- 26 Apr 2008 13:48
#1517904
Please post your views independently of your own attitude to Israel and what you'd like to see happen.
Israel has won three wars decisively this past half-century, in 1948, 1967 and 1973. It was always outnumbered and at least on paper Arab weaponry was not inferior to Israeli (possibly, with exception of 1973, the last war). But its soldiers were far more educated and far superior in morale, while many of the Arab soldiers suffered from illiteracy, were treated like dirt by officers drawn from the upper echelons of their stratified societies more interested in acquiring positions than in proving combat effectiveness, and as such these Arab armies fought very poorly, getting routed in what should have been a walkover with the forces at their disposal.
Since then, however, the positions have reversed. More and more Israeli citizens are shirking army service. A few years ago Israel ceased publishing its demographic data, and the reason is quite clear - emmigration is now very probably higher than immigration. Around 100,000 Jews have returned from Israel to Russia. On the other hand Israel now enjoys very substantial technological superiority over the Arabs.
Many of the Arab states today suffer from the same scourges as they did one or two generations ago. On the other hand, now probably to a lesser extent. The bulk of their populations, including the entire younger cohorts, are now literate. While the average Arab today is still of course much less skilled and useful for modern war than the average Israeli, the gap has narrowed significantly since the 1960's. Back then, education, science and technology, etc were valued in Israel. Today, religious fundamentalism is growing and Israeli pupils scored the lowest out of the industrialized nations in recent PISA international student assessments, on a level between Turkey or Portugal.
Finally, some of the Arab regimes have regained a measure of legitimacy by recent strong economic growth. Creeping Islamization has ensured that today's Arabs are far more motivated than their predecessors, to a greater extent than Israeli youth. Consider the following scenario. Rising food prices cause unrest in Egypt, the overthrow of Mubarak and the instalment of an Islamic state. Egypt makes a new alliance with Syria, with its Hizbollah proxy in southern Lebanon. The Israelis rather foolishly following 1973 ceded back to Egypt the southern Negev desert. The Palestinian militants can be counted on to wreck havoc in the Israeli rear during conflict. In the background lurks Iran. Israel is encircled.
Finally, technological inferiority can be made up by a spree on rearmament, and Russia and/or China will probably oblige. While Israel has a nuclear deterrant, it can be balanced out by Syrian chemical weapons and Iranian development of a nuclear bomb. Even with technologically inferior forces, in 2006 Hizbollah managed to stall the Israeli offensive, achieving a casualty ratio of 5:1, if not better. Considering the population differentials between Israel and its potential opponents, this would not be a comforting thought for Israeli commanders.
If the above trends continue, the Arabs may indeed fulfil their oil dreams of pushing Israel back into the sea. Granted, many of their capitals and population centers may be destroyed by Israel replicating Samson; even so, Israel itself as a state will vanish. The only salvation would be US interference - but would it be capable of it? It's forces are overstretched, and the US way of waging war (huge buildups involving very complex logistics, so as to substite capital for bodies) are vulnerable to disruption. In the opinion of Chinese strategists, Iraq could have staved off defeat in 1991 by a) attacking critical US targets via commando units and b) being more focused on digging in/fortifications, rather than waiting like sitting ducks in Kuwait. This is not to mention the sheer disruption made possible via attacks on oil infrastructure, made especially painful as it would be in the era of peak oil. If the Muslim powers indeed co-ordinate their actions; pursue rational military strategies; and ensure that at the micro level their soldiers are competent, then anything short of US nuclear intervention can in principle be dealth with.
This is not to say that the above scenario is what will happen. On the contrary, it may well be unlikely. (On the other hand, if global warming really strikes hard, the Middle East will be especially hard-hit. Domestic difficulties may encourage the Arab dictators to pursue military adventurism). For all the improvements in Arab society, it still remains stratified and opposed to modern science, and while Islamic fundamentalism improved morale, it won't do much good for the former. More books are translated to Spanish every year than have ever been translated into Arabic (and some 75% of those are religious). It is hard to see how such societies can persecute successful offensive war, which is much more complicated than digging yourself in with AKs and RPGs (basically, what Hizbollah does).
On the other hand, in the long-term, Israel is just a continuation of the Crusader kingdoms (not necessarily in the moral/imperialistic sense - again, let's not drag this into a pro/anti-Israel bash; but certainly in the strategic sense). And all Crusader kingdoms, while driven by love of God (Zionist morale) and European support (US support), eventually succumbed to love of gold and internal decay (Israel's migration reversal, Army shirking). The Arabs, while initially beaten and demoralized, later devised counters to the Crusader's prowess in the field of open combat. The Crusader knights were surrounded and deprived of water at the Horns of Hatting, leaving their destruction easy. In Lebanon, Israeli Merkava's were countered by commited dug-in troops wielding RPG's and AKs. Despite repeated European new Crusades (a future US role?), eventually they grew tired of Middle East adventures and the now abandoned Crusader kingdoms submitted to Muslim rule (the future of Israel?).
