Middle East Defence & Security

[Sandhi Yudha]

Jokowi aide quashes report Indonesia was set to open ties with Israel - Middle East and Africa - The Jakarta Post

Coordinator of President Jokowi's special aides Ari Dwipayana said in a statement issued late last week that no deal had been struck between Indonesia and Israel on the establishment of diplomatic relations.

www.thejakartapost.com

This is old stories has been squash by Indonesian officials more than a month ago. Seems some in Israel so desperate to shown the world, that Muslims nations still want to 'normalize' with Israel, after they bomb and kill teens of thousands Palestinians.

No..Now some in Israel become more 'knowledgeable' on Indonesian politics, then Indonesian them selves. Spreading rumours and 'lies' shown how desperate Israel has become. The reality that no administration in Indonesia can survive, if they normalize with Israel after this, is not real. The delusional thinking from Israel on Muslim nations, is the reality.

The price for normalisation from Muslim Nations is Palestinian statehood. Only Israel that keep that delusional believe otherwise.

There is indeed no good reason for Indonesia to normalize diplomatic ties with/acknowledge the state of israel. Doing that just to be able to join OECD will be a very backboneless and shameless act.

Media Hareetz Sebut Indonesia Komitmen Jalin Hubungan Diplomatik dengan Israel Demi Masuk OECD? Ini Respons Kemlu RI

Media Israel itu memuat dalam artikel bertajuk Indonesia Commits to Establishing Diplomatic Ties With Israel for First Time in History.

www.liputan6.com

It will be as realistic as the Netherlands or the UK want to do the same with Russia now.

 

[Ananda]

Besides, was it suicide for Indonesia to have defense trade with Israel?

There never been 'defense trade' with Israel. It is always defense trade with other parties. In 80's those A-4 are with US, it is US build fighters that happens operate by Israel. The Aerostar UAV is with Philippines supplier that happens source it from Israel company. The turrets for Pandur II is source from Brazil, deal with Brazilian company that happens JV with Israel ones.

They're never going to be deal with Israel, official connection with Israel and Diplomatic relationship with Israel unless Palestinian 'real' sovereign statehood happening. Especially after this, no Muslim nation or Muslim majority nation administration or regime willing to risk their political survival for Israel sake. The so call Palestinian state is not a real sovereign statehood, is delusional to say that it is ever been a sovereign ones. The price is goes up, if Israel want to have normalisation with Muslim world.

The closest situation when Indonesia 'nearly' having open diplomatic relationship with Israel, was when Suharto have discussion with Rabin. That's happening also relate with Arafat support. This is when Indonesia under 'strong' man that practically can dictate anything in Indonesia.

Hubungan rahasia Indonesia-Israel: Operasi Alpha, temu Suharto-Rabin, pembelian pesawat tempur - BBC News Indonesia

Krisis terkait pengakuan Yerusalem oleh AS, membuat kita menoleh lagi pada hubungan Indonesia-Israel, yang kendati tak memiliki hubungan diplomatik, ternyata pernah menjalin kerja sama rahasia di bidang militer dan perdagangan.

www.bbc.com

Even then, with much more condusive situation, with Israel under administration 'relative' much more willingness toward Palestine (Rabin one), that's not happening. Present condition with someone like Netanyahu? Now that's really delusional if ever think will happen.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

There never been 'defense trade' with Israel. It is always defense trade with other parties. In 80's those A-4 are with US, it is US build fighters that happens operate by Israel. The Aerostar UAV is with Philippines supplier that happens source it from Israel company. The turrets for Pandur II is source from Brazil, deal with Brazilian company that happens JV with Israel ones.

Yeah sure keep telling yourself that buddy.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

According to Hamas's MoH (on Telegram), the total number of casualties in Gaza has recently dropped from 33,000 to 21,000.

