Note: Supplemental materials are not guaranteed with Rental or Used book purchases.
Purchase Benefits
Looking to rent a book? Rent The Israeli Secret Services and the Struggle Against Terrorism [ISBN: 9780231140430] for the semester, quarter, and short term or search our site for other textbooks by Pedahzur, Ami. Renting a textbook can save you up to 90% from the cost of buying.
List of Figures | p. VII |
Acknowledgments | p. IX |
Introduction | p. 1 |
The Emergence of Israel's Counterterrorism Doctrine | p. 14 |
The Path to the Defensive Model and Back | p. 30 |
Rescuing Hostages | p. 47 |
The Lebanese Puzzle | p. 66 |
New Challenges From the West Bank and Gaza | p. 75 |
The Global Challenge of Iran and Hezbollah | p. 83 |
New Rivals, Old Responses | p. 94 |
A War Against an Elusive Enemy | p. 111 |
The Second Lebanon War and Beyond | p. 128 |
Fighting The Terrorism Plague | p. 135 |
Notes | p. 151 |
Glossary | p. 187 |
Index | p. 201 |
Table of Contents provided by Ingram. All Rights Reserved. |
The New copy of this book will include any supplemental materials advertised. Please check the title of the book to determine if it should include any access cards, study guides, lab manuals, CDs, etc.
The Used, Rental and eBook copies of this book are not guaranteed to include any supplemental materials. Typically, only the book itself is included. This is true even if the title states it includes any access cards, study guides, lab manuals, CDs, etc.
View this excerpt in pdf format | Copyright information
Excerpt from the Chapter, "Fighting the Terrorism Plague"
CURRENT AND FUTURE CHALLENGES
As with many terrorist events that have not cost lives, most of Israel's citizens have forgotten the explosion at the country's largest fuel and gas facility that took place on May 23, 2002. I did not know much about the circumstances of that incident until one Friday morning in late December of that year. At that time I was teaching a seminar on terrorism, part of the master's-degree program for students at the University of Haifa who were members of the security establishment. The small classroom in which the course was held fostered a degree of intimacy among the students. In the first row, slightly apart from the other students, sat a mild-mannered man who occasionally made comments revealing his deep familiarity with the subject we were discussing. Few Israelis would recognize this man's name&mdashRafi Taterka—but there is no one in the intelligence community who has not heard of him. Taterka, who began his career in the operations branch of the GSS, rose through the ranks until he was head of the branch and then deputy head of the entire organization. About five years after his retirement from the GSS,Taterka was appointed CEO of Petroleum and Energy Infrastructures, the government company responsible for Israel's oil and gas reserves.
Part of the seminar coursework involved the presentation of an outline of each student's final paper in front of the class. Rafi had a different idea. Instead of describing the subject of his seminar paper, he presented the class with his company's report on the internal investigation into the terrorist attack perpetrated by the Silwan cell of Hamas against the Pi Glilot oil and gas depot. The cell's members had managed to attach a one-kilogram explosive charge to a tanker truck and to explode the charge by remote control after the truck had entered the protected compound. Taterka promised an experience we would not soon forget, and he was good on his word.The in-depth investigation included a minute-by-minute silent video portrayal of the attack, as captured by security cameras positioned in various locations at Pi Glilot. The picture of the tanker truck exploding and bursting into flames at the diesel storage area is still deeply engraved in my memory. The shocking aspect of the attack has nothing to do with the results. No lives were lost, and there were no injuries. The cold sweat that drenched my back and the shocked expressions frozen on the faces of the other students were the result of the scenario running through our heads, in which the tanker truck had exploded not in front of the diesel storage area, but rather in front of the gas storage area a few dozen meters away. This could have been Israel's 9/11. The Pi Glilot facility is located on the outskirts of Tel Aviv, and a few hundred meters away, on the other side of the highway, is Israel's intelligence city—a series of military bases and civilian facilities that serve Aman and Mossad.
