Tag: war

Posted on

528: ISRAEL AIR FORCE’S INTELLIGENCE-DRIVEN PRECISION STRIKES ON THE HEART OF LEBANON

 

 

My article published in News Analytics Journal (Oct24)

 

 

The Israeli Air Force is one of the world’s most advanced and capable air forces. It plays a crucial role in Israel’s defence and has been involved in numerous conflicts since its establishment. Established in 1948, shortly after Israel declared independence, it participated in the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, using a mix of hastily acquired aircraft from various sources. Its other notable air operations include a pre-emptive airstrike in 1967 during the Six-Day War (Operation Focus), the destruction of an Iraqi nuclear reactor in 1981 (Operation Opera), and The famous 1976 hostage rescue operation in Uganda  (Operation Entebbe). The Israeli Air Force is known for its highly innovative approach to warfare, often adapting its tactics to changing threats. It is also known for precision strikes, especially in urban settings where minimising civilian casualties is important. The IAF integrates intelligence, electronic warfare, and cyber capabilities with traditional air combat, giving it a modern edge.

 

Operation Northern Arrow. The IAF is central to Israel’s defence strategy, especially in countering threats from non-state actors like Hezbollah and Hamas, as well as from regional rivals like Iran. It conducts regular airstrikes in Syria to prevent Iranian entrenchment and arms transfers to Hezbollah. On 01 Oct, the Israeli Defence Forces launched operation “Northern Arrow”, limited, localised, and targeted ground and air raids based on precise intelligence against Hezbollah terrorist targets and infrastructure in southern Lebanon. The Israeli Air Force is carrying out precision strikes on these targets. The Israeli Air Force (IAF)’s success in hitting the “heart” of Lebanon, mainly targeting Hezbollah, reflects high-stakes military operations that combine sophisticated technology, real-time intelligence, and a meticulously crafted strategy. Operating in Lebanon, where Hezbollah is deeply entrenched in urban and rural areas, involves numerous challenges that place these airstrikes at the forefront of modern warfare. Notably, the IAF has conducted strikes on Hezbollah’s missile launch sites, command centers, and weapons storage facilities, particularly in southern Lebanon. These operations aim to pre-emptively disrupt Hezbollah’s military capabilities. Key Hezbollah figures have been killed in the strikes, including leaders involved in smuggling arms from Iran and coordinating attacks against Israel.

 

Multi-faceted Strategy. The Israeli Air Force (IAF) has developed and implemented a multi-faceted strategy to engage Hezbollah and other militant groups operating in Lebanon. Instead of large-scale bombing campaigns, the IAF uses surgical strikes to take out specific targets. Striking at the “heart of Lebanon” refers to hitting key Hezbollah targets embedded within the country’s infrastructure, leadership, and military capabilities. The IAF’s strategy involves a combination of intelligence gathering, precise targeting, psychological warfare, and careful management of military and political risks. The IAF’s strategy often includes pre-emptive strikes against Hezbollah’s weapons depots, missile storage facilities, and military infrastructure.  Precision strikes allow Israel to implement “decapitation” strategies, targeting Hezbollah’s leadership and command centers to disrupt the organisation’s operational capacity. In some cases, the IAF issues warnings, such as the “knock on the roof” tactic, which involves firing non-lethal munitions as a warning before delivering a full strike. This provides civilians with time to evacuate, reducing unintended harm.  The Iron Dome, David’s Sling, and Arrow missile defence systems complement the IAF’s airstrikes by intercepting rockets and missiles launched from Lebanon. This layered defence safeguards against Hezbollah’s retaliation while IAF jets continue operations. Israel’s ability to precisely target high-value individuals and infrastructure at will with minimum collateral damage sends a strong message to Hezbollah and its backers (particularly Iran). The threat of precision strikes on Hezbollah’s leadership, or even broader infrastructure, serves as a powerful deterrent.

