Apocalypse Delayed
Two opinions on how Israel should respond to yesterday's attack by Iran
Today, we have two different opinions on how Israel should respond to yesterday’s attack. The first is written by Canadian Zionist Forum editor, David Roytenberg and the second by frequent contributor Brian Henry. We invite the readers to consider both pieces and to let us know what you think in the comments.
Part 1
David Roytenberg: Israel Should Bide its Time
After a terrifying night, Israel wakes up to a glimmer of hope
Yesterday, we spent the afternoon and evening riveted to the news, as the slow moving attack from Iran made its way toward Israel. Worrying about our loved ones, we were transfixed as the live coverage on CNN documented the events as they unfolded. And then we woke up to an Israel that emerged almost unscathed from the deadly barrage launched by the Islamic Republic, which has made “Death to Israel” a central tenet of its world view for the past 45 years.
A parade of Republicans appeared on yesterday evening’s live coverage on CNN, calling for American support for Israel. John Bolton, former Secretary of State declared that the United States should join Israel in responding to the attack by destroying Iran’s nuclear weapons program. There was nobody from the Democratic side on the broadcast, but the White House issued a statement denouncing the Iranian attack and praising members of the American armed forces who participated in stopping the missile attack on Israel. The US Administration affirmed its “iron-clad guarantee” of Israel’s security.
Remarkably, Israel’s Arrow anti-missile system destroyed almost all of the incoming ballistic missiles. Over 100 were launched. “Less than a handful” got through, causing little damage. Also encouraging was the fact that the Israeli air force was joined by the air force of the Kingdom of Jordan, by Saudi Arabia, as well as by the United States and Great Britain in stopping over 100 Iranian drones and 30 cruise missiles before they reached Israeli air space.
In the aftermath of the attack, the question of what happens next looms over everything else. While the attack was still on its way, Israeli PM Netanyahu promised that Iran would pay a price for attacking Israel. There were reports that Israel had planned to retaliate while the attack was still ongoing, but desisted on American advice as the attack proved almost entirely ineffective.
The UN Security Council convened today at Israel’s request. At the meeting the US condemned Iran for risking an escalation to a wider war. Israel said that Iran should be judged not by the results of the failed attack but by the devastating harm that they had intended to inflict. Iran claimed the raid was an act of self-defense in response to the killing of two IRGC generals and other terrorists in Damascus on the first of April.
The Kingdom of Jordan was reportedly criticized for “helping to defend Israel” but said it had acted in self-defense. Israel’s Benny Gantz, who represents the opposition parties that joined the emergency government at the beginning of the war, said that Israel would respond at a time and place that suited them, while cabinet member Itamar Ben Gvir denounced him, saying that Israel should have “gone crazy” in response to the Iranian attack.
Hamas announced on Saturday that they rejected the latest proposal from the mediators on a hostage deal and a ceasefire. It’s apparent that Hamas sees no advantage in making concessions to Israel in the current atmosphere. The next steps in Gaza are still not clear as Israel, under American pressure, pushes more aid into northern Gaza. In Gaza on Sunday, rumours that Israel was allowing people to return to the north created a rush of people trying to go there, but Israel denied this, saying the north is still a war zone.
The American message to Israel in the aftermath of the Iranian attack was clearly one of restraint, saying that Israel had proved the strength of its defense and “should consider it a win”. The Americans said they would not participate in any retaliation against Iran.
More than these words, the effectiveness of the air defense and the fact that two Arab countries participated in it seemed to send a message that Israel is not alone. In this way, the Iranian attack seemed to have shifted the global atmosphere in which Israel has recently appeared to be increasingly isolated.
Today the war cabinet met and apparently did not decide on any immediate retaliation. Likewise, it emerged that an Israeli attack on Rafah, while still planned, will also be delayed. For better or worse, Israel appears to be conforming to American ideas on how the war should be conducted.
While the temptation to seize the occasion of Iran’s attack to go after the Iranian nuclear program is clearly attractive, it seems to me that Israel has its hands full in Gaza and Lebanon. It would be difficult for Israel to take on Iran on its own, and the Iranians are also equipped with modern air defense. There is no guarantee that an Israeli attack on the nuclear facilities would be effective. The Iranian response and the global reaction is impossible to foresee. While Israel can defend itself, it doesn’t have the power to change the regional balance of power on its own. So much though I’d like to see Iran punished for what it did yesterday, I think that Israel would be wise to bide its time
Image: Israel’s Arrow Defense System shot down over 100 Iranian Ballistic Missiles last night — Source: firstpost.com
Part 2
Brian Henry: Iran’s attack grievously injures a seven-year-old girl
320 drones and missiles shot down & massive casualties prevented but what if it had been a nuclear attack
After a sleepless night in bomb shelters, Israelis are heaving great sighs of relief. Israel and its allies intercepted all 170 drones and 30 cruise missiles of Iran’s attack before they could even enter Israeli airspace. Israel also intercepted 119 of 120 the ballistic missiles Iran fired, destroying them 100 kilometers above Israel, essentially in outer space. One ballistic missile got through and caused minor damage but no casualties at an air base in southern Israel.
Yet falling shrapnel from one of those intercepted missiles severely injured a child. That must be the headline, even though we’re all so relieved because the causality count could have been so very much worse. Even in our overwhelming relief, our thoughts and prayers must first go out for that little girl’s recovery and for her parents and the rest of her family who are suffering the anguish of a child who’s fighting for her life.
