Fascinating interview with Major-General Ya'akov Amidror who has held several major divisions in the Israeli government. He was commander of the Israeli Defense Forces' National Defense College, he also headed the IDF's research and assessment division with special responsibility for preparing the national intelligence assessment, and he served as military secretary for the Minister of Defense. Allan Roth of One Jerusalem.Org rocks. He puts these wonderful, informative interviews together. I joined Alan, Ann Of Boker Tov Boulder
who has a great summary up as well) Don from Chicago.....
Complete audio here. Click bottom link for complete transcript; Here are some money quotes;
General Amidror: First of all, we must admit, we did not succeed to eliminate, to crack the Hezbollah, in first Lebanon, and now the organization in the whole Lebanon. of course, and in this point of view, it is very, very, surprising, and we don't find this situation, and it upset us and so and so forth. It's not time for excuses why it happened. There are some reasons and it will take time to understand exactly why it didn't happened. At the same time we should not forget, and cannot neglect the fact that we at least four very important achievements and some potentials in the future, and I'll elaborate the potentials later on. First of all, from the Israeli point of view, the political achievement, the UN resolution 1559, which its essence is the disarming of Hezbollah, is back on the table, and the international community cannot any more neglect it, and we will have to find a way, how to implement it, and I think that from the Israeli point of view, the fact that this resolution is again in the middle of the scene and again adopted by the international community is very important, for itself, before it will be implemented, elaborated, it's questionable, and it's a big question if it will be implemented, but I think that the fact that everyone in the international community that this is the essence of the solution of the solution. In Lebanon, almost everyone, of course not Syria and Iran, but almost every state around the world, I think from our point of view is very important. The second lesson from this war is the lesson which was learned by the countries around us. After many years, at least six but maybe almost twenty, in which Israel became how to call it, a soft target, which is not responding to the operations which were conducted by Hezbollah, by the Hamas, we were very soft, and during the last six years we almost didn't respond to the operations of Hezbollah. This time the government of Israel was very determined and the retaliation was unproportional and very heavy and I think that at least the Lebanese, but I believe that not only the Lebanese, begin to understand how much they pay in this operation which was a very minor one. They just kidnapped two soldiers and killed another eight, what happened? Why did Israel become the one who is losing his temper and behaving like a crazy country in the region. I think that this a very important lesson. The Arab countries around us will learn it and they will have to know and now they understand that there are red lines which if they will be crossed by them, the retaliation, the response of Israel, might be very severe, and I think it's a very important lesson. The third one is, you know, for years they threaten us, you know, if something will happen in Lebanon, it will be the end of Israel. Thousands of rockets and missiles will hit Israel, and that will be the end of Israel. After a month, we showed them that we can send our ... the civilian society, the system, everything. It was not easy, it was very bad, more than 600,000 had to live in shelters or leave their homes, and leaving as refugees in Israel. But at the end of day Israel will reconstruct the north, and we can handle it, we can live with it, and for those countries who built all their assumptions on the basis that Israel cannot live in such a situation, the fact that we went through such a situation, and at the end of day more than ready to continue, I think that it is a very important lesson for our neighbors. And the fourth one, I know the truth has not been exposed yet, Hezbollah is try to hide its casualties, Hezbollah is not telling the truth about all his people suffered during the last month, and I can ensure you that Hezbollah lost in this month more warriors, members of Hezbollah, than in the previous 20 years of its existence, at least 500 maybe more and if you count all the casualties of Hezbollah during the last 20 years, you will not reach this number, so although Hezbollah is doing a very good job, camouflaging his casualties, they're not telling the truth about what happened to his longer-range launchers and so on and so forth, the truth is that this organization suffered a lot during this month.