 

Precision Challenges in Dense Urban Environment. Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed militant group operating in Lebanon, has developed sophisticated military tactics, including the use of underground tunnels, fortified bunkers, and weapons depots hidden within civilian areas. Hezbollah operates in densely populated areas, using civilian infrastructure to shield its military assets. This makes airstrikes inherently risky as they can cause collateral damage, potentially triggering international condemnation or fuelling strong anti-Israeli sentiment within Lebanon.  The IAF’s ability to conduct precision strikes, often within dense urban environments, underscores the need for exact target identification and delivery of munitions with a near-zero margin for error. Missed strikes can lead to civilian casualties or loss of key assets, which could inflame tensions domestically and internationally. The IAF uses advanced precision-guided munitions, such as laser-guided bombs, GPS-guided missiles, and small-diameter bombs (SDBs). The IAF’s strategy includes using micro-munitions or low-yield bombs to strike specific rooms or floors within buildings, reducing the impact on surrounding areas. Many Hezbollah weapons and command facilities are hidden in tunnels, bunkers, or heavily fortified underground complexes. The IAF uses bunker-busting munitions to penetrate these defences, but accurately targeting these assets requires impeccable intelligence and timing.

 

 

Reliance on Real-Time, Multi-Domain Intelligence and Systems.

 

High-stakes operations in Lebanon require real-time intelligence from multiple sources. The IAF relies on continuous surveillance, including UAVs, satellites, and ground-based informants, to monitor Hezbollah’s activities and rapidly adjust targeting. Hezbollah often mobilises and shifts its assets quickly, necessitating dynamic targeting where real-time decisions are crucial to success.  The IAF’s integrated command-and-control systems allow pilots and commanders to react to evolving battlefield conditions, ensuring that targets are engaged optimally. Hezbollah is aware of Israeli surveillance capabilities and employs deception tactics, such as decoy structures, to mislead or confuse the IAF. To counter this, Israel employs artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning to analyse patterns, identifying real targets amid decoys.

 

Type of Intels. A comprehensive array of intelligence (Intel) is required to execute precision airstrikes like those carried out by the Israeli Air Force (IAF) in Lebanon or similar environments. Precision strikes, especially in complex urban or mountainous environments, rely on this multi-layered, real-time intelligence to minimise collateral damage and achieve tactical goals.

 

    • Human Intelligence (HUMINT). On-the-ground informants within Lebanon, especially those embedded in the targeted regions (either friendly locals, agents, defectors or collaborators), provide real-time, granular information on the movement of individuals, weapons, and critical infrastructure.

 

    • Signals Intelligence (SIGINT). SIGINT is a crucial component of precision airstrikes. Israeli intelligence agencies such as Unit 8200 are known for their expertise in intercepting and decoding enemy communications, both encrypted and unencrypted. This involves monitoring radio frequencies, phone calls, and internet communications to pinpoint militants’ locations and plans.

 

    • Imagery Intelligence (IMINT). IMINT is significantly enhanced by advanced technology. High-resolution satellite imagery, essential for mapping terrain, identifying targets, and observing infrastructure changes or enemy forces’ movement, is made possible through Israel’s access to advanced satellite systems such as the Ofek series. UAVs (drones) and manned aircraft equipped with state-of-the-art sensors are used for aerial reconnaissance to gather real-time visual and thermal imagery. Israel’s drone fleet, including platforms like the Heron and Eitan, provides critical real-time video feeds to operational commanders. Optical & infrared sensors, capable of detecting heat signatures, can identify hidden vehicles, weapons caches, and bunkers even under cover of night or in poor weather conditions, showcasing the military’s technological prowess.

 

    • Geospatial Intelligence (GEOINT). Detailed maps of Lebanon’s terrain, including urban layouts, subterranean networks (e.g., Hezbollah’s tunnels), and natural cover, are crucial for planning precise airstrikes. This is where geospatial intelligence (GEOINT) comes into play, providing planners with a comprehensive understanding of the battlefield. Generating 3D models of cities, towns, and villages allows them to determine the best angles and approaches for strikes, ensuring maximum impact.

 

    • Open-source intelligence (OSINT): Gathering data from news outlets, social media, and other open sources can provide insights into enemy morale, troop movements, or public reactions that influence operational decisions. Monitoring the public statements of groups like Hezbollah, press releases, or the speeches of critical figures can provide valuable strategic and operational clues.

 

    • Electronic Intelligence (ELINT). Identifying and understanding enemy air defence systems’ location, capabilities, and operational status is crucial for safe air operations. The IAF uses ELINT to suppress or evade enemy air defences, such as SAM (Surface-to-Air Missile) batteries. Israel also uses ELINT to disrupt or jam enemy communications and radar systems during strikes, creating confusion and allowing for more precise targeting.