Other observations:
Israel’s friends and allies stepped up in a big way. Not only did the U.S. help shoot down drones and cruise missiles, but so did Jordan, the UK, France, and others.
Prime Minister Trudeau condemned Iran’s attack. So what? The government’s official stance remains that Canada wants to see Israel defenseless. The Liberals should repeal their ban against weapon sales to Israel. Then Trudeau can be taken seriously. Until then, he should shut up.
Iran supplies Russia with drones. We see daily reports of at least a few of these drones getting through Ukrainian defenses to bomb apartment buildings and other targets as Russia continues its terror war against Ukraine.
Why?
Every one of those drones should be shot down – we saw yesterday that this is possible. No Ukrainian children should by dying from Iranian-supplied drones. Yet they are, because the West has failed to give Ukraine the weapons it needs to defend itself.
Canada has no F-15s to give. Our own fleet of fighter jets is decades past retirement age. Yet Canada could be doing more.
Canada manufactures artillery shells. (Who knew?) Six months after Russia launched its full-scale invasion, two Canadian companies that make those shells applied to the federal government for a $400 million investment to boost production. Eighteen months later, the federal government is still dithering, wondering, will there still be a market for shells once they’ve tooled up?
If they’d gone ahead 18 months ago, we now know for sure the answer would have been, yes. The way the world is going, the answer will still be yes in another 18 months. In the meantime, while our government dithers, Ukraine is slowly losing the war because it doesn’t have the artillery shells it needs.
Finally, this Iranian attack has confirmed that ballistic missiles are more difficult to shoot down than drones or cruise missiles – and more expensive to shoot down, too. At $3.5 million U.S. a shot for one Arrow 3 interceptor missile, last night proved to be the most expensive night in Israeli history.
A 99% success rate sounds impressive – it is impressive. I expect the Ayatollahs are shocked and dismayed. But 99% wouldn’t be good enough for a nuclear attack. Not to mention that Iran will have many other options for launching a nuclear attack against Israel besides firing a missile from within its own territory.
In the following days (or hours) we’re likely to hear much talk about how Israel’s response must be proportionate. This can’t mean Israel should seek to severely injure one seven-year-old Iranian child – that’s a horrifying notion even to write. A proportional response means a response that will make Iran unwilling or unable to repeat its attack.
In this case, I’ll suggest the appropriate and proportional response is to make Iran unable to launch a nuclear attack.
Bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities. All of them.
Yes, this will escalate the war even more, but if Israel waits until Iran goes nuclear, it will be too late. And that could happen within months or weeks.
It could happen today.
Until yesterday, the prevailing wisdom was that the Iranian regime was cautious, risk averse. That’s an assumption that should have been shattered by Iran’s attack on Pakistan back in January. Now, it’s apparent the Iranian regime is downright reckless.
To date, the false assumptions about Iran haven’t proven as deadly as the mistakes about the kind of risks Hamas posed. But if the new reality doesn’t sink in fast, the consequences of underestimating the Iranian threat could prove to be far, far more serious.
When Iran’s supreme leader calls for “Death to Israel,” he means it.
Israel’s dilemma as Iran and its proxies press in on it leaves plenty of room for differing assessments of the best way forward. We hope you appreciate the ideas offered here and that you will join the conversation by leaving a comment on this post. While everything we publish here at Canadian Zionist Forum is available for everyone to read, if you want to comment you have to be a paid subscriber. Please consider joining the conversation today.
To everyone, thank you for reading Canadian Zionist Forum.
 | A guest post by
|
I'd like to add that I'm not wedded to my position. Attacking Iran's nuclear sites would be a very high risk venture. Likely, Iran would respond with a full-scale missile and drone attack from both Iran and Lebanon. It would be a serious war likely with high casualties in Israel, Iran and Lebanon.
But if Iran gets a nuclear bomb, Israel's strategic position instantly becomes much worse. Best case scenario would then be that Iran becomes much, much more aggressive, with the potential cost of retaliating against Iran being a nuclear war.
Worst case scenario of course is a nuclear strike against Israel. Can we assume they're not crazy enough to do this? I don't think so.
We know Iran is at most 2 weeks from enriching enough uranium for a few bombs. Most likely we won't know when Iran decides to make that final sprint. One day, Iran will just announce it's a done deal. And I'm afraid we have to assume they already have the bombs made; it's just a question of creating the fuel.
Certainly, it would be great if Israel could finish with Hamas, take a year or two off, then take care of Hezbollah, take another break and finally deal with the nuclear threat from Iran.
But Israel doesn't have that luxury. If they don't act against the Iranian nuclear threat now, I think it means they've decided they have to let Iran go nuclear and deal with an Iran armed with nuclear weapons as best they can.
As one whose deep sleep was rudely disturbed, at 1:45 a.m., who ran dazed, down two flights of stairs to my building's shelter, then dragged through Sunday as a result, and whose family members around Israel experienced same, while I agree with both David and Brian, a definite preference goes to Brian's opinion. It's now a Now or Never issue. We've been 'dreying' (tippy toeing and pussy footing around) around for six months. This has only brought us from bad to worse. If we don't act actively now, it is no use toting around empty threats. Action speaks louder (and volumes) than words. Just as demanding the hostages' release 'Achshav, achshav, acshav', so should we do something. The time really IS NOW!