The situation of the Israeli Army as seen by the oldest Israeli military analyst

If you need to know about something, ask someone who knows!

Ron Ben-Yishai, Israel’s oldest military analyst in the Israeli and international media, admitted in an analysis of his July 27 issue, Yediot Aharonot, that “the Israeli deterrent capability against Syria has reached an end and is no longer effective and fruitful, despite everything that has happened to Syria in recent years. Its inner front».

The truth, which the Israeli leadership cannot ignore, is that Yedioth Ahronoth itself spoke a few days ago about the failure of Israeli anti-missile batteries to drop some Syrian missiles, in addition to the boldness with which the Syrian Air Force dealt with the pursuit of armed groups, and the Israeli army shot down Syrian Sukhoi.

This is confirmed by Ben Yishai, adding that the Syrian army is determined to challenge Israel’s military capability on the Golan Heights and doesn’t stop enhancing its military capabilities to such an extent that the freedom of movement of the Israeli air force and its operations against the bases of the Syrian army missiles, and Hezbollah’s growing missiles arsenal capabilities.

In fact, it is natural for Israel to find itself in a precarious position that limits the margin of its military maneuver on three fronts: the northern part of the occupied Golan, southern Lebanon, and the southern part of the Gaza Strip.

This is what frightens the Israeli leadership despite the great support provided by Washington and Western countries Of the capabilities of Israel and expansionist project in the region.

The Israeli leadership will not lose sight of the fact that most of the projects that the United States has sought with all its capabilities to implement in the Middle East have not been achieved in the desired manner, but are still stumbling in some places and being defeated in other places.

In 2001, resolved its war on Afghanistan, although it was launched with the participation of many NATO countries when it was at the height of its power as the largest and only pole at the time did not achieve most of its goals in Iraq after the use of enormous military capabilities and forced the Iraqis to withdraw the occupation forces.

However, the Israelis, along with the United States, were waiting to achieve their objectives in fragmenting Syria, dividing it and overthrowing its leadership until they were shown that their project had been defeated and Syria and its allies managed to increase the capabilities of the Syrian Army and its transition to an increased level of defense and offensive initiative.

Its power was unable even to meet these unprecedented challenges in the northern front.

Syria turned into a hub around which Hezbollah missiles capabilities and strategic capabilities of the Islamic Republic of Iran and an international alliance with a major force began to regain their role and importance.

It seems that the American inability to resolve the wars in which the US military engages in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Yemen, through which it intervenes in other areas has become one of the factors that increase the level of Israeli fears.

The Israeli leadership has recognized on more than one occasion that Israel is still surrounded by The region has a lake of enemies who are directly targeting it and ready to attack it at any appropriate opportunity and from silent enemies who do not participate in the war but cannot protect it or participate in its rescue because they know that they will pay the price of such an attitude.

But it is still plunged into a long war in Afghanistan for more than 17 years without being able to resolve it for its own interests, and “Israel” cannot, under the circumstances, bear the war for months, even if the US military is fighting directly on the ground to Its side in every location and battle.

It seems that this logical and practical conclusion, which derives from the image of this reality, is what imposes on Israel limited options that it cannot possibly wage a comprehensive war in most cases, but that it understands that such a war would be the last gamble in the region.

For this reason, it is very likely that it will continue to take the same military policy it has been pursuing against Syria for a while to achieve tactical objectives that serve armed terrorist groups and perhaps to prepare for a political and military war of attrition that will reduce the burden of the northern front.