Israel Moving Against Hizb’s Long Range Missiles?

June 3, 2011

The folks at the Friday Lunch Club say: Keep an eye on the Golan this Sunday …

I donno. I hope I am wrong!

Let me guess…

The Palestinian exiles in Lebanon and Syria plan a march to the Israeli borders on Sunday to remind of the Nakba. The last time they did this, on May 15, the Israelis just shot into the crowds and killed at least 11 people. Normally I would expect just a repeat of that scenario.

But this time the IDF says:

"We are preparing on all possible fronts and we will position both command and troops at forward positions," Gantz said ahead of upcoming Naksa Day border protests.

This is very curious. A military does not move command posts forward if it expects a static battle at the current line of conflict, the border. The commands post are already positioned adequate for a border trouble. Putting command posts forward is a typical move when one plans an attack and wants to keep the command in reach of the front line even while the front moves forward.

With Assad busy in Syria to keep the revolts down, could Israel try something nefarious along the Golan line?

And what could this be?

Speculation: Blitzkrieg against Hizbullah's long range missiles in the Bekaa Valley:

bigger

Main move: Three brigades starting from the Golan towards the north east into Syria. The brigade on the right stays in Syria. Main task: interupt the road Damaskus-Beirut and holds the right flank.
The left and middle brigades turn north west and through the mountain gap into Lebanon and towards the Bekaa Valley. Once in Lebanon the middle brigade will proceed to the Bekaa Valley. Main task: find and destroy Hizbullah's long range missiles and their command and control facilities.
The brigade on the left will turn south west to get into the back of Hizbullah's main defense line in south Lebanon which is along the northern bank of the lower Litani river. Main task: Keep Hizbullah forces in that line hunkered down to prevent them reinforcing Bekaa.
Have reinforcements coming along immediately behind the two brigades which jump into Lebanon.
Secondary move: Two brigades from Israel push directly north, one left, one right, towards and beyond the border. This not so much to push through Hizbullah's front line units at the border but to keep them in place and busy.
Additional units come over the sea into Lebanon to disrupt north-south supply lines near the coast.

With Hizbullah's long range missiles destroyed in a fast powerful move, while Bashar Assad is in trouble and can not resupply them, Israel could regain some freedom of action without having to fear a long term missile bombardment on its cities.

UPDATE: Palestinians cancel Naksa Day march to Israel-Lebanon border

Hmmm …

Posted by b on June 3, 2011 at 19:00 UTC | Permalink

Comments

It would be quite a gamble. Yes, Syria is distracted, but that doesn’t mean its front line posts are empty. The Golan front is so heavily fortified, that it would be much easier to penetrate Hezbollah’s defenses along the Lebanese line. It would be like breaking directly through the Maginot in order to surround the French behind the Ardenes.
As for missiles, once Israeli troops enter Syrian territory they would have no reason to hold their fire and their missile arsenal is a lot more dangerous than Hizb’s.
It would also require a couple of hundred thousand troops, which means a large scale mobilization for an unpredictable period of time. That would be a serious set back for the Israeli economy.
Lastly, once in possession of a large chunk of heavily populated Syrian and Lebanese territory, what would the IDF do? Occupy it? I don’t think they can handle a guerrilla war of that size. Even if their goal is to “find the missiles” and leave, how long will that take?
Also, what effect will this have on Jordan and the Gulf states? And Morocco? In a time when they are seen as US/Israeli collaborators and are already worried about their continued rule, the Israelis could see Jordan face its own Tahrir moment.
Of course, it doesn’t mean they wont do it. They may figure they can do anything. And if Syria becomes more unstable, they may think the gamble is in their favor. But I think when they are feeling frisky, they will just attack Lebanon through the traditional rout.

