilection clear.

Third, are the relevant military personalities, primarily the position of the IDF Chief of General Staff, held by Lieutenant General Benny Gantz. Gantz also has a distinguished military history but disdains the need for its revelation. In Gantz's view, he performed his duties as a soldier and went off into the sunset after serving as Chief of Israel's Ground Forces. Unexpectedly back in uniform, Gantz's ego is in check, a welcomed counterweight to his political leadership. But Gantz is also the son of holocaust survivors. As such, Ahmadinejad's inflammatory rhetoric and distortion of history have likely burned themselves on Gantz's conscience. In his position, he does not have the priority of considering historic political outcomes, only the very tangible defense of not only Israel's citizens, but world Jewry as well. The weight of these demands coupled with continued Iranian unyieldingness should not be underestimated.

Finally, are the influences of contemporary Israeli military culture and history. There is no higher honor bestowed to an Israeli than the term "warrior." In modern times, the leading case in point of this personal character trait is Ariel Sharon. His exploits are legendary in civilian and military institutions alike. It is hard to find a past or serving military official who does not want to join Sharon on this pedestal. Moreover, Israeli academies of all disciplines embed the heroic principles and actions of their founding fathers noting the 1948 war of Independence; the IDF's surprise 1967 air campaign and routing of multiple Arab armies; the IDF's 1973 crossing of the Suez Canal; the 1976 Entebbe raid; and the 1981 raid against Iraq's nuclear reactor. But it has been a long time since Israel achieved something along these same heights. The 1982 Lebanon invasion; both Intifadas; the 2006 War against Hezbollah; and the 2009 assault into Gaza do not conjure equal historical billing. Many Israelis think it is long overdue to add another bold exploit to their historical archive. I deem it the lure of "historical footsteps".

In fairness to Israel's political leadership and their own egos aside, neither Israel's political nor military leadership can afford to ignore the interplay of the egos of their Iranian counterparts combined with their continued actions. Israel conducted pre-emptive strikes in 1956 and 1967 in view of her neighbors armament buildup coupled with the fomenting of Arab nationalism calling for Israel's destruction. Even more instructive, however, is in the fall of 1973 Israel did not act in the face of information and indicators that an attack was imminent. The ghosts of this indecision remain front and center in Israeli psyche today.

In sum, the debate above is instructive in its own right. But it is clearly in US interests to be more cognizant of the complex human cultural factors regarding Israeli decision making processes that are not as apparent in traditional intelligence channels as assessments of Israeli military force structure, operational readiness and technical capabilities. Our foreign policy and intelligence community should not limit analysis to Israel's decision-making processes via an objectively rational calculus. It is more that the rationality used will be bounded and influenced by key human factors, some objectively rational, but others tied more to personal ego, culture, tradition, and local historical influences.

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 35
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
SamSeven
You're either with Humanity or you're not.
09:57 AM on 02/13/2012
The 1982 Lebanon invasion; both Intifadas; the 2006 War against Hezbollah;
>>Israel lost that one.

and the 2009 assault into Gaza
>>Israeli massacre on unarmed civilian population is really brave. Yes bombing palestinians from the air and destroyed gaza's infrastructure is really brave.

do not conjure equal historical billing. Many Israelis think it is long overdue to add another bold exploit to their historical archive. I deem it the lure of "historical footsteps".

>>Sure go ahead bomb Iran and then the US will be pulled in to back Israel up like in 73 conflict.

Israel loves to pick on its neighbours then wondering why they hate Israel so much. Imperialism and beligerance only goes so far before there's blowback.
08:24 AM on 02/13/2012
The author seems to think that any attack by Israel against Iran would depend the the "egos" of Israel's leaders. Nodody in Israel wants a war, which would result in great damage to Israel and loss of life.
If it is all down to egos, why has Israel waited so long? - waited for Iran to place most of its enrichment facilities inside a mountain?

Ego has nothing to do with it. The calculus is whether Israel should wait for the mad mullahs to determine to right time to carry out its repeated threat to annihilate Israel.