Hamas-Run Gaza Health Ministry Admits to Flaws in Casualty Data

The Hamas-run Gaza Ministry of Health said on April 6 that it had “incomplete data” for 11,371 of the 33,091 Palestinian fatalities it claims to have documented. In a statistical...

www.fdd.org

Combined with the IDF's claim of 13,000 terrorists killed, this means the ratio of civilians to combatants is 0.6:1.
In an environment so difficult to operate in, this is no less than a phenomenal achievement.

 

[Ananda]

Yeah sure keep telling yourself that buddy.

Well I keep in realism not delusional Israel thinking know it all attitude on Muslim World.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

Iran launches "dozens" of drones toward Israel. They appear to be launched an hour before midnight, and should take several hours to arrive.
I wonder what the GPS jamming will do to them. The IDF has more than just that in place, but still. GPS signals are spoofed to show Beirut.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1779239811682808287

My assessment:
Iran has a substantial arsenal of munitions. It also has a substantial arsenal of expiring munitions. I believe that instead of going for a quality attack, it ticks off the "retaliation" box with volume, while utilizing mostly expiring munitions mixed with a few quality ones.
From a strategic standpoint, it has little interest in expending its valuable high quality munitions in a single attack.
In this arsenal, Iran has drones, cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles. Each has different travel time, so I assume over night more and more launches will be reported as they are synced with earlier launches of slower munitions for a simultaneous hit.
One of Iran's more powerful tools in this attack is Hezbollah's large arsenal of medium range rockets that can also be synced as the less destructive but more exhausting weapon - intended to deplete Israel's air defense munitions right before impact.

 

[KipPotapych]

^ Was thinking the exact same thing myself. We will see. I would also guess that a great deal of these will be intercepted by the US (and possibly others) long before they get anywhere near Israel.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

^ Was thinking the exact same thing myself. We will see. I would also guess that a great deal of these will be intercepted by the US (and possibly others) long before they get anywhere near Israel.

And you are correct. Numerous Arab states have reportedly declared readiness to intercept incoming threats bound for Israel. The US has reportedly also aided in the interception of drones, and British aircraft have also reportedly launched from Akrotiri AB for this mission.

Babak is mostly reliable.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1779270595332698480

 

[seaspear]

There have been reports of American bases in Iraq being targeted by such drones at the same time? the number of these Shaheed drones have been put at anywhere up to three hundred which would dwarf such attacks by Russia on Ukraine if correct

 

[KipPotapych]

There have been reports of American bases in Iraq being targeted by such drones at the same time? the number of these Shaheed drones have been put at anywhere up to three hundred which would dwarf such attacks by Russia on Ukraine if correct

I haven’t seen reports of the US assets being targeted during the attack on Israel, but NYT reported citing a couple of unnamed Israeli officials that Iran sent 185 drones, 36 cruise missiles, and 110 surface to surface missiles. Most were launched from Iran, but some from Iraq and Yemen.

Israel Reports Light Damage After Iran Launches Large Strike

Iran fired more than 300 drones and missiles at Israel overnight. The U.S. military shot dozens of them down, but most were intercepted by Israel’s military.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Big_Zucchini]

Ok so Iran got totally rekt last night but I wouldn't count this as an Israeli victory. Here's what I think:

1. Decades of appeasement policy by Israel (specifically by Netanyahu) have brought Iran to the point where it can launch massive volleys of assorted fires on Israel without significantly affecting its arsenal.

2. This policy has also allowed Iran to gain new capabilities rapidly. From a handful of primitive BMs in 2010 to potentially thousands of precise, reliable, and not wholly susceptible to Israeli soft kill, BMs, in 2024.

3. Such attacks may become the new norm. If in the past Iran would have Hezbollah or Syrian militias respond by firing a barrage of rockets, or a few long range heavy rockets, then starting today Iran may attempt to retaliate for every high profile attack in a manner similar or of greater magnitude than last night.

4. Israel so far has been only attacking Iranian assets outside Iran. The few attacks on Iranian soil were of low magnitude - typically assassinations or destruction of select pieces of equipment, and themselves are a very rare occurrence. For Israel to restore deterrence, this must change. Until then, Iran can safely assume it has the upper hand and that time is on its side.