In the years since the attack, Palestinian militant groups have upgraded their abilities in guerrilla warfare and terrorism. "Necessity is the mother of invention," as the popular saying goes. Despite Israel's unceasing efforts to seal the border between the Gaza Strip and Egypt, whose entire length is just over 7.5 miles, local entrepreneurs still managed to find all sorts of ways to smuggle weapons, ammunition, and money from Sinai into Gaza. The drip of weapons turned into a flood in January 2008, when Hamas activists took down the wall between Gaza and Egypt. Smugglers also use the 130-mile-long border between Israel and Sinai, which, following the opening of the Gaza-Egyptian border, became a highly sensitive area due to the success of armed Palestinians in infiltrating the Sinai Desert and using it as a point of departure for attacks in Israel. Not only have the groups engaged in terrorism become a greater challenge, but their tactics have also become more sophisticated over the years, a fact that requires the heightened alertness of the security establishment. Throughout the Al-Aqsa intifada, the Palestinians increased their use of high-trajectory weapons, due to Israel's success in foiling suicide attacks.
At first the rockets were short-range Qassams fired from the Gaza Strip toward northern Negev communities. As the intifada progressed, Grad missiles with a range of ten miles appeared on the scene. The Palestinian factions, frustrated at the limited effects of the rockets in comparison to suicide attacks, are constantly striving to increase their effectiveness. One of the ways to do this is to smuggle the missiles into the West Bank or manufacture them there. In one such attempt three Palestinians were arrested on October 5, 2005, after trying to smuggle technological information on rocket production to the West Bank from Gaza. Unlike the Gaza Strip, launching rockets from the West Bank threatens installations such as the Ben-Gurion Airport and large urban centers, including the Tel-Aviv metropolitan area. The rockets are not the only threat hanging over Israel's residents. Terrorists do not usually limit themselves to a single tactic, but rather tend to use every method that proves its efficacy.Thus, for example, the Palestinian networks have never stopped their attempts to kidnap Israelis for bargaining purposes. In most cases the kidnap victims are soldiers, but these groups have stressed in the past that they also view civilians as legitimate targets. Israel must also continue to be on guard against suicide bombers. Even though the security establishment has managed to set up mechanisms over the years to make the dispatching of suicide bombers into Israel very difficult, the militants find it hard to abandon this method because of its great effectiveness. There are large numbers of Palestinians ready to strap an explosive belt around their waists and strike at targets in Israel and around the world, and these are certainly still a cause for worry. Another formidable threat is the potential use of force multipliers. Even though conventional terrorism has proven to be the most e.ective means of causing the maximum number of victims, attacks that make use of such multipliers produce a strong psychological effect.
Palestinian terrorism is not the only front where Israel has found itself with no definitive response. The assassination of Imad Mughniyah on February 12, 2008 in the Kfar Suseh neighborhood of the Syrian capital brought to the headlines the name of the archterrorist, who for over two decades was responsible for some of the most horrific attacks against Israeli and other Western targets while staying out of the spotlight. During the Second Lebanon War, Hezbollah successfully sowed terror on the Israeli home front by launching rockets against civilian population centers. Eight months after the war, Israeli civilians learned that one of those rockets had landed in the heart of Haifa's oil-refinery compound, where there is a large concentration of hazardous substances. Similar to the Pi Glilot incident, here too, luck played a major role. The rocket, one of 124 that landed in the Haifa Bay area during the war, exploded in an open space, and no major disaster occurred.
In the first months of 2008, most estimates are that while Hezbollah still cannot operate and function freely in southern Lebanon, as it was able to before the July--August 2006 war, the military wing of the organization under the leadership of Mughniyah was able, with the aid of Iran and Syria, to restore large parts of its artillery capabilities and arsenal, especially regarding short and mid-distance missiles.. Hence, the war did not change the basic strategic balance between the two sides. Even the assassination of Mughniyah, who was an invaluable asset for Hezbollah and Iran, will not have a significant impact. He trained a number of potential successors over the years. Furthermore, the war exemplified again, as in the 1980s during Israel struggle against the PLO and as in the 1990s against Hezbollah, and even in the last few years against the Palestinian groups operating in the Gaza Strip, that Israel, for all its military superiority, has not found an effective offensive response to artillery attacks initiated by terrorist groups.