Pamela: I have one. I defer, if you wish. This is Pamela of Atlas Shrugs. I earlier had a similar interview with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and I just hung up the phone with Lieutenant-General Moshe Ya'alon, and I had asked what Israel got out of this cease-fire, what Israel would get out of entrusting its safety to France, when Chirac accused Israel of intending to destroy Lebanon, when the Foreign Minister said to his Iranian counterpart in Beirut that Iran was a stabilizing country in the reason. My question to you is will Israel risk killing French soldiers? Israel is so exposed in this cease-fire. I don't see any of the benefits that are being discussed here. At the same time you have crisis of confidence in the Israeli government. You have a number of, the president Moshe Katzav is accused of sexually harassing five women, Justice Minister Haim Ramon is accused of sexually harassing one woman, you have the chairman of the Foreign and Defense Committee Tzachi Hanegbi, excuse my pronunciation, I'm sorry, I don't speak Hebrew, accused of fraud and breach of trust and making political appointments during his tenure as Environment Minister, and I'm just wondering if there is a crisis of confidence in the government at such a critical time in Israel's history?
General Amidror: I think that there is a kind of confidence crisis. You can hear the first voices calling for investigation and maybe to nominate a. committee which will-- I do not want to go into that. It's too early and it quite happened that after the crisis will be over, we will hear more and more people talking about the need to investigate and to find whom to blame. I think that will be a great mistake. I don't think that the problem that we are facing is connected to specific people here, and there and if somebody was corrupted or has ... let's get rid of him. I'm not talking about all these. I think that the war itself was not easy, but we have to face what we achieved, and I tried to explained and what we have to focus in the future, and you are right the threat from Iran the threat of rebuilding the capability is there, and we have deal with, and the way to deal with it is not by mentioning names of people who might be innocent in the court or might be guilty, and if they will guilty in the court they will go out. But going into the process and to understand where were our mistakes from the process of view and not from the people point of view, and I think it's a better way to deal with the problem and to be more ready for the challenges in the future, and, yes, you're right maybe we are facing now a crisis of confidence, not because of these allegations that you mentioned but because of the situation and the consequences of a very tough war.
Israpundit: I'm with Israpundit. I'm a former US military intelligence officer and an analyst for American Congress for Truth. Yesterday I was on a talk radio program addressing the standdown from 7/11 and talking with former military types here in the United States. There were several things that were disquieting in the talk radio conversation. Let me detail them for you. There is a lot of video feed here in the United States indicating that a lot of the IDF soldiers that were deployed were either missing equipment, exchanging weapons to colleagues coming to the lines to soldier through, and there anxious reports about the fact of the unavailability of rations and water essentially for troops, but more importantly there were analyses about the starvation of the IDF security budget during the course of the last six years, notwithstanding the amount of intelligence that you had talked about early on in the conversation. What do you as a military expert in Israel identify as some of the issues or lessons learned to come out of this conflict so that it is not repeated again and in fact the tactics learned here to fight what basically is a terrorist army are basically honed for the second phase of the conflict that many of us believe is coming shortly.
General Amidror: This is a very interesting and professional question, and I will try say some words about it, although it really before the briefing, before we have all the lessons, before we can say something about what we should do. Some elements of the first are fighting such guerrilla military organizations, you have to look at it from two angles. In some areas it is pure military. For example, the way that we succeed to hit the long-range missile launchers make it one use only, and then it was hit by our air force. This is something which is more like an army target in a battlefield. It is not connected to any guerrilla systems. It's like hitting tanks or missile launchers in any other real military battle. In some other areas, mentioning the 122 mm Katyushas, and enhanced Katyushas which were fired from within the civilian centers from a.... stood in the kitchen of many buildings in south Lebanon, and was fired from the garden or from the window of the kitchen into Israel, to that you have to look at a guerrilla warfare, and there the old lesson is that you