Posted by: Lysander | Jun 3 2011 21:53 utc | 1

b, do you think the israelis know where those missiles are? If they knew, couldn’t they just bomb them? If they have to search for them, how long would it take? Lysander’s considerations seem reasonable, on this as on other points
other thoughts:
Well, there’s Unifil along the south Lebanese border, b’s manoeuvre would completely bypass it
and anything is possible with the deranged israelis, even more now that they don’t think they have a “friend” at the WH
unless they hope to split Syria and establish their first satellite-state ever (Egypt and Jordan only were supine allies through the mediation of the Us); I don’t have the slightest idea as to its feasibility, but it would be the only strategic aim that would make sense for such an attack
also, in the course of this “Arab spring”, they can’t count on Unifil disarming / preventing Hezbollah retaliations against northern Israel
so at the end, I don’t really believe it possible, either

Posted by: claudio | Jun 3 2011 22:58 utc | 2

Not. Gonna. Happen. How many times has Hez spanked the IDF and sent them home now?
I think they’ll stick to what they do best: murdering defenseless Palestinian civilians.

Posted by: Ran | Jun 3 2011 23:26 utc | 3

Tangentially…
Israelis Rush for Second Passports (CounterPunch)
Is the party winding down?

Posted by: Dr. Wellington Yueh | Jun 4 2011 1:58 utc | 4

Lol, Israel would not dare. An attack against Syria is an attack against Iran. I think it’s more likely for Syrian army and Hizbullah to conduct a joint attack to free the Golan and Shebaa farms, and stop there. The UN cannot condemn the re-taking of land that is internationally recognized as Syrian and Lebanese, respectively. The UN also would not be able to condemn the operation because there are at least 4 UN security council resolutions calling for Israel to leave those areas… more than 40 years ago.

Posted by: Murad | Jun 4 2011 3:43 utc | 5

A Former Spy Chief Questions the Judgment of Israeli Leaders

The man who ran Israel’s Mossad spy agency until January contends that Israel’s top leaders lack judgment and that the anticipated pressures of international isolation as the Palestinians campaign for statehood could lead to rash decisions …
…
On Thursday he got more specific, naming Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak, but this time through a leaked statement to journalists. The statement had to do with his belief that his retirement and the retirement of other top security chiefs had taken away a necessary alternative voice in decision making.
In recent months, the military chief of staff, Gabi Ashkenazi, and the director of the Shin Bet internal security agency, Yuval Diskin, have also stepped down. Mr. Dagan was quoted in several newspapers as saying that the three of them had served as a counterweight to Mr. Netanyahu and Mr. Barak.
“I decided to speak out because when I was in office, Diskin, Ashkenazi and I could block any dangerous adventure,” he was quoted as saying. “Now I am afraid that there is no one to stop Bibi and Barak,” he added, using Mr. Netanyahu’s nickname.

Posted by: b | Jun 4 2011 5:49 utc | 6

Palestinians in Lebanon to postpone ‘Naksa Day’ march to Israel border

Posted by: annie | Jun 4 2011 7:28 utc | 7

Re 7, Yes, Haaretz is a good source for Palestinians cancelling their plans, isn’t it?

Posted by: alexno | Jun 4 2011 7:52 utc | 8

I judge Netanyahu’s government, panicking as they are, perfectly capable of wanting to try this kind of exercise, with the same over the top violence as operation Cast Lead against Gaza. “Successfully trying” is another matter, though (Israel’s success rate against Hizb is nothing to crow about, ahem).
Unless they’ve become plain stupid, I suspect Hizbollah has already accounted for that kind of things though.
Is there ant one who has been following Israel airforce overflying of Lebanon recently ? Up to last december, there where frequent incursions, I don’t know if that is still the case.

Posted by: philippe | Jun 4 2011 8:12 utc | 9

@alexno, I find generally Haaretz is a good source for events in that area

Posted by: claudio | Jun 4 2011 9:36 utc | 10

B
It’s one thing to speculate about a blitzkrieg manouevre against the presumption that Hizbullah have long-range missiles somewhere in the Bekaa – it’s another thing entirely to deal with the missile systems positioned South of the Litani that were used to strategic effect to shut down the northern third of Israel for a month back in 2006, in spite of a concerted aerial campaign and an unsuccessful 30k-man attempt at a northern front invasion. If you think that the Israelis are eager to repeat that little fiasco….well, they’re not. Deterrence remains the order of the day.
And why would the Israelis, vis a vis Syria, break one of the most basic rules of strategy – never interrupt your adversary when he’s making a mistake. Any Israeli incursion into Syria would result in the shut-down of the protest movement overnight, allow Assad to re-consolidate his position, and let him score a rather crucial domestic propaganda victory by pointing out that the civil unrest/protest/insurrection phase was wrong/misguided/evil/inimical to national security, as it allowed the Israelis to invade. The Israelis like the prospect of a weakened Syria, over which it can exert leverage.