Additionally, powerful players such as Hezbollah, Iran, and Syria, which are interested in maneuvering proxy players in the Palestinian arena and controlling the intensity of the violence in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, are constantly trying to transfer funding and munitions to the various Palestinian networks and in certain cases to train their people. Mughniyah was a major facilitator of this endeavor. Religious divisions between Sunni and Shiite regimes seem to be less relevant when it comes to the struggle against Israel. Syria, for example, where most of the residents are indeed Sunni, helps Iran in transferring weapons shipments to Hezbollah and is even in direct contact with that organization, supplying it with intelligence concerning Israel. Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, has supported all the Palestinian factions throughout the Al-Aqsa intifada, especially Hamas and Islamic Jihad, which are faithful to a radical Sunni doctrine. The cargo ship Karine A, which was attempting to smuggle weapons and ammunition to Gaza but was intercepted by Shayetet 13, is just one example of the efforts invested by Tehran in aiding the Palestinian struggle. A simpler method of providing assistance has always been funding and/or remuneration. The Iranian rulers, as well as the Saudi royal house, which follows a Wahhabi Sunni ideology, have deposited huge sums of money in the personal bank accounts of senior Hamas activists. Saddam Hussein's secular Baathist regime preferred to help families of suicide bombers directly by depositing $15,000 in the personal bank accounts of each Palestinian family with a son who carried out a suicide attack.
Finally, yet important, is the threat posed by the global jihadi movement. After the American invasion of Afghanistan and the destruction of Al-Qaeda's organizational infrastructure, the latter became an amorphous coalition of groups all over the world, called the global Salafi jihad, or "Al- Qaeda 2.0." Though many believe that the main target of the network is the United States, it has also proved that it is interested in and capable of striking at Israeli and Jewish targets in Israel and around the world.Through the years, Al-Qaeda and local groups inspired by the global-jihad ideology have committed a number of terrorist attacks against such targets. These have included a truck-bomb explosion near a synagogue on the island of Djerba, Tunisia, on April 11, 2002; a suicide bombing in the Israeli-owned Paradise Hotel in Mombassa, Kenya, on November 28, 2002; and the firing of a shoulder-launched rocket against an Israeli Arkia Airlines plane at the same location and on the same day. A year later, on November 15, 2003, two suicide bombers attacked a synagogue in Istanbul, Turkey, and five days later a suicide bomber detonated a device near the Israeli consulate in Istanbul. The anti-Israeli operations by Al-Qaeda affiliates continued in April 2004 with a double attack on recreation sites in the Sinai Peninsula filled with Israel tourists; the Hilton Taba Hotel and the Ras A-Satan recreation village were both struck by car bombs. Finally, in the summer of 2005, global Salafi jihad militants succeeded in surprising Israel by launching a Katyusha rocket from Jordanian territory toward the resort town of Eilat.
Among the most challenging threats Israel faces today are attacks by terrorists who are not Palestinians or even Arabs. The risk emerges from countries where terrorists enjoy unlimited freedom of movement—mainly Africa and the Middle East, but not only there.The salient example of such an activity is the case of two British youths of Pakistani origin who volunteered to commit a suicide attack at a bar in Tel Aviv called Mike's Place at the behest of Hamas and the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades. Twenty-two-year-old Asif Mohammed Hanif, a resident of the town of Hounslow near London, and Omar Khan Sharif from Derby, who was five years older than his friend, had become acquainted when they had visited Damascus at the same time in order to pursue their Islamic studies. Both were associated with the Al-Muhajiron ("The Immigrants") group that was active in England and believed in war against the West. A friendship developed between the two, and the rumor soon spread that the two wanted to offer themselves in the name of the struggle against Israel. On April 12, 2003, they reached the Jordanian side of the Allenby Bridge, presented their British passports at the border checkpoint, and asked for permission to enter Israel. The two aroused the suspicion of an airport security guard, and a GSS officer questioned them on the purpose of their visit in Israel, the route they had taken before arriving at Israel, and the people they intended to meet. In the end, the interrogation did not yield any cause for further detention, and they were allowed into the country.