And the Arab world is also terrified at the prospect of an Iran with nuclear weapons.
"Saudi king urged U.S. to attack Iran"

"Cut off the head of the snake," the Saudi ambassador to Washington, Adel al-Jubeir, quotes the king as saying during a meeting with General David Petraeus in April 2008.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/11/29/us-wikileaks-usa-idUSTRE6AP06Z20101129
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Nwo2012
Sue me, I boycott products from the settlements
05:28 AM on 02/13/2012
No war for israel. The israeli government is seriously deluded if it thinks the world is going to go to war to enforce israeli hegemony in the region.

israels days on the top table in the Middle East is behind it. Good riddance.
01:42 AM on 02/12/2012
I disagree with all four components:
1) There is no resemblance between taking out one overt facility and a large array of underground facilities.
2) I do not believe there is anyone that wishes to get to the point where we must act. This is too grave and too crucial for anyone to consider personal political gain.
3) General Gantz's opinion is NOT relevant. He is asked: "can you do it". And I think we all know the answer.
4) I am a warrior myself. It's a great honor. But we all aspire to live in peace with our neighbors and NOT to "add another bold exploit"". We would give up this honor in a heartbeat.

I agree with the lessons of the Holocaust. We must believe the President of Iran when he says he plans to eradicate Israel and we know he is acquiring the means to do so. I also concur that Israeli psyche is influenced by the lessons of the Yom Kipur War.

Not one Israeli believes we can strike on Iran and "win". We know it will NOT result in a peaceful Middle East. We know that the day after will not bring rejoicing like after Entebbe or Osirak.

We DO NOT want to do this.
If we DO act, it will be for one reason only: the conclusion that we have been left with no other choice.
jhNY
Mercy.
02:07 PM on 02/11/2012
It must be at least occasionally confounding to our world-striding military and diplomatic leadership here in the US, that our own future is irrevocably tied to the doings of a very few people in a very tiny place, over whom and over which we can seemingly exercise no control.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:24 PM on 02/11/2012
Ask yourself why the Middle East is important to the US. Oil?

Maybe not. The oil-producing nations have to sell it to someone. The US would be in a stronger position if it were to protect its ability to pay a good price for oil, rather than worrying about who is selling it. All of the Arab nations and Iran have huge problems with nascent democracy -- let them figure it out for themselves.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
1776 or 1984
IT'S AN EMPIRE, NOT A REPUBLIC!
09:29 AM on 02/11/2012
Here we go with the classic Good Cop / Bad Cop routine.

Both are gunning for regime-change for regional domination, not defense.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rbenjamin
Rule 5 rules
09:13 AM on 02/11/2012
This is a very informative post, although I must confess I haven't yet wrapped my hands around the full implications of how to fold the human cultural factors into the military ones.

It's interesting to me that the arc of Israel's self perceived iconic military feats go from large scale operations of '48, '56, '67 and '73, in which the whole was nation fully mobilized and often personally involved in combat, to the raids of Entebbe and Orsiak, carried out by small numbers of specialists. Citizen war to something more like single hero combat of ancient times. Equally important, a shift from wars of immediate existential impact to raids of mostly psychological impact (Entebbe) or raids with (arguably) long term strategic effects like Osirak. All the rather asymmetric actions from '82 on have lacked a full measure of either daring or full measure of national commitment.

Iran and Israel share no common border, so any military strike against Iran is going to score well in the daring category. However, if Iran has the means to retaliate by proxy with missiles over the Lebanese border, Israel may find itself in another asymmetrical conflict, this time with more civilian participation than the last rocket war and no lasting strategic gains.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:10 AM on 02/11/2012
The salient question is: Does Israel know that it, like Saudi Arabia, is our proxy state?
If they don't want to be our proxy state, let them do without the uncounted billions we provide for them for their defense. Then they can act with impunity and irresponsiblity.
photo
Vlady
Better Late
12:45 AM on 02/12/2012
>>Does Israel know that it, like Saudi Arabia, is our proxy state?

Apparently you are the only source of this confidential information.
photo
karim banned
A fool's mind is at the mercy of his tongue and a
12:22 PM on 02/12/2012
Israel was designed to be US proxy states.

