Israel’s security dilemma

Why the Jewish state will never leave at peace unless it frees itself from its racial and religious bigotry

THE LAST WORD | Andrew M. Mwenda | For the last week, Israel and Iran have been exchanging heavy blows. I had expected Israel to beat Iran badly, decisively, and quickly. From a strategic point of view, I understand Israel’s aims even though I may not agree with them. Indeed, if I were in the shoes of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, I would most likely have acted exactly as he did. This is because the international system is anarchical, i.e., there is no higher authority above states to ensure security for all. If attacked, states have to fend for themselves.

This presents states with a security dilemma. For instance, a state can reduce its military power. This would make it vulnerable to aggression by other states. Alternatively, it can enhance its military power. But this would threaten the security of other states, who would most likely see its military capabilities as menacing and threatening. Soon you have an arms race in the region. This is the dynamic in which Israel and Iran are caught.

I have very little information about Iran. But I know much more about Israel. This is because its leaders, intellectuals, and proxies in the West are always in the media talking about its security fears and anxieties. I take everything with a pinch of salt. This is in large part because every country would like to exaggerate its security threats to justify its own investment in its military capabilities. What is clear is that Israel and Iran have been competing in the region for power and influence directly and through proxies.

According to Israel and its allies in the West, Iran has proxies such as Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen and Syria under Bashar Al Asaad. This is how it threatens neighbors and enhances her influence in the Middle East. To fight Iran, one must attack its proxies first. This is a strategy of cutting off the different arms of a hydra-headed monster. In the last two years, Israel has attacked and claims to have severely degraded Hamas and Hezbollah and caused the downfall of Asaad in Syria. Last year, it attacked and claimed to have destroyed a sizable share of Tehran’s air defense and missile launching systems.

Now Israel also claims that Iran has been building and amassing a large arsenal of hypersonic, cruise, and ballistic missiles in the thousands. Therefore, this was the best time to attack and destroy Iran’s arsenal before it became too big to destroy. Remember that in ballistic missile warfare, the offense has a crushing advantage over the defense. This is because it costs almost ten times more to build an interceptor missile than to build an attack missile. This means the more ballistic missiles your opponent acquires, the more costly it becomes for you to defend yourself, and hence the more vulnerable you become. Hence, the best strategy for Israel against Iran is a preemptive attack to destroy missile launchers, radar systems, missile manufacturing facilities, and missile stockpiles themselves.

But as Carl Von Clausewitz said, war is the realm of uncertainty. It seems that Israel made a strategic miscalculation. This is because Iran has demonstrated its ability to retaliate and inflict unprecedented havoc on Israel. I think this is the first time Israeli cities have been bombed by an enemy state since its founding. But it also confirms Israel’s fears about Iran were correct, i.e., that Tehran has been building a massive arsenal of missiles to destroy her. And this is where things may get worse if the USA does not intervene directly in support of Israel to degrade Iran’s military strength.

Israel has the Iron Dome, meant to intercept short-range missiles Hamas and Hezbollah use, and then David Sling and Arrow which can intercept medium and long-range missiles. The latter two are ones Israel has been using against Iranian missile attacks. The problem, however, is that if this war continues for the next few days (i.e. if Iran has more ballistic and hypersonic missiles in its stores and the capacity to launch them), Israel is cooked. It costs Israel $3m to $4m to shoot down just one Iranian ballistic missile that costs Tehran only $200,000 to build. Israel may run out of interceptors and go bankrupt trying to produce more—if this war lasts a few more weeks.

Israel is a small country (22,000 Sq km) with a small population (9 million) compared to Iran, with 1.7 million square km and 92 million people. In a prolonged war, Iran has greater capacity to degrade Israel. This war has broken the myths of Israel’s invincibility, which has been its greatest strategic asset. Historians will write about this as an inflection point in the politics of the Middle East. Israel has been the dominant and feared power in the region. Its Arab neighbors may now also begin to think of building missile capabilities, knowing they can threaten Israel and force it into a stalemate.

Israel has an ace to play—the USA and its European allies. These have a racial investment in the Jewish state. Most of the citizens of Israel are Europeans whose relatives were exterminated in Europe by fellow Europeans based on their religion. The survivors of that genocide were expelled to Palestine. This tragedy hangs on the conscience of Europe and its descendants in North America and Oceania. Therefore, the USA and its European allies may intervene directly to save Israel to atone for their crimes against Jews.

Israel is a settler colony. All successful settler colonies have succeeded because they exterminated native populations in Canada, Australia, New Zeeland, USA etc. Settler colonialism failed in Algeria, Kenya, Zimbabwe, and South Africa and therefore granted rights to native populations. But before it failed, it created false narratives that if it granted rights to natives, the settlers would be exterminated. These fears proved false. But Israel clings to them, claiming that granting rights to Palestinians would be the end of the Jewish state and Jewish people.

Under such fears, Israel can only survive as an apartheid state and therefore forever face resistance from Palestinians and the hostility of its Arab neighbors. The two-state solution is no longer feasible. Yet Israel can accept a one-state solution where Jews and Palestinians live together with equal rights. Israel’s security dilemma is its cruel and sadistic rule over Palestinians. Ending the occupation will be liberating to both Israelis and Palestinians and free the Jewish state of its racial supremacist fantasies and misguided fears.

****

amwenda@ugindependent.co.ug