Hanif and Sharif enjoyed complete freedom of movement in Israel. First they traveled to Gaza, and after a short stay there they visited Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, Nablus, and Ramallah. At the end of their tour, they returned to Gaza, where they made contact with members of the Hamas military wing. The British pair introduced themselves to the local people as peace activists and made sure to link up with representatives of international humanitarian organizations and to visit institutions that granted welfare services to the Palestinians. On April 29, more than two weeks after they had gained entrance to Israel, they joined a group of Italian journalists traveling to Tel Aviv. The journalists' vehicle was not checked, according to the policy that was customary then, and from there it was not very far to the youth hostel on 48 Ha'yarkon Street. On the wall of the hostel, the two found an invitation in English to music evenings at the neighboring bar, Mike's Place. The next day, at a late hour, they left the hostel and made their way to the bar. While they were waiting at the entrance to the building, Sharif 's explosive device, rigged up in a Koran, had a technical failure. While the detonator exploded the main charge failed to go off. Hanif decided to carry out the operation on his own. At 1:00 a.m. a strong blast was heard from the area of the bar.Ten minutes later, the police received a report about a man who was seen running away from the vicinity of the explosion.The man, Omar Sharif, tried to enter the lobby of the nearby David Intercontinental Hotel, but the security guard at the entrance pushed him back. Sharif rushed outside and stopped a taxi. He had just about got into the car when the security officer who had pursued him arrived in time to pull him out of the cab. Despite the joint efforts of the officer and the driver to restrain him, Sharif was still able to escape and fled toward the beach. After combing the area, the police found only his jacket and explosive device. On May 12, his body washed up on the shore.
Most of the onus of gathering intelligence in such cases fell on the shoulders of Mossad, which now had to monitor social networks operating in the Middle East, Asia, Africa, and Europe. Israeli intelligence's familiarity with some of these regions is very limited. Furthermore, the increase in Islamic immigration to the West has now created a situation in which almost every major city in Europe, America, and Australia has a widespread network of mosques, as well as Islamic education and welfare institutions. The ability of a small organization such as Mossad to obtain intelligence on all the sites that may potentially develop into extremist action--oriented cells is also very limited. This is emphasized by the fact that Mossad knew nothing of the 9/11 plot. Furthermore, the only partial cooperation offered by local intelligence agencies does not effectively help Mossad to thwart terrorism.
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
Is it possible to be better prepared for these challenges? Over the years, terrorism aimed at Israel has become more aggressive, and the civilian home front has become the front line. The Israeli war model, which has also been replicated in other countries, has not proven to be a success in meeting its goals. In order to effectively contend with terrorism, it is incumbent to transfer the bulk of counterterrorism activity to alternative models. Citizens of democratic states must realize that terrorism pursues democracies wherever they may be and every so often will rear its head. Policymakers should refrain from making empty promises of being able to entirely eradicate terrorism. During times of terrorism, policymakers must exhaust all available resources in the framework of the conflict so that they may reduce its intensity and lower violence to tolerable levels. This could be achieved by applying elements from the reconciliatory model. Moreover, since terrorism is a type of psychological warfare, politicians should fight the temptation to boost the morale of the public through sophisticated assassinations of terrorist leaders. The assassinations do not meet this goal. The public is aware that assassinations usually lead to retaliations by the terrorists and thus instead of feeling more secure, civilians feel more threatened. Policymakers themselves intensify the fear by warning the public of the unavoidable revenge. Hence, not only do such assassinations not undermine the capabilities of the various terrorist groups to attack, but they also intensify the terrorists' desire to prove their viability by amplifying the psychological fear factor. Clear and honest statements by politicians who tell the public that terrorism, despite its horrific outcomes, rarely poses a major threat to the state's national security would be welcome in that connection. Such statements would reassure the public and undermine the attempts of the terrorists to create a continuous state of fear, chaos, and mistrust of the public in its leaders. Beyond mitigating the psychological impact of terrorism, policy-makers should allocate resources and formulate a defensive model that consists of three main stages: prevention, crisis management, and reconstruction.
