Senior echelons in the IDF are seeking new approaches and terms to deal with the
fact that asymmetrical enemies have become the military’s principal foe,
according to the commander of the IDF Command and Staff College, Maj.- Gen.
“The nature of war has not changed, but the nature of the
enemy has. Once, everything was clear and we knew what resolution, victory and
deterrence were,” Baidatz said this week. “At the moment, the need for new terms
is very much felt – terms that will match the current reality.”
on Wednesday at a conference held in honor of the late former IDF chief of
staff, Amnon Lipkin-Shahak, at the Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya.
must eliminate whatever fails to characterize the security concept in recent
years, and understand that asymmetric conflict is the main conflict,” Baidatz
The changes should include reforms to operational battle
approaches, he added.
In the battle arenas of the 21st century, the IDF’s
goal is to reach targets “while minimizing [civilian] damages to both sides, and
to that end, we must realize that the opponent is of a wholly different kind
than the old [enemy].”
The later half of Israel’s history has revolved
around unconventional wars, Baidatz argued, in which the IDF faced off against
terrorist organizations rather than states.
“Since 1973, we can state
that Israel has not had wars against regular state armies, but against terror
groups. There is a clear change,” he added.
Recent conflicts such as
Operation Pillar of Defense against Hamas and Islamic Jihad in Gaza were
asymmetrical clashes. The IDF’s goal in this operation was “not only to disrupt
their abilities, but also to lead the enemy to decide that, on the day after the
conflict ends, it is not worth his while to renew terrorism against Israel,” he
During the November conflict, a Hamas battalion commander held
evaluations in his home while dressed in civilian clothes, as his family sat in
the adjacent room, Baidatz noted.
In light of the exploitation of
noncombatants by terrorists, the IDF exercises caution when using force, to
avoid harming civilians, Baidatz explained.
“Before every attack, we
weigh up whether it is moral, who it will hurt... we’ll also weigh the
effectiveness of the attack for the continuation of the war,” he said. “Will it
reduce [conflict], or widen it?”
Please LIKE our Facebook page - it makes us stronger: