The Military Superiority of the Jewish State Amidst the Argument for Restraint

By Col Dencio S. Acop (Ret), PhD, CPP | Date 08-30-2024

BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS — The conflicts involving the Jewish state of Israel and its Islamic neighbors have been ongoing for quite some time now! They actually have been for the most part of Israel’s formal existence since 1948.

The past few weeks just saw the latest round of incessant attacks and counter-attacks between Israel and its opponents. While the fighting is occasionally interrupted by intermittent periods of peace negotiations, hostilities seem to continue on soon after one side has replenished its spent resources and is ready for business-as-usual violence.

In recent days, Israel and Hamas, brokered by Egypt, Qatar, and the United States, have been hankering down on momentarily ending the bloodshed in the Gaza Strip. By all accounts, it appears that temporary cessation of hostilities could be attained if Israel partially withdraws from Gaza’s southern border with Egypt while Hamas stops launching rockets and returns some Israeli hostages it kidnapped almost a year ago.

The impending deal is not yet out of the woodwork as Biden and Netanyahu have yet to agree. With the US elections just a few months off, Biden is pushing the deal but Netanyahu is not.

While the former fears possible loss for the Democratic Party from an escalation of the war in the Middle East, the latter also fears a drop in his rising popularity as a hardliner for Israeli security if he gives in. The result is a stalemate where time is bided in exchange for political advantages to be gained. 

Meanwhile, in the north, Israel anticipates Iranian retaliation for its killing of Hamas chief Ismail Haniyeh earlier this year in Tehran. The Jewish state and Lebanese militia Hezbollah have just concluded one of their own exchanges of historical violence before this anticipation.

After Hezbollah launched a rocket into Majdal Shams in Israeli-occupied Golan Heights on July 27 killing at least 12 children, Israel assassinated top Hezbollah commander Fu’ad Shukr. The militant group then vowed to respond but before it could, the Israeli Defense Force launched pre-emptive strikes that took out rocket launch bases in southern Lebanon.

Now after almost a year, the Israel-Hezbollah War is a low-intensity conflict that has evolved into a war of attrition aimed to wear down each side’s will to fight. The fear of the two conflicts’ regional escalation comes from Iran’s backing of both Hamas and Hezbollah. The core of the conflict stems from fundamental religious and cultural differences between the Jewish state and its Islamic neighbors exacerbated by the non-tolerant attitude of hardliners like Iran and the militant groups it supports.   

For decades since its statehood in 1948, Israel has had to battle successive aggressions from its predominantly Arab neighbors some of whom are fundamentally intolerant of the Jewish state’s co-existence with them in the Middle East. Besides what some religious would cite as Israel’s God-ordained right to be in the Promised Land, what has allowed Israel to survive its neighbors all these years? Apart from the arguable explanation offered by religious destiny and divine providence, this analyst sees superior intelligence and excellent execution of operations as the key to Israeli military success.

Israel’s history of defense performances is a public record open to scrutiny. Take the latest skirmishes with Hezbollah for instance.

Interpretation of the accounts from that battle indicates that Israel was able to detect Hezbollah’s preparations for a large-scale attack after the killing of Fu’ad Shukr in southern Beirut. Despite the predictability of its executed strategy and tactics over the years, the Jewish state has time and again demonstrated its capability and capacity to successfully hit its predetermined targets almost at will.

The same cannot be said of its opponents no matter how many they are. Seasoned operators are only too keenly aware of the sophisticated intricacies that go into case build-up, training, organization, operational planning, logistical support, as well as competence of military leadership prior to the launching of top-secret missions.

Logic would tell us that Israel has all these and more. There are also the intangible values that drive each and every member of the Israeli defense establishment. More often than we think, these internal values are the ones that propel an organization towards success especially in the battlefield. Such values cannot be far from love of country; a deep sense of responsibility, accountability, and commitment; and a willingness to die, if necessary, so that family and country can survive.  

Finally, it is reassuring to think that continued rationality within the hearts and minds of decision-makers across the broad spectrum of public administration and governance stakeholders keeps the world safe and free from global annihilation.

In the latest rounds of violence just described, the decision-makers on both sides of the fence were capable of sending their forces to fight, but they were also equally capable of pulling their punches when they saw that the hostilities were headed in the wrong direction.

For instance, the leaders feared a regional escalation of the conflicts and therefore acted accordingly. And even if protagonist leaders appear hell-bent on pursuing violence until their enemy is annihilated and victory is achieved, there are other world leaders who weigh in to inject rationality into the course of things to avoid total disaster.

It is further reassuring to see that this is happening not just in the Middle East but in other areas of global conflict as well. Not giving up on peace despite all the reasons and motivations propelling man to war is made even more significant by the realization that certain protagonists, either directly or indirectly, actually possess nuclear weapons as part of their defense arsenal.

In the Middle East scenario, at least two countries involved have such weapons: Israel and the United States. Iran is suspected of also possessing nukes or is on the verge of owning one. Indirectly, other nuclear powers are likewise involved. Russia and China, for instance, support Iran.

It must be pointed out clearly that no conventional superiority in war will matter if nuclear superiority is invoked by any of these protagonists. Because in such a war, there will be no such thing as a decisive victory but only mutually assured destruction where everyone is a loser.