At the prevention stage, it is extremely important to assess frequently the level of threat posed by terrorists. Preventive intelligence is essential, since it enables the security forces to implement effective selective prevention procedures. Yet even in the absence of accurate information, it is of the essence to try to bring di.erent pieces of information together and to assess the risks on yearly, monthly, weekly, and daily bases. Such risk assessments are essential to planning more e.ective protection mechanisms for attractive targets in times of danger. These include the physical protection of targets, the allocation of resources for technological solutions, and the employment of a su.cient number of guards at strategic places. It is also important to deploy trained rescue forces if the risk seems immediate.
At the crisis- management stage, it is essential to design and implement routine procedures that will ensure a flow of relevant information to all the emergency forces after an attack.This is important in preventing too many or too few rescue forces from being sent in, as well as in ensuring that the forces can enter and leave the attack site unobstructed, whether by clearing urban traffic arteries or by the use of roadblocks. When an attack occurs, temporary headquarters should be set up at the site to synchronize the entrances and departures of the emergency forces and to coordinate activities inside the area. Moreover, a framework that defines the roles and routines of all actors participating in postattack crisis management is essential. Finally, since the first persons to encounter and provide information about terrorist attacks are usually members of the public, governments should try to educate the public on how to respond to such attacks.
In the reconstruction stage, it is important to treat the direct victims and their families, as well as other individuals who have been affected by an attack. Such treatment should follow a long-term plan that would allow state authorities a degree of flexibility, enabling them to tailor diffierent solutions for the different victims. At the end of the day, the goal should be a speedy and effective recovery for the victims, both physically and psychologically. No less important is putting businesses back on track as quickly as possible. This could be achieved by offering them various incentives such as tax relief. Most important, it is the duty of policy-makers to mitigate the psychological effects of terrorist attacks immediately, using every media outlet, and thus to undermine the very goal of the terrorists.
On a different front, efforts to suppress channels of cash flow to terrorists should be reassessed. Groups such as Hamas are almost impenetrable when attempting to pin down their financing sources. In contrast to its image in the West, the group is first and foremost a social movement that runs a ramified system of charity and relief institutions. A significant part of the monies that are collected in the West is sent to these institutions out of a genuine desire to assist the Palestinian population, which is in dire need of health and welfare services. The relatively amorphous structure of the Hamas leads to situations in which the heads of the charity mechanisms in Gaza at the same time support terrorist cells and may transfer part of the funds to them, either directly or indirectly. The bulk of these pecuniary transfers are conducted on a local level and are not registered or documented, another fact that makes e.orts to block the cash flow particularly difficult.
Even more complicated are the attempts to block the support of states. Iran, which over the last few years has become a major source of funding for the various Palestinian groups, has a ramified network of financial, security, and intelligence organizations that can overcome different barriers set by Israel. Hence, it can be assumed that despite a few successes in revealing attempts to channel funds to groups of terrorists, many more such attempts remain hidden from intelligence organizations. Since terrorist attacks, either suicide operations or rocket barrages, are relatively cheap, and given that the various terrorist networks do not seem to have been weakened over the years, it appears that the campaign to crack down on the.nanciers of these groups has not been very successful.
INTELLIGENCE AND THE ARMED FORCES
Despite the proven success of the defensive model, policymakers and the heads of the security establishment are unlikely to give up the war model easily. Still, I think it important to make some recommendations for intelligence organizations and the armed forces to consider.
