1. Israel’s National Security Doctrine
Limmud Conference

2. The Strategy of Strategic Surprise
Situational
Strategic
Irrelevant 'interpretive conceptual system' in terms of understanding the individual relative to his environment
An event in which information was lacking, the information didn’t arrive in time or wasn’t properly analyzed
Lanir uses the same terms but explains them slightly differently
He then says that all of these are situational surprises – what Heifetz calls a technical challenge – if we had all the information we would not have been surprised. An example he gives is the YK war where they had all the info – but were still surprised
Fundamental Surprise meanwhile is the incompatability of perception of self with reality – example of husband fidning wife cheating – for her its situational, for him its fundamental – to solve it, Lanir talks about fundamental learning – there is no algorithm which provides reasoned steps…it requires a jump from reductionism to holism. Need tolerance for uncertainty, to challenge calculated rationality
In order to deal with these situations, one needs to undergo fundamental learning / change one’s personal perception (Mindset)

3. The Process of Strategic Surprise
Change in priorities and values
Stage 4: Fundamental Learning
Strategic Surprise
Situational (Technical) response to Fundamental (Adaptive) Problem
Stage 3: Denial
Strategic Surprise
Strategic Surprise
Difference that makes the difference
Stage 2: Incubation
Copying without translating
New trend in the neighborhood?
Stage 1: Relevancy
Relevancy Gap

4. The Israeli Context Need for Substantive Broad Long Term View
Complex Challenges
Short, Unstable Tenures
Volatile Environment
Fragmentation of Knesset and Government
Need for Substantive Broad Long Term View
Incentive for Short Term Thinking
Address for
Decision Makers
Training Future
Strategists
Model to Emulate

5. Strategic Surprise in Israel’s National Security
Stage 3: Denial
Strategic Surprise
Strategic Surprise
Stage 2: Incubation
האיום הקיומי הוא פיזי
Stage 1: Relevancy
Relevancy Gap
הזירה המרכזית: צבאית
צה"ל הגורם העיקרי

6. Israel’s National Security Mindset
Pol Dip Challenge
Legitimacy for Jewish homeland
London Conference
White Paper 1939
Facilitating Jewish Aliya
Political- diplomatic arena
Military- security arena
Organizing logic
It doesn’t matter what the goyim say. It matters what the Jews do (Ben Gurion)
Military vs. Security Activism
Ben Gurion’s Seminar
Partition Plan: Arabs threaten to invade
Sec. Doctrine: IL win war
Alliance with Superpower (France / US)
Alliance of Periphery
1933
1939
1947
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000~
Time 6

7. Israel’s Traditional Security Doctrine
List of Threats
Main Working Assumptions
Conventional: Army
Existential Threat: Physical
Terror / Guerilla
Main Arena: Military Security
Nuclear
IDF protect the nation
Deterrence
So enemy won’t initiate war
Early Warning
To prepare forces
Decisive Victory
Over enemy
Creating an Iron Wall
Strategic Early Warning
Closeness to Superpower
Ambiguous Nuclear Policy
Home-Front Role Secondary
Force planning: Tanks and Planes
Large Army relative to population
relevancy
Quick Decisive Victory
High quality intelligence agencies
Striving for short wars
Keeping strong army w/o economic collapse
Army responsible for home front
Special relations with USA
Taking war onto enemy’s territory
Controlling territory main leverage
1960
1970
1980
1990
Time 7 7

8. Updates to Israel’s Security Doctrine
Meridor Commission: Defence
Low intensity conflict
The Dahiya Doctrine
Guiding Assumptions of Nat Sec unchanged
Arena: Military
IDF responsible

9. Divergent Reality: The Resistance Network
Base: Middle East
Nasrallah: “We do not need tanks and planes… [Israel] is weaker than a spider web.” (7/31/06)
Abu Mussa Marzouk:
“failure of the political process will bring about the destruction of Israel (5/15/07)
Characteristics: Islamist (Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah)
Main Strategy: Undermine 2SS / ‘Logic of Implosion’
Main Tactics: Asymmetrical Warfare, ‘overstretch’
Synchronized Victories: Need strong foreign affairs establishment
IDF responsible for protecting nation
Military Superiority
New non conventional tactics required. Home Front + Diplomatic also essential
Main Arena: Security Deterrence, Early Warning, Decisive Victory
Resistance Network focuses on soft underbelly – asymmetric warfare, international arena and home front
Existential Threat Military

10. Divergent Reality: Strategic A-Symmetry
Hierarchical top-down structure
Flat network based structure
Finality of claims / Peace
Permanent Resistance
High intensity / Victory
Low intensity / Attrition / Implosion
No civilian casualties
Attack civilians / Human shields
IL Arabs = domestic issue
IL Arabs = Strategic leverage
Battleground: Military field
Battleground: Home front & intl. arena
Control over PL = Military Necessity
Control over PL = Strategic Asset
Authority with responsibility
Authority w/o responsibility

11. Divergent Reality: Delegitimization Network
Base: Europe & North America
Characteristics: Red-Green Alliance, global spread, focused around hubs & catalysts
Main Strategy: Promote 1SS / turn IL into pariah state
Main Tactics: BDS, lawfare, apartheid parallels
The key: Blur difference between delegitimizers & critics
Red
Green
Liberalising the arguments
Essentialism
Liberal Elite: From Kibbutz to Kibbush
Demonization: IL= apartheid
Coercion only way: BDS
Lawfare
Double standards / singling out

12. The Feedback Loop
Flotilla planned for 16 months in countries friendly to IL
Delegitimization Network
Resistance Network
Hamas drew upon Europe-based Muslim Brotherhood network
Fundamental Delegit
Implosion threat
Advance 1SS narrative
Undermine
2SS
The Flotilla represents an evolved stage in the two networks’ coordination 12 12 12

13. Crisis in Israel’s National Security
Attacks on Israel are nothing new
New dynamic – new threat (advancing 1SS)
Israel’s position vis-à-vis Western Govts remains stable
Increasing threat from Liberal Progressive Elite
Commitment to peace & HR vital – but there will always be an outstanding issue (Shebaa Farms Syndrome):
Hasbara important but delegitimization is ideology driven
Main Problem: Hasbara / Policy

14. Creation of Existential Political Threat
De-Legitimacy
Demonization
3rd World Pact
Bottom Up Processes
Change in Balance of Power
US: Asset to Liability?
Danger: Turning Into Pariah State
Intl Inversion towards 2SS 14 14 14