cannot do it without having control on the ground. And control on the ground can begin only by ground forces. You can use the technology, the air force, to help the ground forces, to make it easier for them, but at the end of the day, if you want to have control on the ground, and for stopping these Katyushas, you have to have control on the ground, you need the ground forces. I think this is a very important lesson for us and for some Israeli experts who begin to believe that because of our technology, how to call it, benefit, and because we have no question a better capabilities to involve our technology by ourselves, and we have the best air force in the Middle East and so and so forth, we can do it air force only. No. You need very good soldiers on the ground, infantry and armor. And we learned a very hard lesson, that the new anti-tank missiles, like the Kornet, is a real threat to our armored corps and we have to go it with the next stage that we have, and we decided some years ago not to buy. We have a system that Americans .... that can hit missile any missile which tries to hit the tank. It's an active defensive system for the tanks, and we will have to go into it and to have it in the future, so to naturalize part of the capability of soldiers to fight which build on the best know anti-tank missiles in the world, Russian pipes, and we worked... two years ago we learned to know that the Syrians are going to buy this missile, the Kornet and the Metis, and we told the Russians, please don't sell it to the Syrians, it will go to the Hezbollah, and they promised us that it will not, and at the end of the day it is in the hands of the Hezbollah. The main lesson is that it cannot be done air force only, and for doing it you have to have strong ground forces to gain control on the ground. The other lesson is that, although it's very primitive, it's a second World War rocket type, the 122 mm, we have to use technology to stop, because otherwise it is very problematic when it is coming to areas which areas are intensively populated like the north part of Israel, and we will have to invest a lot of money in corporations. The Americans are beginning some years ago, the Nautilus project, we stopped it because of lack of money. Now we will have to find the money and to build this weapon system, defensive weapon systems, and I think that this combination of continuing having a very advanced air force to enhance our capabilities of the ground forces and defensive system against this kind of primitive rockets, these three elements should be learned and we have to invest in and to be ready in a better position to the next war. There are some other lessons that we will have to learn to learn from this war, and I believe that it will be learned and we will implement it. As you know it will take time to debrief the forces and to understand where our mistakes were militarily. I mean, was it in the plan, was it in the tactics, in the training of the forces, but i think that the main three lessons that we have to learn is is the three that I just mentioned.
Ann Lieberman: This is Ann Lieberman at Boker Tov Boulder. Yesterday there were attacks on Ashkelon with Katyushas out of Gaza, not Qassams, but Katyushas, and so I wondered if this is unusual, and if it has meaning, and if it has anything to do with the fact that the Iranian foreign minister, after the resolution was passed, went to Egypt and met with Mubarak. Should we worry about Egypt?
General Amidror: I don't think it is connected to this visit at all, and I don't see now that the Egyptians, although I am sure that they are very dissatisfied from the result of the war. Deep in their heart they were very concerned about the success of Hezbollah, and without saying it, I can read their mouth saying that they hoped and prayed that we will win in a better result than what happened, for the Egyptians, a great frustration.
General Amidror: I think that from Egyptian point of view, this result of not crushing the Hezbollah is a very frustrating situation. They hoped that we will do it this time. So I don't believe that this visit of the Iranians now and in the future will change the policy of the Egyptian government, but yes something is going to, since our unilateral retreat from Gaza, and the fact that we are not controlling any more the border between Egypt and the Palestinians, is making the life of those who want to smuggle in weapon systems easier than in the past, and if Israel will be not cautious enough, and we will not respond in time, and we will not be strong enough to go into these centers of evil inside Gaza, we might face int he future, an anew Lebanon in Gaza, and I think that that was one of the consequences that should be taken into consideration in the unilateral retreat, which was, from my point of view, a great mistake.
Pamela: Just to follow up on Ann's question about Egypt. Isn't Israel a hair's breath away from Mubarak? Once he's finished, and he's rather old, the Muslim Brotherhood is poised to take power. What's you're vision of Egypt post Mubarak? I mean there's problems there.
