Israel's Response to Terror Attack May Signal Policy Shift or Election Tactic
Translated & summarized from Arutz Sheva by baba
A former Israeli military official, Yaron Buskila, believes the IDF's response to a recent terror attack at Etzion Junction signals a significant shift towards broader responsibility for the attacker's environment. This approach includes destroying buildings and seizing land, aiming to deter future attacks by imposing wider consequences. Buskila questions if this is a lasting policy change or an election tactic, and expresses concern that future coalition governments might limit such security actions.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Former officer Yaron Buskila sees a dramatic shift in Israel's response to terror attacks.
- The military is now extending responsibility beyond attackers to their immediate surroundings.
- Actions include destroying buildings and seizing land from which attacks originate.
- Buskila questions if this is a new policy or a pre-election maneuver.
- He fears future coalitions with Arab parties could limit security operations.
A former senior Israeli military official has identified a significant shift in the country's response to terror attacks, suggesting a move from targeting only the perpetrator to extending responsibility to their surroundings. Yaron Buskila, a retired Lieutenant Colonel and former Operations Officer for the Judea and Samaria Division, believes the military's actions following a recent attack at the Etzion Junction indicate a potential change in security doctrine for the West Bank.
Buskila noted that the destruction of buildings and seizure of areas from which attacks were launched signifies a broader approach. He explained that this method imposes a price not only on the attacker and their family through home demolition but also extends punishment to the wider environment that enabled the attack. "The military will seize an area from which an attack was launched and it will not be possible to use it for shelter and planning attacks," Buskila stated, highlighting a departure from previous responses that primarily focused on the individual attacker.
He argued that this expanded responsibility could influence local populations to actively prevent future attacks. Buskila also addressed potential international criticism, asserting that operational benefit should outweigh concerns about global reactions, as Israel is often condemned regardless of its actions. He emphasized that the priority should be to reduce terror and dismantle terror organizations, making any action that serves this goal legitimate, even if it involves property destruction or casualties.
Buskila drew parallels to Israel's operations in Gaza and Southern Lebanon, where the focus has been on dismantling infrastructure that enables terror, not just the immediate threat. He believes this strategy should be applied in the West Bank as well. However, he remains cautious about declaring this a new, permanent policy, questioning whether it is a genuine strategic change or a temporary measure related to upcoming elections, especially since the current government has not previously employed such tactics.
Furthermore, Buskila expressed concern that the inclusion of Arab parties in future coalition governments could hinder the implementation of such security measures. He believes a government reliant on these parties would struggle to approve necessary actions against Arab elements, even when operationally required, posing a significant risk to public safety and security.
Mentioned
