The Diplomatic-Security Cabinet gathered on Wednesday for a decisive discussion on the country's defense budget. Journalists reported an atmosphere of crisis, rife with pressure and threats applied by army officers on one side of the table and finance ministry officials on the other. In the late evening hours it was reported that the ministers had dispersed, and that the decision was postponed by a day. A short time later the first reports began to emerge about an attack in Syria attributed to Israel.
We will come back later to the connection between the Cabinet and the budget debate to the attack, details of which have begun to become clearer. We can learn from the various reports (most prominently from al-Arabiya) that the targets were anti-aircraft missile batteries, intended to be transferred soon to Hezbollah. Similar to previous incidents, this time, too, Israel has maintained a policy of ambiguity and has declined to either confirm or deny the reports, even though just this week Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon issued a warning that Israel will not allow advanced weaponry to reach Lebanon.
It is possible that Ya'alon's comments were meant to deter our neighbors to the north from trying to execute such a weapons transfer, and if Israel is indeed behind the attack, we can assume that the message was not internalized along the Syria-Hezbollah axis.
This is the fifth time in the past year that large attacks in Syria have been attributed to Israel. Prior attacks included the destruction of SA-17 anti-aircraft missile batteries, M-600 long-range rockets and Russian made land-to-sea Yakhont missile launchers. The common denominator between each incident is Syria's clear intention of transferring "game-changing" weaponry to Hezbollah, and an unwavering Israeli stance that such weapons will not cross the Syrian-Lebanese border. After each incident Syria has also refrained from responding to the affront to its pride, sovereignty and property, and despite its warnings to the contrary it has never responded. The lack of an official Syrian reaction to the latest attack, as of Thursday evening, could mean that this incident, too, will not lead to a response with the potential of igniting the northern front.
Another thing we can learn from this attack is just how deep the ties between Syria and Hezbollah run, and the degree to which the Assad regime is committed to the Lebanese terrorist group. Amid international pressure Syria was forced to relinquish its unconventional weapons capabilities, hindering its ability to deter rebel forces, and because of this its financial dependence on Iran and military dependence on Hezbollah has grown. The most direct way for the regime to repay this debt is by transferring sophisticated weapons to Lebanon: Assad has shown again and again that he is willing to take risks in order to reward his patrons, also so that they continue to support him.
Taking this into consideration, Assad will likely attempt similar weapons transfers in the future as well. Israel will need -- if the reports are indeed true that it is behind the attacks -- to continue walking the tightrope between deterring the enemy while also avoiding an escalation. The primary key to this end is to combine intelligence, air power and cyber capabilities -- the three main components that should benefit most from the extra funds added to the defense budget on Thursday, which brings us back to the Diplomatic-Security Cabinet meeting. Many words have been dispensed about the bloated salaries and service conditions provided by the army to career soldiers, but the hand of fate has drawn a clear and present line connecting money and actual defensive capabilities. We can only lament that this lesson has not truly been learned.
טעינו? נתקן! אם מצאתם טעות בכתבה, נשמח שתשתפו אותנו