In January 1965, Israel bombed and blatantly destroyed the gigantic water pumping station at Shallal in Syria, which would divert the course of the two rivers that supply the Sea of Galilee in the north, on which it depended for its water supply. In 2007, the Israeli Air Force destroyed “the cube”, a Syrian infrastructure that was weeks away from becoming an active nuclear reactor, in Syrian territory – and the operation only became known more than 10 years later, through an investigation by the newspaper Haaretz . In June 2010, the action was of another type. The Stuxnet virus infected 30,000 computers in Iran, spread across 14 military installations, causing significant destruction in the Natanz underground complex, considered the most impregnable of the sites where Iran is racing to enrich uranium. The cyberattack was reportedly coordinated with the United States. Israel’s way of acting in the face of hostile neighbors that surround it has varied over time, target and objective.
Now, after the unprecedented direct attack (indirect, through proxies in the region, they are daily) from Iran – with almost zero results –, in Israel there is a debate on how to respond. The reaction, in addition to strategic and diplomatic issues, also involves assessing the relative weight of each side’s military power (see infographic). And here, the numbers are not always what they seem. Let’s start with spending: Israel officially spends much more on defense. But the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, its elite body, with around 200,000 members, has other sources of financing: it operates on the Tehran stock exchange through shell companies and directly dominates vast sectors of the country’s economy. According to old estimates, it dominates a third of the economy.
When it comes to aviation, the imbalance is huge in favor of Israel, although the numbers are not very far apart (the total is 612 planes for Israel, 551 for Iran). But Israel has the latest fighters, F15, F16 or F35. Iran only has lower capacity technology and mainly Soviet planes.
According to the Arms Control Association, an American NGO, Iran will have more than 3,000 ballistic missiles. The ability to defend against them also apparently counts here as an advantage due to the sophistication of the Israeli systems (also helped by covering a small territory): it has the Iron Dome, David’s Sling and Arrow systems, in addition to the American Patriot.
“In practice, both have the capacity to attack each other, but in different ways”, summarizes António José Telo, professor at the Military Academy.
But even in technical matters, there is more than mere military capability at stake. “Iran’s attack, even if it went badly against Israel, 70 to 80% of the projectiles would be stopped. Israel has a different, more traditional attack capability, with long-range aviation, with precision attacks, with explosive bombs much larger than those carried by any Iranian ballistic missile. But, for this to work, it is necessary to nullify the air defenses , using Jordanian airspace, or a simultaneous cyberattack. And risk losses. Now, for Iran’s vectors, if it has losses, it doesn’t matter much, in terms of cost. An F15 costs close to 20 million dollars. Losses have to be very controlled”, points out the expert. And there is a capacity that is at the same time a risk, he points out: “They can cause damage to critical targets, such as in the nuclear program, but conventional ammunition in a nuclear weapons zone runs the risk of releasing radiation.”
Give a “symbolic response” More than technical issues, Israel will weigh above all tactical issues: “Israel will try to take advantage of Iran’s attack in international talks – even if it does not do so publicly – saying that the situation can only be resolved when the Hamas problem is resolved. resolved, concluding the operation in Rafah, in the Gaza Strip. And he will try to get an international green light for this – which will never be public. There are signs that he achieved what he wanted in this field.”
At the same time, he states, “the US tells Israel, in private, that it is in the interests of the balance of the Middle East and to contain the power of Iran – which is already or will be or about to be nuclear – and to find a coalition in the region to contain it. . Therefore, what is said to Israel is “you can give a symbolic response”, but not a pretext that would escalate the war. If Israel is smart, it stays quiet and awaits political action.”
14th place
of Iran in the 2024 Global Firepower Index. Israel comes in 17th. It is “harmed” by criteria such as population, territory and natural resources
