Iron Dome is not enough to protect Israeli citizens
While Iron Dome can effectively defend small militarily important targets, it does not provide the protection that our civilian population in the south, and maybe tomorrow in the north, is entitled to.
By Moshe Arens Tags: Gaza Iron DomeAs the walrus said to the carpenter in Lewis Carroll's fable, "the time has come to talk of many things." In Israel, after the pounding Israel's citizens in the south took from assorted rockets and mortar shells in the past weeks, the time has come to talk of that great Israeli development, the Iron Dome rocket interception system.
It successfully engaged a good number of rockets launched from the Gaza Strip against the south, and was a source of justified pride for all Israelis. But before we make this system the linchpin of Israel's defensive strategy it might be well to analyze the performance of the system during the recent attacks, and the final result. Who was the winner in the duel, the Iron Dome or the combination of Grads, Qassams and mortar shells fired against the civilian population in southern Israel?
 |
An Iron Dome battery. |
| Photo by: Reuters |
The Iron Dome, developed by Rafael, is a superb technological achievement. It follows Israel's first technological breakthrough in ballistic missile interception - the Arrow, developed by IAI. For years the interception of ballistic missiles was considered next to impossible, until the Arrow, designed to intercept missiles launched from a distance of hundreds of kilometers, proved otherwise.
Obviously, intercepting missiles launched from shorter ranges is a far more difficult task. The Iron Dome is capable of intercepting ballistic missiles launched from a distance of 5-70 kilometers, no mean feat. It is an achievement unequaled anywhere in the world. All Israelis can take pride in this achievement. Over and above its military value, and it has substantial military value, it enhances Israel's image in the eyes of friends and foes alike.
As should be expected, it is a very expensive system, which at this point intercepts simple, very cheap, rockets. If valued in terms of out-of-pocket costs, for attacker and defender, it cannot win the battle against the incoming missiles. But, of course, that is not the only consideration in acquiring the system.
An Iron Dome battery is capable of providing defense for an area of about 150 square kilometers against incoming ballistic missiles. That is its "footprint." That means that it cannot provide protection for all of the Israeli civilians living in southern Israel, even if a substantial number of additional batteries were added to the two batteries presently deployed. Also, if a large number of rockets are directed into the area protected by an Iron Dome battery the system can be saturated, and thus penetrated. It does not provide protection against mortar shell launched at short range. In other words, it is only a very partial answer to the rocket threat against Israeli civilians coming from the Gaza Strip.
This became clear last week. The incoming rockets forced Israelis throughout the south to run for shelter. That is the bottom line - and in that sense the rockets were the winners in the duel with the Iron Dome. The terrorists in the Gaza Strip understand that, and more rockets will surely be coming our way. Thus the Iron Dome is a source of pride and gives us the feeling that we are not completely helpless against the rocket threat. It gives mayors in the south a chance to compete against each other in pressuring the government to acquire more Iron Dome batteries and deploy them near their cities, and it seemingly provides justification to increase the defense budget.
But to be honest, whereas the Iron Dome can effectively defend small militarily important targets, it does not provide the protection that our civilian population in the south, and maybe tomorrow in the north, is entitled to. The idea that missile interception systems, when eventually deployed throughout Israel, will provide an impenetrable umbrella under which Israelis will be able to peacefully carry on their daily lives even when Israel is attacked by rockets, is an illusion. There are other ways to put an end to the rocket threat, and the government will sooner or later have to resort to them.
Why Facebook Connect?
Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.
- Latest
- Most Viewed
- Most Rated
- Open all
I will mention 2 fundamental problems Arens has, and you can then draw your own conclusions: 1. Arens is an engineer. Unlike Physicists who work to understand the basics, an engineer takes the physicists' understanding as 'given' and uses it to construct useful things. In other words, Arens does not get to the bottom of problems he encounters but relies on "axioms" produced by others (such as Jabotinsky)./ 2. Arens does not give away any conquered territory, regardless of how wise the move might be. Examples: Arens voted AGAINST peace with Egypt (1979); against withdrawal from Lebanon under Peres (1985) even when all the goals of the Lebanon War were achieved years before; and Arens was against the final withdrawal by Barak (2000). His third "no" he still repeats because it is not yet considered a no-brainer by all Israelis.// The conclusion from point #2 is that Arens has an "anal peronality". His political positions are taken by his "gut", not his head, and represent no more wisdom than that of a child on his potty chair. Arens' intellect is used to JUSTIFY his "gut" positions. He can justify wrong ideas, but not before an inquiring audience. In this article we find an example: Arens was of course against the withdrawal from Gaza by Sharon, although since then he started claiming that there is no demographic danger from the Arabs, using the number of residents of the West bank only (without explicitly saying that he excludes Gazans). Now Arens hints that the correct solution of the Gaza problem will be a take-over by Israel. But then, what will happen to the demographic problem? Well, he will have to sit a bit longer on his chair and think about it.
Mr. Arens missed the point of Iron Dome although he inadvertantly touched on it in his discussion.Iron Dome has two main functions: 1) it is intende to protect a statiscally small area like a town or a military installation, 2) It can and does provide bactrack information identifying the launch points of the missiles. The latter is probably more significant that the former. since, properly used and distributed, that information can be used in a variety of ways to interdict the terrorist launch teams in the act of, preparatory to or immediately after a launch. The information gathered from each launch, when compiled and contrasted, will give a pattern of lauch sites and times that will allow the IDF to make pre-emptory strikes that will eradicate the launchers and their teams while they are setting up. The methods of response are numerous: artillery, helicopters, fighter bombers,tanks, mortar teams and even commandos can be used to terminate the launches. Mr. Arens is limited in his thinking and obviously has an agenda to promote that is not in Israel's best interest. Take his advice with a grain of salt; that is all that it is worth.
