OPINION — Israel is well-positioned as 2019 begins, but it is also primed to face serious challenges over the next twelve months. The following five strategic goals are critical—and achievable—for securing Israel’s future.
First, Israel must foil the Iran-Hezbollah-Syria force building project along its northern border. The Supreme Leader of Iran has made it clear that his ultimate goal is not to deter Israel but to destroy it and his proxy forces and advanced missiles are on the frontlines of those efforts. It is even conceivable that these forces are meant to aid in Iran’s adaptation of North Korea’s script for nuclearization but in the sequel Iran will seek to hold Israel hostage much like North Korea did to South Korea – essentially taking the possibility of a pre-emptive strike to prevent nuclearization.
Because the Israeli campaign to prevent Iranian entrenchment in Syria has proved successful thus far, Iran has reworked its strategy and shifted the bulk of its operations to Lebanese and Iraqi territory. This complicates Israeli activities, as the “rules of the game” in those arenas are far from clear and leave much room for miscalculation and unintended escalation. Nevertheless, Israel must continue to act to prevent the emergence of a strategic threat, but when possible, it should do so in ways that provide plausible deniability and minimize the risk for uncontrolled escalation.
Second, Israel must devise a clear and coordinated strategy for coping with potential Iranian steps to acquire a nuclear weapon. The current belief in Washington, Jerusalem, and Riyadh is that the decaying regime in Teheran will be forced by economic pressures to either accept Secretary Pompeo’s twelve demands or face possible collapse – and we can hope for either outcome, but it would be negligent not to plan other possibilities.
If the Iranian regime does not collapse but the JCPOA does, then Israel will face an unconstrained Iran that could decide to increase enrichment to levels necessary for the production of a nuclear weapon. If both the regime and the nuclear deal survive, then Israel will face an Islamic Republic that is advancing towards a nuclear weapon in the sunset phases of the agreement (with the support of the international community). Regardless of which scenario emerges, Israel must prepare and coordinate strategies with the Trump Administration—including preparation for diplomatic options, heightened intelligence collection efforts, and investment in maintaining a military option—to ensure the radical regime in Teheran does not reach the nuclear threshold.
Third, the Government of Israel must reinforce the crucial U.S.-Israel relationship by returning it to bipartisan consensus. While ties between Jerusalem and Washington are now close due to the warm relationship between Messrs. Netanyahu and Trump, the long-term structural relationship has been severely undermined by a growing partisan imbalance: support for Israel among Republicans has increased considerably, and support among Democrats has declined dramatically. There are some built-in factors which have contributed to this worrying partisan shift in U.S. attitudes toward Israel – for example, the majority of Israeli governments in recent memory have been right wing and so it is no surprise that their policies have been criticized by Democratic officials and voters – but the divide has also been exacerbated by irresponsible actions and statements from senior Israeli officials.
Playing partisan favorites does not serve Israel’s long-term interests in the context of America’s two-party system. At some point in the future there will be a Democrat in the White House, so sustaining the strategic relationship between Washington and Jerusalem will hinge on bipartisan support for Israel. Israel should take steps to remedy the current situation and strengthen bipartisan support by: examining innovative solutions to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (the status quo has thus far been a frequent point of friction and provided little strategic advantage), zealously maintaining Israel’s democratic ideals, funding more public diplomacy by Israel’s Foreign Ministry, and inviting people of many stripes to come to Israel and see its thriving democracy for themselves.
Fourth, Israel must renew its ties with the American Jewish community. The critical relationship between American Jews and Israelis has grown fraught with tension in recent years because of disagreements on issues such as religious authority in Israel, party politics in the U.S., and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This tension should be treated seriously, since American Jewish support is a pillar of Israel’s national security and because Zionism dictates that Israel is the national home for all Jewish people.
It would be counterproductive to point fingers or assign blame. Instead, we should establish a framework to increase dialogue and improve the relationship between the Israeli and American Jewish communities. One possibility would be to establish something along the lines of a “National Council of the Jewish People” to promote engagement, conduct research on the relationship, and promote awareness of how both communities contribute to building a more profound and richer Jewish identity. It is safe to assume that even after the establishment of such a body, the two sides will not agree on every subject, but awareness, engagement, and mutual respect just might help to rescue the relationship from its current crisis.
Fifth, the Government of Israel must retake the initiative in the Palestinian arena. In the past, after Palestinian leaders rejected Israeli peace proposals, Jerusalem defaulted to a policy that sought to maintain the status quo to ensure Israeli security and avoid a return to the dark days of the second intifada. In turn, this formed the basis for the (mis)understanding that without a two-state agreement Israel’s future as a Jewish democracy is doomed by demography, and it gave Ramallah the impression that it should continue to hold out for better terms as doing so was a win-win: either Israel would make further concessions, or it would meet its demise.
To be clear, Israel is not “doomed” without a peace deal. For many years, critics of Israel have declared the status quo unsustainable while it has managed not only to sustain its policies but to thrive. However, it must be acknowledged that the status quo is not desirable – it is eroding essential features of the state of Israel, including its Jewish, democratic, and morally just fundamentals as well as its security, which every citizen and supporter should seek to maintain.
Rather than muddling along without any apparent strategy other than maintaining the status quo, we recommend that Jerusalem adopt the policies outlined by the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) to turn the trajectory of the Israeli-Palestinian in Israel’s favor. Jerusalem should work towards achieving clear strategic goals vis-à-vis the Palestinians: halting the slide to a one-state reality, improving the situation on the ground, and preserving the option of a future two-state solution. Instead of using Israel’s unprecedented military, diplomatic, and economic standing as an excuse to avoid taking decisive action in the Palestinian arena, the Government of Israel should use it to promote critical goals under uniquely favorable strategic conditions.
Israelis should be proud of all they have accomplished in just 70 years. Yet pride should not become hubris that causes decision-makers to turn a blind-eye to strategic threats on the horizon. 2019 will be critical for Israel’s national security, and it will take both courage and creativity to overcome the challenges that lie ahead.
Have a different perspective you'd like to share? Comment below, or send your ideas for an OPINION piece to The Cipher Brief at Editor@thecipherbrief.com.
Read more from Retired Major General Amos Yadlin, the former chief of Israeli military intelligence and Ari Heistein in The Cipher Brief...