Israel's intelligence organizations, headed by the GSS, have indeed developed impressive capabilities.They have helped to intercept acts of terrorism while still in the planning stages and to strike at terrorists and their leaders. Terrorists are skilled at eluding intelligence efforts, however, and they will continue to be so. It is impossible to monitor every terrorist cell and thwart every attack. In order to contend with terrorists effectively, intelligence and thwarting forces have to be as flexible as the terrorists—a virtually impossible task as well. Therefore, instead of implementing organizational reforms that will end up in a new series of struggles between the various agencies, the agent model that is employed in the United States should be adopted, with certain adjustments. The idea is to establish a main headquarters for the struggle against terrorism that will serve as the hub of a network that will send out its arms to each and every one of the various intelligence and thwarting forces. The establishment of such a headquarters will not require any far-reaching organizational reforms or a massive investment of resources. At the same time, it will enable daily coordination among the various bodies and a rapid deployment of the necessary resources when a terrorist threat is detected by one of the intelligence organizations. Representatives of all the forces in charge of coping with terrorism will be stationed full-time at the headquarters. Their job will be real-time coordination among the various organizations.The prime minister's advisor for coping with terrorism or an intelligence advisor will supervise the headquarters, as the Agranat Commission and the Committee of Inquiry Into the Intelligence System in Light of the War in Iraq recommended.
The basic requirements for the position of advisor should be a deep familiarity with all aspects of terrorism and with the capabilities and limitations of the intelligence and thwarting forces. The advisor must have the ability to analyze contradictory intelligence assessments, to present the leadership with as clear picture as possible while distinguishing between assessments based on intelligence and those based on guesswork, and to offer viable alternatives for coping with each challenge. Other important duties of the advisor would include the assessment of various counterterrorism policies that have been implemented in the past as well as by other countries and a careful drawing of conclusions from such experiences. These conclusions will become highly valuable for the creation of a framework for an official counterterrorism policy. This new model should not replace the war model altogether, but rather should incorporate successful elements from alternatives, including the criminal- justice and the reconciliatory models.
The advisor would have to be close to but independent of the prime minister. One of the advisor's main functions would be to prevent the leadership from acting under public or political pressure, to offer alternative models of response, and to help leaders instill a sense of security in the civilian population. Another no less important function would be to serve as an unbiased arbiter in the event of struggles between organizations. The position of advisor would not be at the expense of the triennial evaluation of the regional and functional sectors of the responsibilities of each of the intelligence organizations and the redefining of the borders of each sector in keeping with changing circumstances. A permanent committee whose role would be defined by law would conduct this evaluation. Participants in the discussions would include representatives of the parliamentary system, the prime minister's advisor, and heads of the intelligence organizations. A clear division of fields of activity that would be sensitive to the changing types of threats could mitigate the extent of interorganizational struggles.
In the area of international cooperation, the picture actually looks brighter. Global terrorism has opened an unprecedented window of opportunity for Israel. Most of the countries around the globe are afraid of terrorist attacks against their citizens. This fear has found public expression in the signing of international treaties against terrorism and increasing intelligence cooperation among friendly states. Even though many countries are not interested in formal or even informal friendly ties with Israel, the importance of intelligence cooperation sidelines such issues. Israel still enjoys signi.cant prestige, mainly in the human-intelligence field. The intelligence organizations of many countries are glad to benefit from the knowledge Israel has developed and receive information from this country. Since the Israeli intelligence community does not have unlimited resources, it, too, can benefit from the assistance of intelligence organizations from rich countries that are spearheading the development of high-tech intelligence-gathering instruments and their use in the struggle against terrorism. Before intelligence organizations around the world can express openness to the idea of cooperation with Israel, however, Israel will have to give up its longstanding habit of violating the sovereignty of other states. In an era of multiple and increasingly sophisticated threats, Israel cannot afford to jeopardize strategic cooperation with potential allies in the war against terrorism.