5. While Iran has constructed robust capabilities to threaten Israel with a vast array of munition types, Israel does not have a similar capability. Israel indeed has the ability to attack Iran, but it relies on mechanisms and systems that are far more sensitive to geopolitical changes or fluctuations in asset readiness, for example some country closing its airspace or a temporary shut down of aerial refueling assets. Israel has classified items that can permit such attacks in a manner simpler than one might assume, and I can only speculate on some things like air launched ballistic missiles and long range cruise missiles, but when an armed force keeps a system secret, especially an offensive one that one can hardly hide from spotters, it typically also has implications regarding its availability and the capacity to use it. Classified systems are typically something you have in the dozens or low hundreds, not thousands ready for immediate use.
One "classified" item in the IAF's arsenal is its fleet of Harpy/Harop drones ready to do SEAD across the region on a short notice, but those systems aren't really hidden from the public. They're widely marketed. Potential exotic capabilities like air launched BMs I mentioned earlier - are also marketed.

6. In the short term, the expenditure on each such attack is massive on Israel's side. About 1-1.3 billion USD are estimated by the former financial advisor to the IDF's CoGS. This is equivalent to about 5-7% of Israel's annual defense budget blown in a single night. A massive hit. It is never sustainable to keep defending oneself without attacking the source, and it is more valid when such costs are incurred.

 

[seaspear]

I understood 3 ballistic missiles hit the Nevatim airbase film footage seems to show some fires

 

[Big_Zucchini]

Should Israel work to create a different equation with the US?

The US is Israel's most valuable ally. It is also its only ally that is capable of combat and aiding it in combat.

The US also abuses this status to pressure Israel into making strategically bad decisions such as accepting hits and not retaliating. A policy that will ultimately strengthens Israel's enemies and delays wars until they are more destructive, by which point the incumbent president retires. Rinse and repeat for every president. Netanyahu is also to blame for this for caving in to such requests, and for seeking out such a policy for himself as well.

What Israel needs is first a new leadership - a technocratic, secular government that will pursue Israel's strategic goals and interests.

What Israel needs second is a strategy in which Israel seeks maximum decoupling from the US and either gain substantial new soft power, or spread its dependencies better in a way that allows it to pursue its own agenda without any nation being able to apply too high leverage on its own.
Israel needs to answer aggression with aggression. This is not something it can magically reconcile with the US's strategy of global appeasement. Israel simply doesn't have the luxury of appeasing its enemies.
Israel's leadership must recognize that hostile nations such as Iran, Russia, and China, are not considered hostile enough to the west to justify going to war with, and hostilities with them will only earn western condemnation given enough time.

It would serve well to see additional partnerships. Not to replace the US, which in fact we should bolster our partnership with, but as rainy day alternatives.

There is the very real possibility Israel will be forced into military action that its allies will oppose, and it needs to maintain the capability of prosecuting such actions, at least for a short period of time (weeks).

https://www.axios.com/2024/04/14/biden-netanyahu-iran-israel-us-wont-support

 

[John Fedup]

Should Israel work to create a different equation with the US?

The US is Israel's most valuable ally. It is also its only ally that is capable of combat and aiding it in combat.

The US also abuses this status to pressure Israel into making strategically bad decisions such as accepting hits and not retaliating. A policy that will ultimately strengthens Israel's enemies and delays wars until they are more destructive, by which point the incumbent president retires. Rinse and repeat for every president. Netanyahu is also to blame for this for caving in to such requests, and for seeking out such a policy for himself as well.

What Israel needs is first a new leadership - a technocratic, secular government that will pursue Israel's strategic goals and interests.

What Israel needs second is a strategy in which Israel seeks maximum decoupling from the US and either gain substantial new soft power, or spread its dependencies better in a way that allows it to pursue its own agenda without any nation being able to apply too high leverage on its own.
Israel needs to answer aggression with aggression. This is not something it can magically reconcile with the US's strategy of global appeasement. Israel simply doesn't have the luxury of appeasing its enemies.
Israel's leadership must recognize that hostile nations such as Iran, Russia, and China, are not considered hostile enough to the west to justify going to war with, and hostilities with them will only earn western condemnation given enough time.

It would serve well to see additional partnerships. Not to replace the US, which in fact we should bolster our partnership with, but as rainy day alternatives.

There is the very real possibility Israel will be forced into military action that its allies will oppose, and it needs to maintain the capability of prosecuting such actions, at least for a short period of time (weeks).

https://www.axios.com/2024/04/14/biden-netanyahu-iran-israel-us-wont-support

Having rainy day alternatives to the US(especially now with its dysfunctional government) is desirable but where do you find these alternatives?

 

[Delta204]

Should Israel work to create a different equation with the US?

The US is Israel's most valuable ally. It is also its only ally that is capable of combat and aiding it in combat.

The US also abuses this status to pressure Israel into making strategically bad decisions such as accepting hits and not retaliating. A policy that will ultimately strengthens Israel's enemies and delays wars until they are more destructive, by which point the incumbent president retires. Rinse and repeat for every president. Netanyahu is also to blame for this for caving in to such requests, and for seeking out such a policy for himself as well.

What Israel needs is first a new leadership - a technocratic, secular government that will pursue Israel's strategic goals and interests.

What Israel needs second is a strategy in which Israel seeks maximum decoupling from the US and either gain substantial new soft power, or spread its dependencies better in a way that allows it to pursue its own agenda without any nation being able to apply too high leverage on its own.
Israel needs to answer aggression with aggression. This is not something it can magically reconcile with the US's strategy of global appeasement. Israel simply doesn't have the luxury of appeasing its enemies.
Israel's leadership must recognize that hostile nations such as Iran, Russia, and China, are not considered hostile enough to the west to justify going to war with, and hostilities with them will only earn western condemnation given enough time.

It would serve well to see additional partnerships. Not to replace the US, which in fact we should bolster our partnership with, but as rainy day alternatives.

There is the very real possibility Israel will be forced into military action that its allies will oppose, and it needs to maintain the capability of prosecuting such actions, at least for a short period of time (weeks).

https://www.axios.com/2024/04/14/biden-netanyahu-iran-israel-us-wont-support

Which countries do you suggest Israel could forge stronger relations with to counterbalance your proposed decoupling from the US? Have you seen the recent UN votes on Gaza? The US itself has become isolated to a degree with it's continued support of Israel which is a remarkable development of its own. I would suggest Israel should start by decoupling from Netanyahu first before it reevaluates it's most important strategic relationship.

 

[Delta204]

Your point about delaying wars until they are more destructive warrants further discussion. But I don't see how an earlier war with Iran could have necessarily prevented it's rapid BM development that has occurred over the last decade other than delaying it for a few years. This issue is not just specific to Iran, we are now living in an age where large numbers of effective BM can be build my almost any moderate military power. Yesterday gave us a glimpse of what future state v state warfare will look like (salvos of relatively cheap but effective missiles & drones arriving in a coordinated manner) and all modern militaries will all need to adjust accordingly. Unless you are suggesting Israel could have tried to topple the regime perhaps?

Perhaps Israel could pursue a type of strategic containment framework against Iran similar to AUKUS. Iran has many enemies in the region and I feel that there is more potential for Israel to form strategic alliances with them. That may take time however, considering the current sentiments over the Gaza war.

 

[John Fedup]

Your point about delaying wars until they are more destructive warrants further discussion. But I don't see how an earlier war with Iran could have necessarily prevented it's rapid BM development that has occurred over the last decade other than delaying it for a few years. This issue is not just specific to Iran, we are now living in an age where large numbers of effective BM can be build my almost any moderate military power. Yesterday gave us a glimpse of what future state v state warfare will look like (salvos of relatively cheap but effective missiles & drones arriving in a coordinated manner) and all modern militaries will all need to adjust accordingly. Unless you are suggesting Israel could have tried to topple the regime perhaps?