Nobody has informed you that the roles has changed and now the tail is in control of the dog!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
alafonse
It's definitely a crap-shoot.
08:24 AM on 02/11/2012
People who are abused tend to end up being abusers. So it seems with Israel.
But there's absolutely no reason that the US should get involved in this harangue.
American people would just like to let the dust settle and have a little peace and quiet while they try to salvage what they can of their lives.
07:07 AM on 02/11/2012
Mr. Dermer's insights are enlightening and certainly valid. The Jew's long history of persecution and worse is too. Understandably, but not excusably, this baggage is responsible for Israel having made itself into a militant supremacist theocracy/ethnocracy with ICBM nukes; a very real and rapidly increasing threat to itself and to the whole world. A pariah among nations. America should support the Jewish state's healing, but never its cruel and deranged fixation on domination and vengeance.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rbenjamin
Rule 5 rules
09:22 AM on 02/11/2012
Theocracy is pure nonsense. Religious parties have influence, but nothing close to control. As for ethnocracy, Israel's parliamentary system is a volatile forum for all kinds of ethnicity, Jewish and otherwise.

If you are just waking up to Israel as a nuclear power, you haven't been paying much attention.
11:28 AM on 02/11/2012
Does, for instance, Israeli's Rabbinical Authority not sort Jew from goy with emphasis on maternal bloodlines and marriage? Based of their rulings, are applicants not either rejected or assigned to one of the multiple levels of citizenship which allow or deny crucial privileges including where they are, and are not, permitted to live?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Want2knowY
12:52 PM on 02/11/2012
...and if the religious parties tried to gain control in Israel, they would likely lose most, if not all, of their influence. The point is not lost on them, either.
09:42 AM on 02/13/2012
Wish I could fan you again. Succinct and to the point. Faved!
03:59 AM on 02/11/2012
it is non of USA to be involved in Israel/ Iran affair. let them beat the hell of each other .our congress should shut the hell up and not get involved.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rbenjamin
Rule 5 rules
09:25 AM on 02/11/2012
So, your position is that if Congress stay out, what happens in the Middle East won't affect us? You want the United States to have no say in its own destiny?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:16 PM on 02/11/2012
In fact, the Middle East is much less important to the destiny of the US than most of us seem to imagine. All of us would be far better off if we paid more attention to debt and the economy.
photo
Vlady
Better Late
10:39 PM on 02/10/2012
An excellently pictured glimpse into psychological predicament and perspectives supposedly attributed to Israeli leaders. It reminded me the part of Leo Tolstoy's 'War and Peace', where the author contemplated elaborately on, in your words, 'Human Calculus in the Equation to Attack' Moscow by Napoleon and on psychological predicament of Russian general Kutuzov.
10:23 PM on 02/10/2012
This seems to be a well reasoned article. The fact that a major war would undoubtedly throw an economically weak world over the financial precipice, is not a factor in the Israeli calculus. All in all a very well reasoned article.
10:07 PM on 02/10/2012
Israel should do whatever it thinks best with Iran. That is Israel's right, given the hostility of Iran to Israel. We should make it clear, however, that the US will not support Israel in an effort that we believe to be contrary to US interests. That is our right.
03:51 AM on 02/11/2012
well said
08:42 PM on 02/10/2012
A couple of good things could have been added to this article. 1) The wars described above were in self defense--when Israel was under attack. 2) The Iranian regime is a real threat to the existence of Israel. http://483years.blogspot.com/
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rbenjamin
Rule 5 rules
09:31 AM on 02/11/2012
Point 1) is handled pretty well in the article. As for point 2) the Iranian regime may be a threat, but not a credible existential threat. Even in the worst case scenario of a nuclear Iran, it is only an existential threat by means of mutual destruction. This has been a routine threat level for many nations, USA included, post WWII.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Want2knowY
12:56 PM on 02/11/2012
...but a nulear Iran does pose threats to Israel that go beyond any potential Iranian use of a weapon. A nuclear Iran could limit or constrict Israel's ability to take action beyond its borders, which, depending on the situation, may or may not be an existential threat.