Posted by: dan | Jun 4 2011 11:06 utc | 11

Dan,
What are your thoughts regarding an Israeli penetration through Syrian defenses along the golan? Is that something they can accomplish quickly? Does Syria have the capability to significantly hinder the IAF airbases with it’s long range S2S missiles?
Thanks and glad to have you back.

Posted by: Lysander | Jun 4 2011 14:29 utc | 12

Lysander
I really don’t know – I kind of doubt it; the IDF hasn’t done anything like this for decades now, and it’s not the kind of thing that you can just re-learn on the fly. Generally speaking, nowadays the Israeli military prefers the easy task of beating up Palestinians, who have few credible retaliatory options, and using its air force.
As a tactical question it’s a moot exercise because it’s a strategically idiotic thing to try to do – a 2-country invasion that would morph into a debilitating, bloody and expensive occupation that the Israelis cannot afford. Chuck in a completely unpredictable reaction from a post-Mubarak Egypt, the re-ignition of a front in Gaza, a possible new front in the West Bank, and you have a recipe for a complete and utter catastrofuck.

Posted by: dan | Jun 4 2011 15:02 utc | 13

and you have a recipe for a complete and utter catastrofuck.
well, then that is probably what they will do.

Posted by: dan of steele | Jun 4 2011 16:03 utc | 14

well, then that is probably what they will do.
Right. The plan would be for a blitzkrieg. Hit hard and fast and then immediately back out again. Two weeks max. Of course in war no plan survives the start of its implementation. It could easily become a clusterfuck.

Posted by: b | Jun 4 2011 16:38 utc | 15

The Israelis haven’t mobilised their reserves, so a major move seems unlikely.
Assembling significant forces in the Golan also takes time, and it would usually be reported. They can’t do it without preparation; that’s why they usually cover it up in an international crisis.
If such an invasion occurred, if I were Hizbullah, I’d fire off the missiles in the day or two before the Israelis arrived. No doubt, Israel would land airborne troops in advance, and would have bombed also.
But a good number of missiles would have been fired. If only one hits Tel Aviv, all the Israelis are going to be looking for their American passports in the bottom of their wardrobe. According to the latest reports, they are German passports as much as American.

Posted by: alexno | Jun 4 2011 20:45 utc | 16

Perhaps Hizbullah, Syrian-Iranian supporters, knowingly just suspended Naksa Day border protests at the last moment because the true agenda was to strategically, map record, and monitor who, what, and how, tactics of how Israel was to react, and gathered enough data to top from the bottom, if you grep what I’m saying. In other words, making Benni and they boys, show their cards…

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Jun 5 2011 8:32 utc | 17

B
You need to consider this in the context of what happened on Nakba day – a mere few weeks ago and widely reported in the media. Unarmed Palestinian protesters crossed into the Israeli occupied Golan with ease, and there are reports of some going further on into Israel itself and visiting their ancestral homes.
The Israeli security forces were completely unprepared, incompetent ( except for the killing unarmed Palestinians routine that they’re proficient at ), and complacent. The IDF doesn’t like being shown up as a bunch of fools, so they’ve beefed things up at the ceasefire line in an effort to forestall a repeat performance. Quite how you’ve managed to transform this into wild speculation about a possible imminent Blitzkrieg is an amusing example of confirmation bias, context be damned.

Posted by: dan | Jun 5 2011 10:29 utc | 18

Dan, thanks for your answer in 13.

Posted by: Lysander | Jun 5 2011 12:10 utc | 19

Back to Main