Adjustment is also necessary in the thwarting sphere. In late 2006, Israel's Channel Two television broadcasted a segment in which the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) revealed for the first time the existence of a counterterrorism military school. The soldiers who were training there appeared in the broadcast while practicing takeover scenarios developed during a period of hostage taking incidents.The segment, which was broadcast four months after the Second Lebanon War, was designed to relay a firm message: Israel is prepared for the struggle against terrorism. More than anything else, however, it showed that the IDF is ready to contend with incidents whose chances of occurring are low.
The major lesson learned from the Second Lebanon War is that military units must become more professional in their fields of specialization. Tracking down and arresting terrorists is not a mission that requires the assignment of elite units. In many countries that adhere to the criminal-justice model, police forces carry out this task. Yet given the volume of terrorism with which Israel has to cope, police forces by themselves will not be able to counter this challenge. That said, much of the burden can be transferred to the Border Police as well as to soldiers who would be trained specifically for such missions. In December 2005, six independent battalions, including the armored infantry, established back in the days of the first intifada, were concentrated under the Kfir (900) Brigade. Each battalion is under the command of a different regional brigade in the West Bank and is designated to operate against Palestinian fighters in an area familiar to its soldiers. The soldiers themselves go through a specialized seven-month training period in microwarfare to prepare themselves for the operations to which they will be assigned. With the support of Yamam, the elite mistaarvim units Duvdevan and Yamas, the border police, and the unmanned-aerial-vehicle and helicopter squadrons, the Kfir brigade soldiers should be the operational arms of the GSS in the occupied territories and enable their comrades from the Armored Corps, the Infantry Corps, and the elite units to focus on their own training and to fulfill their original, designated purposes in times of emergency. The successful Sayeret Matkal and Shaldag operation on Syrian soil in September 2007 is a prime example of the great potential of the special units, when they are not occupied with side missions that do not correspond with their qualifications and their original objectives. While Sayeret Matkal soldiers gathered crucial intelligence and evidence that Syria was building a nuclear facility, the Sayeret Shaldag men used their special laser position-pinpointing equipment to make it feasible for the Israeli Air Force to attack and eradicate it. Hence, the Yamam should remain the sole counterterrorism SWAT team, while the elite military units should be removed from the counterterrorism scene and be deployed for such missions only if they serve the purpose of training them to perform better in their designated fields of expertise.
At the time that this book was written, there was no end in sight to Israel's conflict with the Palestinians or with the Arab world in general. The conflict, which used to be territorial in nature, has changed in recent years, becoming an ideological and theological dispute as well. This significantly worsens the situation with regard to the challenges of terrorism. The chances of reducing the levels of violence seem slimmer than ever, as the players are not only Palestinian groups plotting to strike at Israeli and Jewish targets, but also Sunni and Shiite cells all over the world, who are ideologically committed to the destruction of the State of Israel.
This book focuses entirely on Israel's struggle against terrorism, which has so far not been extensively researched, at least not with respect to its operational dimension. Even so, it must be recalled that together with the terrorism threat, the Israeli security establishment is constantly contending with strategic threats from other sources. Worth mentioning, among others, are the Iranian nuclear threat, the risk of war with the states bordering on Israel, and the risk of the rise of other radical regimes in the region. While terrorism tends to occupy the public as well as policymakers, it is imperative to understand and internalize the psychological dimension of terrorism and the limitations of the use of force in a nonsymmetrical struggle. It is time to give other counterterrorism models a chance while diverting the war model to where it belongs: strategic threats posed by state actors.
...
COPYRIGHT NOTICE: Published by Columbia University Press and copyrighted © 2009 by Ami Pedahzur. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without permission in writing from the publisher, except for reading and browsing via the World Wide Web. Users are not permitted to mount this file on any network servers. For more information, please e-mail us or visit the permissions page on our Web site.