Monday, February 12, 2018

Is this war with Iran--or a dangerous chess game?

Two days ago, Iran sent a sophisticated drone into northern Israel. Israel shot down the drone. What happened next isn't exactly clear. But the bottom line that day was, Israel sent jets (and maybe missiles) deep into Syria to attack military sites Israel said were both Syrian and Iranian. Syrian (or Iran-manned) anti-aircraft sites shot down one Israeli fighter jet. The crew bailed out, landing inside Israel. Both survived. 

Now, we talk of war with Iran (Yaakov Katz, "The open war with Iran has begun", jerusalempost, February 11, 2018). Is this what's in our near future--war? Or, are we looking at a complex cat-mouse game; or, is what comes now a nuanced,  multilayered chess game playing out on a vast real-time game-board topography?

Take a look at the essay below. It's quite a read. It's by essayist Vic Rosenthal, called, "Our conflict as multiplayer 3-D chess". I found it at  the website abuyehuda on February 9, 2018. As you read it, think about what's been going on for the last year between Israel and Iran, Hamas, the Palestinian Authority, Syria and Hezbollah. My comments follow: 

"The conflict between Israel and her enemies is both like and unlike the game of chess.

In ordinary chess there are only two players, and their objectives are identical: to checkmate the opposing king. In the Jewish/Muslim conflict in the Middle East there are a multitude of players, each with its own objective. For example, Israel’s goal is to establish herself as a stable, peaceful country. The Palestinian goal is to replace Israel with an Arab state and remove the Jews from the land between the river and the sea. The Iranian goal is to eliminate an obstacle to expanding Iran’s area of influence throughout the region, and to become a hero to the Muslim world by defeating the Jews. And there are also Russians, Americans, Turks, and others playing.

Nevertheless, chess is a game of strategy based on war – simpler than reality although complicated enough –  so there are analogies that can be drawn.

For example, in the opening part of a game of chess, both sides jockey for position. Conflict is muted – a pawn here or there is traded, but the object is to arrange one’s pieces so that after the “middlegame” when the more powerful ones clash, the other side will be at a disadvantage, perhaps with holes blasted in the defenses surrounding its king, with parts of its army destroyed, and forced to constantly defend itself with no respite to develop a counterattack.

Israel and Iran are currently in the positional phase, “developing their pieces” in chess terminology, but make no mistake, what happens today is preparatory to a more violent confrontation. Iran (which did not invent chess but has been playing it since at least 600 CE) is acting systematically to prepare for the more violent middlegame. The Iranian regime is a better than average player.

Israel and the Palestinians are mediocre players, making many “rookie mistakes,” although the Palestinians play somewhat more competently than Israel. Both sides often act without sufficient consideration of the obvious moves that the other side will make in response. For example, in December of 1992 Israel expelled 400 Palestinians , mostly associated with Hamas, to Lebanon. Unfortunately, Lebanon refused to take them, and within a year all of the deported Palestinians had been permitted to return.

But that was a small mistake. The biggest and most damaging error made by Israel was the massive sacrifice offered in the Oslo Accords. It is sometimes advantageous to make an unbalanced exchange in chess, to give up an important piece in return for a great positional advantage or to make possible a “combination” in which the opponent can be forced to choose between unacceptable alternatives. Israel gave up an important piece when she allowed the dying, irrelevant PLO to come back to life, and to insert its cancerous cells into her body.

The sacrifice was supposed to bring about a change in the PLO’s objectives and to make peace possible. But it was based on a complete misunderstanding of the nature and motivations of Arafat and the PLO. The Palestinians accepted the sacrifice and ramped up terrorism and diplomatic warfare against Israel. At the same time, the PLO began its educational project which has borne fruit in today’s young “lone wolf” terrorists.

The biggest Palestinian mistake has been to never accept Israeli offers of a state, even with restrictions on militarization and lack of a “right of return” for the descendants of 1948 Arab refugees. A Palestinian state, no matter how limited, would have greatly improved their strategic and diplomatic positions, and given them time and space to prepare to strike at the heart of the Jewish state. Their ideological dogmatism prevents them from playing an innovative game.

In chess, both sides start almost even (White has a slight advantage from moving first). By 1993, Israel had developed a great advantage over most of its opponents. But much has been lost from a series of blunders, particularly Oslo and the withdrawals from South Lebanon and Gaza. And as Israel has played more and more poorly, the Palestinians have improved. They have taken advantage of the UN and the historic anti-Jewish attitudes in Europe to make significant diplomatic gains. They have not been so successful with the terrorism gambit, as Israel’s security forces have become better at counteracting it.

Iran, busy with her war against Iraq, was mostly out of the game against Israel until the 1990s. But she has recently started to demonstrate her skill. She leveraged the US to end sanctions, prevent financial collapse and provide funding for her military plans, while keeping her nuclear program and even legitimizing it. She exploited the chaos in Iraq and Syria to expand her influence in the region, and to prepare new fronts for the coming war with Israel. She even got the US and Russia to do some of the fighting for her.

Israel is hampered by the lack of a consistent strategy against any of her opponents, possibly because of her internal divisions and democratic tradition. Even when there is a strategy, there is often poor execution. Israel’s pieces, to continue the analogy, sometimes don’t move where they are supposed to! This is less of a problem for the Palestinian, Iranian and Russian players, where there is more or less dictatorial control.

The game continues, in its three (or more) dimensional, multiplayer form. Israel’s most dangerous enemy, Iran, is biding her time until she feels that she is strong enough to come out of the slashing violence of the middlegame with a winning advantage. But this phase will not continue forever.

The middlegame is preparation for the endgame, the systematic pursuit of the enemy that will result in the players realizing or not realizing their often inconsistent goals. That’s in the future. We can’t get there except through the violent middlegame. Let’s hope we have a good strategy and competent leaders to execute it.

But life isn’t chess. Life is more complicated and beset by unexpected events. And if you lose, you don’t get another chance.

My comment: this essay is excellent. It suggests that, in asymmetrical war, a low-tech enemy can still attack a high-tech enemy with effectiveness. It also suggests that Iran is a serious 'player' with serious capabilties. 

One major mistake by Israel, coupled with one or two major  breaks for the Arab enemy, could mean the Islamic conquest of the Jewish state. In other words, Israel, this essay suggests, faces great risk against an implacable enemy--or, more accurately, five implacable enemies: Hamas, the Palestinian Authority, Hezbollah, Syria and Iran. 

What would happen if these five enemies decided to attack Israel in a coordinated modern-day blitzkrieg?

What this essay neglects--because this point is outside the purview of the essay--is that Israel is no normal country. It doesn't exist or survive by the might of its army or the keenness of its political leadership. Israel survives because of something most people neglect and many refuse to believe: we are strong only because the Hand of HaShem--the G-d of Israel--protects us. 

Many laugh at such a thought. Let them laugh. 

Many scoff. Let them scoff.

When you live in Israel and see the dangers and difficulties we face, you realize this land is indeed a land of miracle. These miracles are everywhere. All you need do is open your eyes.

These miracles don't come from IBM, Apple or Procter and Gamble.They don't come from the IDF. They certainly don't come from Israel's political leadership.  

They come from G-d.

Right now, Iran is pushing forward with its kill-Israel agenda. Its Arab allies are eager to join in. 

The military chess game is on. 

The moves will be complex. There will be fear. There will be confusion. There will be clashes where one mistake could create horrific unintended consequences.

There will be only one winner. 

How will Israel win? G-d knows.

No comments:

Post a Comment