So that's the question I'm asking - will Israel survive in the long-term?
Israel has won three wars decisively this past half-century, in 1948, 1967 and 1973. It was always outnumbered and at least on paper Arab weaponry was not inferior to Israeli (possibly, with exception of 1973, the last war). But its soldiers were far more educated and far superior in morale, while many of the Arab soldiers suffered from illiteracy, were treated like dirt by officers drawn from the upper echelons of their stratified societies more interested in acquiring positions than in proving combat effectiveness, and as such these Arab armies fought very poorly, getting routed in what should have been a walkover with the forces at their disposal.
Since then, however, the positions have reversed. More and more Israeli citizens are shirking army service. A few years ago Israel ceased publishing its demographic data, and the reason is quite clear - emmigration is now very probably higher than immigration. Around 100,000 Jews have returned from Israel to Russia. On the other hand Israel now enjoys very substantial technological superiority over the Arabs.
Many of the Arab states today suffer from the same scourges as they did one or two generations ago. On the other hand, now probably to a lesser extent. The bulk of their populations, including the entire younger cohorts, are now literate. While the average Arab today is still of course much less skilled and useful for modern war than the average Israeli, the gap has narrowed significantly since the 1960's. Back then, education, science and technology, etc were valued in Israel. Today, religious fundamentalism is growing and Israeli pupils scored the lowest out of the industrialized nations in recent PISA international student assessments, on a level between Turkey or Portugal.
Finally, some of the Arab regimes have regained a measure of legitimacy by recent strong economic growth. Creeping Islamization has ensured that today's Arabs are far more motivated than their predecessors, to a greater extent than Israeli youth. Consider the following scenario. Rising food prices cause unrest in Egypt, the overthrow of Mubarak and the instalment of an Islamic state. Egypt makes a new alliance with Syria, with its Hizbollah proxy in southern Lebanon. The Israelis rather foolishly following 1973 ceded back to Egypt the southern Negev desert. The Palestinian militants can be counted on to wreck havoc in the Israeli rear during conflict. In the background lurks Iran. Israel is encircled.
Finally, technological inferiority can be made up by a spree on rearmament, and Russia and/or China will probably oblige. While Israel has a nuclear deterrant, it can be balanced out by Syrian chemical weapons and Iranian development of a nuclear bomb. Even with technologically inferior forces, in 2006 Hizbollah managed to stall the Israeli offensive, achieving a casualty ratio of 5:1, if not better. Considering the population differentials between Israel and its potential opponents, this would not be a comforting thought for Israeli commanders.
If the above trends continue, the Arabs may indeed fulfil their oil dreams of pushing Israel back into the sea. Granted, many of their capitals and population centers may be destroyed by Israel replicating Samson; even so, Israel itself as a state will vanish. The only salvation would be US interference - but would it be capable of it? It's forces are overstretched, and the US way of waging war (huge buildups involving very complex logistics, so as to substite capital for bodies) are vulnerable to disruption. In the opinion of Chinese strategists, Iraq could have staved off defeat in 1991 by a) attacking critical US targets via commando units and b) being more focused on digging in/fortifications, rather than waiting like sitting ducks in Kuwait. This is not to mention the sheer disruption made possible via attacks on oil infrastructure, made especially painful as it would be in the era of peak oil. If the Muslim powers indeed co-ordinate their actions; pursue rational military strategies; and ensure that at the micro level their soldiers are competent, then anything short of US nuclear intervention can in principle be dealth with.
This is not to say that the above scenario is what will happen. On the contrary, it may well be unlikely. (On the other hand, if global warming really strikes hard, the Middle East will be especially hard-hit. Domestic difficulties may encourage the Arab dictators to pursue military adventurism). For all the improvements in Arab society, it still remains stratified and opposed to modern science, and while Islamic fundamentalism improved morale, it won't do much good for the former. More books are translated to Spanish every year than have ever been translated into Arabic (and some 75% of those are religious). It is hard to see how such societies can persecute successful offensive war, which is much more complicated than digging yourself in with AKs and RPGs (basically, what Hizbollah does).
On the other hand, in the long-term, Israel is just a continuation of the Crusader kingdoms (not necessarily in the moral/imperialistic sense - again, let's not drag this into a pro/anti-Israel bash; but certainly in the strategic sense). And all Crusader kingdoms, while driven by love of God (Zionist morale) and European support (US support), eventually succumbed to love of gold and internal decay (Israel's migration reversal, Army shirking). The Arabs, while initially beaten and demoralized, later devised counters to the Crusader's prowess in the field of open combat. The Crusader knights were surrounded and deprived of water at the Horns of Hatting, leaving their destruction easy. In Lebanon, Israeli Merkava's were countered by commited dug-in troops wielding RPG's and AKs. Despite repeated European new Crusades (a future US role?), eventually they grew tired of Middle East adventures and the now abandoned Crusader kingdoms submitted to Muslim rule (the future of Israel?).
So that's the question I'm asking - will Israel survive in the long-term?
- By FiveofSwords
- By JohnRawls