Post

More from @sfrantzman

Seth Frantzman

@sfrantzman

Apr 17

This may seem an unlikelt conclusion, but my sense is that the Hezbollah "Radwan" force and Hamas "battalions" are sort of symptoms of the same problem in analyzing the conflicts. In both cases Israel has focused a lot of attention on these entities, as if defeating them is a measurement of achievement.
Here is why this is problematic.

Hamas didn't used to have "battalions." It used to be a much smaller terror group. It grew into a terror army with "battalions" primarily because it was allowed to. Israel's numerous wars in Gaza each ended with Israel claiming achievements against the Hamas "metro" or something else. And in each case Hamas rapidly recovered and expanded.

The 24 "battalions" are thus an example of the whole problem of managing the conflict with Hamas. It became exponentially stronger. And when the war began after the Hamas attack, I think a lot of battalions dispersed and went to ground...so the "defeat" of the battalions was only partial and partly on paper.

Read 12 tweets

Seth Frantzman

@sfrantzman

Apr 16

There should be a kind of "alternate history" article(s) on how Iran and its proxies were empowered to grow exponentially in the region and it should include Israel's policies, which were ostensibly against Iran and the proxies...but explain how this ended up with Iran in an unprecedented and strong position on Israel's borders.

What I mean is the aphorism, when everyone is thinking the same thing, someone isn't thinking. It requires a critical reading of the history to explain the policies that enabled Hamas to become exponentially more powerful than it was 20 years ago.

And it requires some explanation why Israel's conception of strategy decided that having an increasingly powerful Hezbollah on the northern border, especially after the challenges of 2006...became "this is fine." Even as it became clear that Hezbollah was not deterred, but rather Israel was becoming deterred.

Read 19 tweets

Seth Frantzman

@sfrantzman

Apr 15

I just realized that one outcome of Iran launching such a massive unprecedented attack using drones and missiles is that it wanted to create a new bar for such attacks in the future so it can attack Israel with fewer projectiles directly and then have it portrayed as normal and acceptable

You see all the people who already went to bat for this narrative claiming this was just a symbolic attack not meant to succeed…so they now define 350 missiles as acceptable. And so if Iran launches 20 missiles they will have redefined that as fine

The whole narrative when it comes to Israel is always to define things that are unacceptable in any other context, such as attacks on civilians, as basically normal and acceptable “retaliation” or “resistance” and thus make any Israeli response “escalation”

Read 4 tweets

Seth Frantzman

@sfrantzman

Apr 15

The worst takes on the Iranian attack of April 13-14 are those who call it “symbolic”. This was a massive, unprecedented attack of historic proportions. Never before in history were so many drones, ballistic, missiles and cruise missiles (350 in total) used at the same time in an attack, and from several different fronts and directions, including attacks from Hezbollah in Lebanon and from the direction of Yemen and over Iraq and Jordan, and almost all of it timed to arrive within around ten minutes of eachother…

Those who think it was “symbolic” or designed not to succeed either know nothing about the weapons involved, the complexity of planning this, know nothing about history, know nothing about the complexity of the air defenses involved and billions of investment it took over four decades to meet this attack, or are simply being purposely disingenuous (more likely).

I suspect most of those making the comment aren’t purposely ignorant, they know firing 350 drones and missiles that require different times to arrive and targeting different areas of Israel with precision from four directions is incredibly complex and was not designed to fail…they need to downplay it for some reason. Because by their logic if 350 is symbolic then what would 1,000 missiles be?

If Iran wanted a symbolic attack it would have launched a dozen missiles. Does anyone say the attack on Asad base was “symbolic” and it involved two dozen missiles right?

Read 5 tweets

Seth Frantzman

@sfrantzman

Apr 15

Israel historically understood that it had to be willing to go it alone.

One of the issues after October 7 is how to restore deterrence. My sense is that Iran and its proxies all feel emboldened and have tried to change the "rules" and the "equation" in the region to make it acceptable for them all to attack Israel whenever they want. Israel's partners are willing to help defend, but their message is for Israel not to respond too much...which creates a situation of endless war and managing the conflict. That is what led to Oct. 7.

Not responding and "managing" conflicts is not a good substitute for strategy. It just kicks the can down the road...and kicking the can leads Iran and its proxies to grow stronger.

There is no evidence that Iran or its proxies have gotten weaker the more the conflicts and various fronts and arenas are "managed."

Hezbollah has acquired PGMs and thousands of drones for instance.

Read 9 tweets

Seth Frantzman

@sfrantzman

Apr 14

Today the narrative among some is that Iran’s unprecedented massive attack with missiles and drones is just “symbolic” and didn’t harm much so therefore it can be shrugged off.

That was the same mentality about the rocket fire from Gaza two decades ago and also the Hezbollah rocket fire and the Houthi attacks. The always change the goal posts so hundreds or thousands of missiles are no big deal. And then when Hamas massacres 1,000 people and takes 250 hostage then they are surprised.

If you don’t take one missile being fired as a threat then it becomes two and then ten and 100 and 1,000. The fact is that systematically Iran has been allowed to spread drone and missile terror around the Middle East and also sent drones to Russia to terrorize Ukrainians. Did the same people who say it was just “symbolic” say that when missiles and drones rain down on Ukrainian civilians?

The fact is that the decision to ignore Hamas rockets and then Hezbollah rockets and then Houthi attacks and then Iraqi militia attacks and now Iran’s attacks is destroying the region. Air defenses are not a magic wand OR A SUBSTITUTE FOR POLICY AND STRATEGY.

Read 9 tweets

Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

Seth Frantzman

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @sfrantzman

Seth Frantzman

Seth Frantzman

Seth Frantzman

Seth Frantzman

Seth Frantzman

Seth Frantzman

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Send Email!