 

    • Cyber Intelligence. Israel is known for its advanced cyber capabilities. Hacking enemy networks to disrupt command-and-control systems or gather intelligence on upcoming operations can provide critical information. Using malware to access sensitive enemy communications, weapons systems, or logistics can help planners effectively target vital nodes.

 

All of these intelligence sources are integrated through a centralised command-and-control system. Israel’s Unit 8200 and Aman (Military Intelligence Directorate) play vital roles in gathering, processing, and disseminating this intelligence. Their ability to fuse these sources in real-time allows the IAF to carry out precision strikes accurately. The IAF uses electronic warfare to jam enemy radars and air defence systems, allowing its aircraft to fly deep into Lebanon without detection. By neutralising Hezbollah’s anti-aircraft capabilities, the IAF can focus on executing precision strikes with minimal risk to its pilots.

 

The IAF’s ability to mobilise quickly and launch strikes in response to evolving intelligence is crucial to its engagement strategy. The flexibility to strike at any time gives Israel the ability to act before Hezbollah can adjust its defences. The IAF frequently conducts training exercises and simulations to prepare for diverse scenarios in Lebanon. This ensures pilots and commanders are ready to adapt to changing conditions, whether that involves urban combat environments, underground targets, or mobile missile launchers.

 

Precision targeting has revolutionised modern air warfare, opening new vistas for air forces worldwide. The Israeli Air Force’s high-stakes execution in Lebanon is a master class in contemporary precision warfare, balancing technological superiority, intelligence integration, and strategic foresight.  It is a coordinated mix of intelligence dominance, advanced technology, psychological deterrence, and military agility. The integration of real-time intelligence, cyber warfare, electronic warfare, and precision-guided munitions allows the IAF to strike Hezbollah’s core infrastructure while minimising civilian harm. By focusing on leadership decapitation, missile neutralisation, and disruption of supply chains, Israel manages to keep Hezbollah in check. This approach not only maintains Israel’s military superiority but also offers a blueprint for future conflicts where urban and hybrid warfare will dominate. The Israeli Air Force’s successful precision targeting in Lebanon has demonstrated how modern air forces can utilise technology, intelligence, and innovation to achieve strategic goals in challenging environments.

 

Your valuable comments are most welcome.

 

617
Default rating

Please give a thumbs up if you  like The Post?

 

For regular updates, please register your email here:-

Subscribe

 

 

References and credits

To all the online sites and channels.

 

Disclaimer:

Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from reliable and accurate sources. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.

 

Posted on

527: A PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS.

 

All Pictures Courtesy Internet.

Credit goes to all the parent websites.

 

 

Who is sponsoring these wars?

 

 

Who is instigating these wars?

 

 

Fighter aircraft are still relevant.

 

 

Should be seen along with the area of interest/covered.

 

 

Does size matter?

In future it has to be a balanced mix of different sizes and capabilities.

 

 

Who is adding Muscle power and at what rate and in which region?

 

 

Coming Soon.

 

 

Future of air warfare

 

 

 

Should be seen along with the area of these countries.

China’s area is three times that of India.

 

Your valuable comments are most welcome.

 

617
Default rating

Please give a thumbs up if you  like The Post?

 

For regular updates, please register your email here:-

Subscribe

References and credits

To all the online sites and channels.

Disclaimer:

Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from reliable and accurate sources. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.

Posted on

515: KURSK INCURSION: TURNING THE TABLES

 

 

My OPED published on the EurAsian Times website on 30 Sep 24.

 

In an unexpected move, On Aug. 6, Ukraine surprised the world by launching a bold pre-emptive offensive attack into Russian territory. Reportedly, over 1000 Ukrainian troops, along with armour, crossed into Kursk Oblast, a Russian region that borders Ukraine to the southeast. Ukraine’s cross-border attack named “Operation Krepost” on Russia’s Kursk region is the most significant incursion by Ukrainian forces into Russian territory since the start of the war. In this operation, Ukraine claims to have seized over 1,000 square kilometres of territory and captured several settlements and hundreds of Russian soldiers. The Kursk attack is distinct in the scale of resources used by Ukraine and its highly secretive nature. The event represents a turning point in the war and global geopolitics, shifting the initiative temporarily from Moscow to Kyiv. It has sparked widespread debate, highlighting the conflict’s potential for escalation and geographical expansion and raising questions about the underlying objectives behind this move and its possible future repercussions.