General Amidror: No question that there are problems. But you have to remember that it is not only Mubarak. Egypt is a very strong people, and systems which believe that it will be a disaster for Egypt if the Muslim Brotherhood will take control of Egypt and they will do everything in their hands, not because of Israel, because of Egypt, to stop such a process and not to let it materialize, and I hope that they will wine at the end of the day. It is not in our hands. We cannot make the difference to change the situation in Cairo, and we are not part of Egyptian society, but I can ensure you, in the Egyptian society there are many many people and elements and the military forces and others which are very aware of the danger of the Muslim Brother and will do whatever they can to prevent it. Though we have to elaborate it and to assess the situation every day and to learn what it going on, yes. Can we change it? The answer is no. And yes, we are living in a very tough area and we have to be more prepared in the future, but I think that Egypt is not going to change in the next few years, and if such a change will occur in Egypt we will have to change all our attitude towards the south frontier.
Allen Roth: General, you started out by saying that for us to understand what has been occurring that we must understand that Iran played a major role here. What policies do you feel that the United States, the Free World and Israel should have towards Iran, and Syria, and let me just say that there are movements here in the United States, Richard Holbrook had an op-ed in the Washington Post in which he was arguing that the United States, the Bush Administration, just like the Clinton Administration, and I guess the Carter Administrations should be engaging Syria in a more serious fashion and to drag it away from Iran. Do you think that that's a plausible foreign policy move, or are there other things that you think we should be doing?
General Amidror: I thought that this naivety does not exist any more, but ....(laughter) Again and again, you have to deal with the same people, the same naivety, and I must say that I envy them, because it's easier, with a better life to look with a very optimistic view and to believe that it is our... to be blamed and if we would only change our attitude, other fights like the Syrians and the Iranians will change their policy. It's we that are not good enough to meet their needs and situation. The past will be blamed that we are not going far enough to meet what they have in mind. I think that after so many years, and I think that what happened in the Lebanon is a very good example. What could Israel do more than unilateral retreat to the international border which was demarked by the United Nations. We have a paper, you know know every criminal has a paper. Honestly we don't have any connection to the police. So we have a paper from the United Nations that we retreated to the international border as was defined by the United Nations, including Shebaa farms, but look at Hezbollah, they are staying after this retreat, so what they mean to be engaged if you want there is a friend of mine in Washington who used to say, if you want to be engaged, you have to buy a ring. (laughter) What ring would they accept, more than Clinton was ready to offer after the father? What ring which is better than was offered by Carter to our neighbors. So I envy them. I think that they are mistaken. The problem is that if you follow their way, at the end of the day you find yourself with a nuclear Iran, because that was the assumption, exactly the assumption, of the Europeans for many years. let's engage the Iranians, let's talk with them. Be as they called it critical dialogue, and then we will convince them, offering some carrot and threatening them, but being in dialogue and engagement, in the end what we have, nuclear Iran. So I must, after so many years years, experience all this dialogue and engagement and promises and processes and on former tracks and tricks, two tracks, I don't believe. In the end, this ideology of radical Islam is against the existence of any liberal system in the world. They think that democracy is a poison to the Muslim world, and at the end of the day they cannot compromise on their ideology, and this is as I said, a very naive assumptions that they will if we will be ready, and be open enough, and engage them, and have a dialogue with them. And again and again we have to try to convince that this is a naivety that we will pay at the end with blood for this kind of mistake.
Questioner: General I have a question for you. There is a speculative piece by Seymore Hirsch in the New Yorker, and cutting through lots of words in this piece he tries to present a case that basically the US wanted essentially a sort of test of tactics through an aerial campaign in Lebanon through the proxy, I hate to use that word, of the IAF, in particular. A number of us seem to feel that that's nothing more, nothing less than sheer speculation on Seymore Hirsch's side.
General Amidror: It's like, it's not Al-Qaeda, but the Mossad who made the explosion on 9/11.
Questioner: Correct.
General Amidror: And all these speculations and conspiracies --
Pamela: Louder.
General Amidror: --and so forth, in one word, nonsense.
Questioner: So in one word, what was that?
General Amidror: Nonsense.
Questioner: Nothing. Nada.
Pamela: Nonsense.
General Amidror: Nonsense,
Questioner: Nonsense, right.
Pamela: If you could speak up. It would so great up if you could speak up.
Questioner: There's a second part of my question which has to deal with...
