Israeli Arrow 2 missile
The Jerusalem Post announced that the IDF was testing the latest version of the Arrow missile interceptor. The new upgraded Arrow 2 system tested was designed to respond to improvements in the missiles that Israeli enemies might launch, specifically to intercept potential Iranian nuclear warheads (even though trusted experts I’ve consulted say Iran doesn’t have any!).
This raises the question: why is Israel preparing a weapons system for a threat that doesn’t exist? Talk about provoking a Mideast arms race! Israel possesses WMD when no other nation in the region has them. It possesses anti-missile systems designed to protect against a weapon that doesn’t exist. Israel’s defenders may argue that in a dangerous neighborhood, anticipation of the military strategy of the enemy is critical. But there comes a point when such behavior becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Paranoia, much??
The Arrow is one several layers of missile-defense, the first one being Iron Dome, which is designed to intercept short-range rockets like those fired by Hamas during Operation Protective Edge.
The Post says that the Air Force will know within days about the success of the test. That’s not precisely true. The military knows the result, and according to my Israeli source, it failed. A Sparrow missile was fired at Israel and the Arrow was supposed to intercept it before it reached Israel. Instead the Arrow landed in the Mediterranean north of Israel according to this Russian media source:
The suspected target was suspected of landing some 300 kilometers to the north of Tel Aviv.
Yossi Melman confirms the test failure in this tweet:
It’s clear that today’s Arrow2 test, the Israel-US anti missile defense systen, failed. The aim was to see if extension of its 300+km works
— Yossi Melman (@yossi_melman) September 9, 2014
Contrast this to Israeli media like i24, which report the test was a success. Wishful thinking, but thinking that characterizes too much of poodle-like relationship between Israeli reporters and the security establishment.
One test failure doesn’t signify the non-viability of the entire Arrow program. But if there are more, it could signal serious problems.
This statement from the defense ministry seems designed to preempt any criticism that might emerge once it becomes known that the test failed:
“This test has no connection to the operational performance of the Arrow weapons system, which is operated by the Air Defense Command of the air force,” the statement said.
It’s hard to even parse the meaning of this statement. But it seems to say that despite the failed test Arrow remains a viable missile defense system. They might’ve added that since two countries, two militaries, and four defense contractors have billions invested in the system, that it has to remain viable, no matter how many failures there might be. Excuse that bit of cynicism. But one thing you learn when you’re exposing the presumptions of the national security state is that cynicism and irony are critical tools.
Richard.
You’re the same guy who recently disparaged the Iron Dome Missile Defense System while it was successfully defending life and property.
Pass the salt.
@Black Canary: Iron Dome didn’t successfully defend anything. First, it failed several times in incidents which killed Israelis and damaged homes. Second, Qassams couldn’t hit the broad side of a barn. Third, Prof Postol continues to say Iron Dome isn’t destroying warheads as it was meant to do. I’ll take his word over yours any day.
Seeing is believing.
http://www.newsweek.com/video-watch-israels-iron-dome-intercept-15-rockets-once-266763
I lived through the rocket attacks. Trust me when I say, Iron Dome works.
@ Black Canary: You can’t “see” whether Iron Dome works. What may look to the naked eye like a hit may be Iron Dome actually not hitting the target but self destructing because it’s failed to do so. Iron DOme may actually hit the target but not destroy its warhead, which means it will still strike the ground where it may kill or injure someone or destroy homes (both happened numerous times during the last war). That being said, Iron Dome does work anywhere from 5-20% of the time. So it does succeed sometimes and this video may show an actual hit.
Richard.
Any Israeli who lived through the latest war is familiar with th ‘ba……… boom’ sound of a Iron Dome missile blowing up and detonating an incoming rocket’s warhead.
If Professor Postel’s theory is correct, than bomb disposal units would have been all over the greater Tel Aviv area, cordoning off the site, diverting traffic, evacuating civilians, deactivating the warhead and hauling it off somewhere. A big ‘balagan’. But no where did I see this occurring. Yes shrapnel fell, and caused minimal damage, yes damaged rocket casings did land on civilian areas, but their warheads had already been destroyed by the Iron Dome interceptors.
I cannot explain the obvious success of Iron Dome anymore, or any better.
Richard, the reason I think that Iron Dome is successful is because for it to be totally useless (as claimed by Prof Postol) would require a huge conspiracy. I don’t think a conspiracy of such scale exists (or can exist) in Israel.
It basically requires many engineers, all of the middle to high managers, operators, low-level commanders, and so on to be fully aware that they’re completely wasting their time by designing, updating and operating this completely useless system.
I can’t imagine that so many people can keep such a secret.
Iron Dome having somewhat less spectacular results then advertised, while still being somewhat effective? Sure, I buy that. But I just can’t see Iron Dome being completely useless without some sort of an internal rumor about that fact.
@ Matan: Your premise is completely wrong & shows you know little about how the R&D, procurement, lobbying, & funding cycles work for complex weapons systems. Engineers have diverging idea of how to address a particular issue. They debate their solutions & lobby for them to be adopted by the military & political class. Once one set of engineers’ proposal is adopted and funded, a huge machine comes into play which both executes the plan and defends it from attack by those outsiders who either believed in another approach or who just plain doubt the success of the chosen plan. Those invested in the plan, which are thousands of engineers, politicians, generals, etc. marshall all their resources to both make it work & defend it. They buy into it psychologically & professionally. Even if the plan has weaknesses they no longer acknowledge, at least not publicly. They become a closed camp.
This is inimical to democracy and to good military weapons policy. This is what happened with Iron DOme. There is so much money and so many jobs and reputations on the line that the Iron Dome boosters have circled the wagons & shut out any criticism.
You don’t have to have a conspiracy such as you describe when everyone involved has become a true believer.
Basically, the argument between the two sides is that Postol claims that even if Iron Dome strikes the incoming missile and knocks it off its trajectory, it has not exploded the ordnance & it can still wreak havoc on the ground. Given that you can’t steer a Qassam to begin with, I agree with him. A rocket with an active payload is still very dangerous & lethal even if it’s been knocked off course by Iron Dome. Postol argues that Iron DOme isn’t destroying the warhead and therefore doesn’t work. He also argues that many of the “strikes” people see or hear from the ground aren’t that because Iron Dome self-destructs if it misses.
Richard, I agree that the Israeli military-industrial complex is a huge circlejerk. I have seen it for myself. Proposals get selected on a political basis rather than technical merit, and once they develop enough inertia they can not be stopped until their inevitable failure. This is just par for the course in these places.
Like I said, I believe that Iron Dome is not a perfect defense, or a perfect system. I just don’t believe that it is a complete failure like you suggest. Is Rafael & the IDF exaggerating the hit percentage? Probably, part of the Iron Dome press coverage is basically free (?) advertisement for Rafael. But Iron Dome being a complete failure? I don’t buy it. The king can only be so naked before some boy cries out that he’s not wearing anything at all.
A target destruction rate of 5-20% isn’t a complete failure, but it’s nowhere near the success rate boasted by Rafael & the IDF. My problem is spending billions on a weapons system that doesn’t work anywhere near as well as it should for the cost.