Perhaps Israel could pursue a type of strategic containment framework against Iran similar to AUKUS. Iran has many enemies in the region and I feel that there is more potential for Israel to form strategic alliances with them. That may take time however, considering the current sentiments over the Gaza war.

The problem of regimes in the region are they are not stable wrt their citizens. It is difficult to unbrain wash decades of “death to Jews and destroy Israel”. Iran probably has a much larger population amicable to regime change but this should have been exploited years ago.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

Having rainy day alternatives to the US(especially now with its dysfunctional government) is desirable but where do you find these alternatives?

I merely suggested a way forward. Surely others know better than I do, what alternatives Israel has. And I reiterate that despite this - relations with the US should be improved.
I think one example is India. Its vast metalworking industry, vast economy, thirst for military industrial independence, and policy of non-alignment make it a prime candidate for wartime supplies.
Israel could identify critical items, e.g. iron GP bombs, 155mm artillery shells, 120mm mortar and tank shells, and 122mm tubes, and guidance kits for these. Israel would provide ToT for these items for India's own use and at near zero cost, and in return India would pledge portions of its stocks and production priority for Israel.
Israel could also pledge similar things in case India enters a state of war.

South Korea is a good example of a country that forced itself into multiple markets by undercutting competitors' prices. Israel could adopt similar policy to try and secure production in eastern European states that are far more favorable to Israel compared to western Europe, and take their defense seriously. Outstanding examples are Czech Republic and Poland.

Perhaps Israel could pursue a type of strategic containment framework against Iran similar to AUKUS. Iran has many enemies in the region and I feel that there is more potential for Israel to form strategic alliances with them. That may take time however, considering the current sentiments over the Gaza war.

The interception of Iranian missiles by Arab states is exactly that. Israel has worked with the US and Arab states to create a regional air defense alliance and it has proven itself again last night. Sentiments or not, Jordan and Saudi Arabia have participated kinetically, showing that practical interests outweigh the whims of the plebs.

Your point about delaying wars until they are more destructive warrants further discussion. But I don't see how an earlier war with Iran could have necessarily prevented it's rapid BM development that has occurred over the last decade other than delaying it for a few years. This issue is not just specific to Iran, we are now living in an age where large numbers of effective BM can be build my almost any moderate military power. Yesterday gave us a glimpse of what future state v state warfare will look like (salvos of relatively cheap but effective missiles & drones arriving in a coordinated manner) and all modern militaries will all need to adjust accordingly. Unless you are suggesting Israel could have tried to topple the regime perhaps?

I do not suggest toppling the regime as I do not think it is necessarily militarily viable. It's more a topic for a superpower to handle.
Regardless, Israel's policy in Syria worked very well. Syria is no longer a threat to Israel, and Iranian militias there are operationally very limited. It is evident that Iran had to launch its BMs from Iraq. I am not aware of BMs launched from Syria.

Similar policy can be adopted in Iraq, Lebanon, and Iran. Strikes can be conducted occasionally to gradually remove weapons production and development capabilities, and reduce their available stocks.
It won't be an overnight crippling of their capabilities, but over several years their fighting capabilities will be reduced to the point where they cannot project power.

 

[John Fedup]

Certainly India could be an important alternative. However SK has a huge export of non Military products worldwide that they likely don’t want to jeopardize. The same applies to Japan. What t could change is the increased Chinese threats which may overcome the commercial loss in favour of access to Israeli military technology.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

Certainly India could be an important alternative. However SK has a huge export of non Military products worldwide that they likely don’t want to jeopardize. The same applies to Japan. What t could change is the increased Chinese threats which may overcome the commercial loss in favour of access to Israeli military technology.

I have yet to see evidence of ties with Israel having any effect on commerce for any state.
Practically any nation with formal ties with Israel also has some form of trade. Some without formal ties too.