Iron Dome was an Israeli initiated, Israeli funded project. The US is, however, funding the procurement of four additional batteries for a very good reason: The US believes that if Israel feels more secure, it will be less likely to initiate a major operation against Gaza. That restraint is what they're paying for. As to the suggestion that Israel should "make peace" or "end the occupation", Hamas has made clear they will *never* agree to peace with Israel because they consider the entire country to be "occupied" territory. They also call - in their Charter - to kill the Jews. One can't make peace with such people.
Israel needs Iron dome sollely to protect it's citizens from terror rocket attacs, it is only fair the agressor should pay for it. Israel should ask money which are donated to Hamas by US, Europe should be instead given to purchase Iron domes for Israel.
Another, and more sensible solution, would be to confront the reality that you will never be safe no matter how many domes you build until you have ceased the occupation of Palestine.
All of you who say just end the "occupation" and they'll be peace are FOOLS. To Hamas etal. ending the occupation means pushing all of Israel into the sea. Get your heads out of your collective butts and OPEN YOUR EYES!!
"For years the interception of ballistic missiles was considered next to impossible, until the Arrow, designed to intercept missiles launched from a distance of hundreds of kilometers, proved otherwise" Sorry, but Arrow never proved anything in a real case as iron dome did!
Israel would like to peddle Iron Dome around the world, so they will salvage what they can from the debacle that was the first real test of the system.
Since America won't allow Israel deal with the rocket threat by military means, they better foot the bill. And, btw, it doesn't cost a million dollars to intercept a rocket. That figure is highly exaggerated.
There are no impenetrable defenses. The Maginot Line was considered an impenetrable defense and it proved to be a liability, not an asset, as the French built their entire defensive strategy around a single idea. The best defense is to live in peace where you are engaged socially and economically with your neighbors. Short of that it is foolish to rely solely on the idea that there are impenetrable defenses.
If Israel will end its occupation of Tel Aviv there would be no need for resistence.
Clearly the "occupation" has nothing to do with it.
Arens predicts peace. There is no way that Israel can eliminate the threat which has already been provoked and which continues to be provoked. Living under a "threat" is a byproduct of p0rovoking one's neighbors. So great has been Israel's provocation that it will take many years for the threat to ease even after the provocation stops. As for taking military steps to stop the threat, this only increases the threat. Arens should be old enough to realize this even though he is obviously not very wise. The only reason that Israel has done as well as it has is because the enemies of Israel have no significant weapons yet. This will certainly change with time. By adhering to strategies favored by such as Arens, Israel has only lost all international support while increasing the threat level.
Nobody has suggested that the IAF be disbanded in reliance on Iron Dome. That does not lessen the achievment. We were all very skeptical, and are very surprised and happy it works.
Cheaper to end the Occupation and illegal settlements and poke the money spent on Iron Dome at the social issues of Israel. Learning how to make peace instead of constantly simmering conflict would be a great start for Israel.
Make the most of the Iron Dome computer system. It has backtrack capabilities. The computer uses well known mathematical formulas to identify the path of the incoming projectile. These formulas can be manipulated to determine the impact points (which is already being done to give ID the ability to discriminate among the various targets) and the exzact same fromulas can determine the launch point to within a square meter. If that INformation is relayed to the IDf, they can use it to make retaliatory strikes so quickly that the return fire will catch the launchers still at the launch sites jumping around and giving each other 'high-fives' for a 'successfull' launch. Hammer the launch sites. You can call it Operation: Weeding the Garden.....
Effectively Iron Dome cannot deal with a saturation attack....that is a known. Given the prohibitive cost of Iron Dome it would be more fiscally responsible to end the occupation and illegal settlements and make peace with the Palestinians. Otherwise nothing will save Israel from itself.
starting to get the cash that paid eletricity and water to gaza
as exemple The fuel for the power plant is financed by the EU, and Dor Alon Energy, the Israeli company that supplies the fuel, is in constant contact with EU officials in order to receive payment in advance. Several days ago, the EU informed the company that it would not pay for the fuel until further notice
“The burden of proof is on them to clarify to us if one treasury is being created for Hamas and Fatah,” Steinitz said in an interview with Army Radio. “Are there guarantees that none of the money we transfer will reach a terrorist organization to purchase missiles or finance firing of rockets?’’
“The burden of proof is on them to clarify to us if one treasury is being created for Hamas and Fatah,” Steinitz said in an interview with Army Radio. “Are there guarantees that none of the money we transfer will reach a terrorist organization to purchase missiles or finance firing of rockets?’’ there isn't an agreement betwenn hamas-pa to govern gaza and samaria judea?
MELISSA - WELL REMMEMBERED - DEDUCT FROM THE PALESTINIAN AID THAT US GIVE TO THEM ! palestinians use theireselves the water too. Sorri melissa, there is not such state like palestine EVER, israel doesnt have to give nothing to them
where did you where last 30 years? what are you smoking. \the place is called samaria and judea not west bank ou something that you invented!
They want to terrorise Israel, let them pay for it and explain to their consituency, why the till is empty
If israel retain the cost of every iron dome and missile, sure that every grad w/mortar will cost thousand of dollars t, and the people of israel coul sleep as well as palestinians. the pa and hamas didn't sign a deal?
These other methods? What are you saying? Make peace? Reoccupy Gaza? Knowing you Moshe Arens, obviously a man of peace, you must be talking about ending the wars between Israel and her neighbours, right?
Then the entire thing is an exercise in pointlessness, because the imprecise nature of those rockets means that they can not be used to threaten "small militarily important targets".
No one weapon is ever the answer. Peace negotiations is certainly the most important tool which is long and cumbersome is the best solution.
Please check your history and note what went on before 1967.