 

Surprise, Shock and Awe. Any move into Russia required a surprise. The Ukrainian attack on Kursk was a stunning display of surprise in modern warfare. By employing a mix of operational secrecy, deception, and tactical manoeuvring, Ukraine managed to achieve a surprising advantage. Ukraine had been engaging Russian forces in the eastern regions around Toretsk and Pokrovsk, giving an impression that its primary focus remained there and diverting attention away from the northern border with Kursk. Ukraine also exploited the gaps in stretched-out Russian deployment by attacking an area with lesser defences. In contrast to previous minor ones with irregular forces, the sheer magnitude of the incursion misled Russian military planners, leaving them in shock and awe at the audacity of the Ukrainian troops. The plans were kept tightly under wraps, sharing them only with a tight group of generals and security officials. The attack was executed with remarkable speed and efficiency, limiting Russia’s ability to mobilise reserves and respond effectively in the early stages. This swift strike allowed Ukrainian forces to capture territory and establish control over critical areas before a complete Russian response could be coordinated.

 

Intentions and Objectives. Ukraine aimed to shift the momentum of the war by launching an offensive into Russian territory. Strategically, Ukraine aimed to divert Russian forces from other critical fronts, such as the eastern regions of Toretsk and Pokrovsk, where Russia had been advancing. While the complete success of this diversion is debated, Ukraine’s offensive has forced Russia to reassess its deployments and react to the threat. Ukraine’s objectives could also be to weaken Russia’s military capability, capture territory, and disrupt Russian supply lines. Some analysts also speculate that holding Russian territory might give Ukraine better leverage in peace negotiations in future. Besides, Ukraine needed to boost its morale after months of defensive operations. A successful offensive into Russia would showcase Ukrainian capabilities and counter Russian propaganda about an inevitable victory. These factors combined to encourage Ukraine to take the risk of crossing into Russia and launching the most significant cross-border attack of the war.

 

 

Effect on Russia. The Ukrainian attack on Kursk has had a significant effect on Russia, both militarily and politically. It has forced Russia to divert resources, exposed its military vulnerabilities, and increased internal political and psychological pressure. The Kursk Offensive has further stretched the already heavily engaged Russian military on multiple fronts, further complicating ongoing Russian offensive operations. Ukraine’s capture of territory in Kursk, including several settlements, is a blow to Russian morale and undermines the Russian invincibility. However, it has also significantly boosted Ukrainian morale, providing a much-needed psychological advantage. This also posed logistical challenges, as Ukrainian forces targeted vital supply lines and infrastructure. The Kursk attack is a psychological blow to the Russians, raising fears of further incursions and challenging the Kremlin’s portrayal of the war as distant from Russian territory. The shock of the incursion could also erode public support for the ongoing conflict as casualties rise and domestic security is threatened. The attack puts internal pressure on the Russian government.

 

Russian Response. Russian President Vladimir Putin called the incursion “a large-scale provocation” and responded by declaring an emergency, imposing heightened security measures in these areas and launching retaliatory counterattacks. Russia mobilised additional troops, mainly from regions close to Kursk, such as Belgorod and Bryansk, to stabilise the situation and prevent further Ukrainian advances. Russia escalated its aerial bombardments across Ukraine, focusing on critical infrastructure, military installations, and supply lines. These colossal airstrikes aimed to disrupt Ukraine’s operations and cripple its logistics. Several missiles (including Kinzhal, Kh-101 and Iskander missiles) and drones attacked 15 of Ukraine’s 24 regions.  Russia also deployed more drones and missile systems to target Ukrainian cities far from the front lines. Russia organised ground counteroffensives to reclaim the territory lost to Ukrainian forces in the Kursk region. These counterattacks aimed to regain control of settlements captured by Ukraine and reinforce border defences. Alongside traditional military responses, Russia reportedly increased cyber-attacks on Ukrainian infrastructure and government systems, aiming to weaken Ukraine’s command and control capabilities. Diplomatically, Russia described the Ukrainian attack as a significant provocation, with President Putin labelling it as part of Ukraine’s broader strategy to destabilise Russia. The Russian government used the Kursk attack to rally domestic support for the war effort and called on international partners to limit support for Ukraine.