General Amidror: It reminds me that a friend of mine used to read anti-semite publications, I asked him why. He said Israel is so great in these publications. (laughter)
Questioner: Israel has some military assets that could, or could not be used in a coordinated effort against Iran. How realistic do you think that is? Here I'm saying that--
General Amidror: I think that the best realistic answer to that is that is something that should be worked between the Pentagon and the national defense of Israel, and not in any way, in any open place, and if they know how to do it, if they think both sides of the line that it is good for both countries and in the interests of both countries to have such a dialogue, and I'm sure that if they'll decide it is good for both countries they will have this ....
Questioner: Okay, I understand the import of your comment.
Ann Lieberman: This is Ann Lieberman again, I've been reading this article that you wrote for bloggers, it's called "Defeating Iranian-Syrian Axis in Lebanon." It was published in Jerusalem Issue briefs item 6, number 2, in July, and at the end of that, in your conclusion, General, you say that Israel must succeed on the diplomatic front in addition to the battlefield, and that it would nothing short of catastrophic for Israel and the international community if diplomatic efforts result in Israel being forced to end its military operation prematurely. It seems to me that that's exactly what's happened. So now that it's happened, do you consider this a catastrophe?
General Amidror:It's not a catastrophe, you know, what I wrote was a black and white situation, and as you know in reality the life are more gray. And I think that as I said at the beginning, there is a very good potential in the Security Council resolution. The problem is that it is in the hands of, how to call it, not the best operator Secretary-General, and the government of the State of Lebanon, and now we have to look at it and to see that it will end at the catastrophic, I mean that Hezbollah will rebuild itself under the umbrella of United Nations forces, enhanced UNIFIL, and UNIFIL was a joke when I was chief of the Northern Command, it would just prevent us from acting against Hezbollah and letting Hezbollah do whatever it wants. So I don't know what we need on the ground and it depends on ... and the people in the United Nations, and the government of Lebanon. We have to be very, very sharp in our reactions to any change in the implementation and not let the Secretary-General go around instead of going straight away to implement this resolution. So I don't think that it's catastrophic, there is a potential of being catastrophic, or potential of being a very good resolution, now it depends on the international community and mainly the United Nations.
Ann Lieberman: Thank you.
Pamela: Pamela, Atlas Shrugs. Does Israel's intelligence have any concerns that Iran, instead of building their nuclear weapon actually bought a nuclear weapon from their pals over in North Korea. I'm sure you know they were there when they shot off those missiles, on July 4th, I'm sure that symbolism was lost on no one. Instead of going to all the trouble of building one, that starving nation could sure use the petrodollars. What is Israel prepared to do? Is Israel concerned about August 22 and the anniversary of the 12th Imam descending to Jerusalem? What's going on with that?
General Amidror: I read the paper about the 22nd of August. I must say it didn't convince me, not because of lack of knowledge, in this ... the professor is a very competent one and very profound one, but as far we know they don't have yet a nuclear capability. They can buy one, but by buying one you don't make two ..., because you have to think about the second and the third day. Israel is in a position to defend itself. The Arrow system is operational, and we believe that we can kill many, if not all of the missiles that will be launched by the Iranians. In a way, it's easier to deal with the Iranian missiles than with the primitive Katyushas, and we believe that we are ready to do it and I don't believe that the Iranians are in a positions to launch now any missile towards Israel with nuclear warhead, but we have to prepare ourselves for the next five years, because then they will have this capability, and you are right this is an existential threat to the State of Israel and we have to think how to defend ourselves and how to prevent it from materializing in the next five years. We're making almost everything that is in our hands to postpone it at least, or to prevent it, and if we will not succeed to postpone or to prevent to be in a position to defend ourselves. And if these two stages will not be enough, Israel should be in a position that within five years, if not today, launching nuclear warheads towards Israel will be the end of Tehran, Qom, and other big cities, and maybe the end of the Persian culture. We have to be in a position to do it in the future. If we are not in the position to do it today.
There's more. Read it.