In Focus: Israel prepares for war Israel continues to be shaken by its defeat in its 2006 war on Lebanon, so the sabre-rattling will continue, writes Galal Nassar Undoubtedly one of Israel's foremost security concerns is the ramifications of its war against Lebanon in July 2006 on the image and efficacy of its deterrent power and on the part this plays in shaping policies in the region. Without a doubt, the repercussions of that war will be frequently tapped in the one-upmanship and mutual recriminations between the factions in the internal Likud elections and the subsequent Knesset elections. Certainly, too, Israel would like to settle many other issues, not least of which is the Iranian nuclear question that is linked one way or another to Hizbullah's rise in Lebanon as a deterrent power to the Israeli army. It was that power that poked a hole in the decades-long mystique of Israeli deterrence, a hole that Israeli leaders have been desperate to repair in the face of Hizbullah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah's constant boasts and threats. So far, the opportunity to do this convincingly has yet to present itself. However, when Nasrallah recently threatened to destroy the Israeli Defence Forces' (IDF) fifth division, which is currently preparing for another invasion of southern Lebanon, Israeli officials could not help but to break their long-held silence on this sore point. It was Defence Minister Ehud Barak who spoke, cautioning anyone against trying to put Israel's military power to the test. The defence minister's response was obviously an attempt to sap Nasrallah's mounting confidence, which appears to be grounded in Hizbullah's military capacities, which in turn appear to be increasing by the day according to regional and international reports. Moreover, through such statements Barak wants to create the impression that he holds the initiative and that he is the best person to overhaul the Israeli military establishment and revitalise the power and prestige of the Israeli military deterrent. Clearly, too, he is trying to bolster the confidence of the Israeli public in the IDF as well as in the ability of the Labour Party, which he heads, to meet all risks and challenges that face the Hebrew state following the failures of Ehud Olmert's Kadima Party. While Barak is issuing statements meant to serve tactical, propaganda and electoral ends at once, Major General Moshe Ivri- Sukenik, who resigned as commander of the IDF Northern Command earlier this year, has sharply criticised IDF training and readiness. Israel is not equipped to confront anticipatable challenges, he warned earlier this month. The general's criticisms are indicative of the degree of chaos in the management of the military establishment that has become prey to internal party squabbles and rivalries between the key political players in Israeli society. Barak may not have responded directly to Nasrallah's boast that he would destroy any units of the Israeli army if they crossed the border into Lebanon, but it was clear enough whom he was referring to when he issued his caution. In a campaign rally in the Kiryat Shmona settlement, he said: "Israel is keeping both eyes open and following very closely what is happening on the other side of the border and beneath the ground. I advise our neighbours not to make the mistake of trying to test us. We are prepared for any attempt to upset the delicate balance. In recent months we have conducted tough military exercises and we continue to do so." In a meeting with the branch leaders of the Labour Party, Barak further spoke of "tension" on the northern border. He said that UN Security Council Resolution 1701 was "the one small success that Israel accomplished from the second Lebanese war". But, he added, even that was not being applied and "Hizbullah is continuing to gather strength and arms." Then he repeated his warning: "Israel is strong and we are determined to defend our country against every enemy and adversary. I do not advise anyone on any front to try to test us." But even as Barak boasts and threatens, the debate in Israel continues to rage over whether the IDF is truly capable of handling the next war. Strategists there know the next war will be a brutal one and they are aware of how much has changed at all levels in the region. At the same time, they are in a quandary. If they start a war, their northern front is not sufficiently fortified to guarantee a victory in the next round, and another failure would be more disastrous than that of July-August 2006. General Ivri-Sukenik is particularly astute to the risks, which is why he has been so harsh in his criticism of the flaws in the army's training programme since that war. He described the army before the war two years ago as "rusted", and described the results of that war as "embarrassing". But in spite of this, he told a conference on the land war in Lebanon, the IDF general staff was not taking things seriously. "We are not training sufficiently. We are not giving people the minimum means to succeed." Moreover, he cautioned, at a time when there should be priority on training, the government was talking about cutting the defence budget. "The result is that next year, after the cut, the readiness level will once more be low," he said. He also urged the IDF to address the threat of short-range Katyusha rockets. That, too, was an important lesson learned from the last war in Lebanon, as virtually all observers of Israel's preparations for the forthcoming war agree. Of course, Israel does have another choice. It could postpone another war with Hizbullah or it could abandon the idea altogether. It could simultaneously abandon the notion of delivering a military strike against Iran, plans for which are connected to the situation in Lebanon and may account for the rise of sabre-rattling on that front. However, this alternative means that Israel would have to recognise Iran as a rival regional power with Hizbullah serving as its arm to the north of Israel. Under the conditions of the new regional balance Israel would have to pay certain political costs. I believe that Barak's statements to the press are essentially trial balloons. He wants to gauge the extent of popular support for him and his party and whether this would increase if he made war with Hizbullah an opening gambit in this electoral campaign. But that is all I believe they are. He is aware of how delicate the situation is and how critical the condition of the IDF is, regardless of whether the forthcoming war is unleashed against Hizbullah on land or against Iran by missile fire.