 

Ukraine’s Supporters.  Several nations and organisations provided critical assistance to Ukraine. The U.S. is Ukraine’s most prominent supporter, providing billions in military aid, including advanced weaponry, intelligence, and training. The U.S. has supplied systems like HIMARS and air defence platforms, which are essential to Ukraine’s defence against Russian advances. Most NATO members, particularly those in Eastern Europe, like Poland, the Baltic States, and Romania, have provided substantial military aid, logistical support, and training. The European Union has also contributed financially, providing billions in aid packages. The U.K. has been a critical supporter, delivering advanced weapons systems and training Ukrainian forces. It has also played a significant diplomatic role, pushing for continued Western support for Ukraine. Canada has offered military and financial assistance to Ukraine, providing artillery systems, armoured vehicles, and drones. It has also imposed significant sanctions on Russia and supported diplomatic initiatives against the invasion. Western defence contractors, particularly from the U.S., have supplied Ukraine with essential technology and equipment. Civil society movements and non-governmental organisations in countries supporting Ukraine have also raised funds and provided humanitarian assistance. These state and non-state supporters have enabled Ukraine to continue resisting the Russian invasion, providing a vital backbone of military, economic, and diplomatic support.

 

Behind-the-scenes Support. In this instance, a debate has arisen about the direct or indirect involvement of the behind-the-scenes supporters. Washington says it was not informed about Ukraine’s plans ahead of its Aug. 6 incursion into Kursk. The United States has also said it did not take any part in the operation. Russia claims that the United States’ involvement in Ukraine’s incursion into Russia’s western Kursk region was “an obvious fact.” Russia also asserts that Western weaponry, including British tanks and U.S. rocket systems, have been used by Ukraine in Kursk. Media sources have reported that the United States and Britain have provided Ukraine with satellite imagery and other information about the Kursk region in the days after the Ukrainian attack. The intelligence was aimed at helping Ukraine keep better track of Russian reinforcements that might attack them or cut off their eventual withdrawal back to Ukraine.

 

 

Crystal Gazing. Ukraine’s advance into Kursk would culminate due to a combination of the Russian response, the number of casualties, and extended lines of communication. The Ukrainian army will probably be unable to hold all of the Russian territory it has advanced on. Kyiv is contemplating a longer-term occupation to use the land as a bargaining chip.  This will take a lot of Ukrainian resources, and enforcing a long-term occupation would depend on factors like Ukraine’s priorities, the availability and spare ability of resources, and the severity of the Russian response. The choices include consolidation on the captured terrain and partial or complete withdrawal. Partial withdrawal and consolidation seem to be the logical possibility.

 

The initial successes achieved by Kyiv in The Kursk attack have further intensified the war and raised questions about the future of the conflict. The Ukrainian offensive into Russian territory has had a profound impact on the course of the war. On one hand, it has boosted the morale of the Ukrainian army and sent a strong message to the West about Ukraine’s ability to take the offensive initiative. On the other hand, the offensive has elicited mixed reactions in Russia. The event has far-reaching repercussions on the entire war, further complicating the situation in the coming period. The war in Ukraine is a complex game, with many intertwined factors influencing the course of events. Both sides are undertaking concurrent campaigns that consume enormous resources (manpower, munitions, and supporting systems). Surge operations for short durations are possible, but sustaining them for long durations is doubtful. The future of this war mainly depends on the extent of continued Western military and political support to Ukraine.

 

Link to the Website:

https://www.eurasiantimes.com/operation-krepost-ukraines-awe-inspiring/

 

Suggestions and value additions are most welcome.

 

617
Default rating

Please give a thumbs up if you  like The Post?

 

For regular updates, please register here:-

Subscribe

 

References

  1. Basel Haj Jasem, “Kursk: A new chapter in the Ukraine war”, Daily Sabah, 27 Aug 2024.
  1. Anastasiia Lapatina, “Six Observations—and Open Questions—on

Ukraine’s Kursk Operation”, 15 Aug 2024.

  1. Deutsche Welle, “What is behind Ukraine’s Kursk operation in Russia?” The Indian Express, New Delhi, 11 Aug 24.
  1. “Moscow says US involvement in Ukrainian incursion into Russia’s Kursk is ‘an obvious fact’”, By Reuters, 27 Aug 24
  1. Mick Ryan, “The Kursk Offensive Dilemma”, Futura Doctrina, 19 Aug 24.

Credits

To all the online sites and channels.

Disclaimer:

Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from reliable and accurate sources. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.