Defense Technology International - June 2008 - (Page 62)

ISAAC BEN-ISRAEL FIRST PERSON BUILDING DETERRENCE Sustained terror attacks can wreak psychological and political havoc on a nation. An example of this is Israel, where the continuing barrage of unguided rockets launched at civilians, by Hamas from Gaza and Hezbollah from southern Lebanon, has sparked intense debates about the country’s ability to protect its citizens. According to some sources, more than 8,000 rockets have been ﬁred at Israel from Gaza alone since 2001. Israel’s military strikes back quickly, and occasionally kills rocket crews before or during a launch. But the best way to nullify the weapons is with a defense system that destroys the rockets in mid-ﬂight—a di cult task since their short range provides only about 15 sec. of advance warning. Nevertheless, Israel’s defense and political establishments have no shortage of ideas about ways to counter the threat. One inﬂuential voice is that of Isaac Ben-Israel, a retired air force major general, who has been involved in military research and predicting defense needs for years. Ben-Israel is a member of the Knesset, and a professor at the Cohn Institute for the History and Philosophy of Sciences and Ideas at Tel Aviv University. DTI Contributing Editor David Eshel sat down with Ben-Israel in his o ce at the Knesset in March and discussed strategies for defeating the rocket threat. Defense Technology International: How will Israel counter the threat of short-range, high-trajectory weapons like the Katyusha, Qassam and lately, Russian-made Grad rockets? Isaac Ben-Israel: History has proven that missiles cannot win wars, but can become strategic weapons and affect a nation with highly sensitive politics like Israel, by causing a gradual loss of conﬁdence in the security and defense establishments. Following the failure to e ectively cope with massive rocket and missile strikes on its vulnerable rear zone, Israel’s defense community and industry have been tasked with developing operationally convincing countermeasures to defeat this threat and deter potential foes from pursuing such actions. Is Israel’s Arrow anti-ballistic missile defense among these measures? It is; and it demonstrates clearly what a small but highly technical and scientiﬁc community like Israel’s can achieve in an emergency. Arrow began in 1991 when Iraq attacked population centers with medium-range ballistic missiles—the upgraded Russian Scud B, or Al Hussein. Although the U.S. Army deployed several Patriot PAC-2 batteries, these had little e ect in intercepting Scuds. The Israeli defense community, with ﬁnancial and technological assistance from the U.S., embarked on an ambitious anti-missile defense program, which brought about the ﬁrst operational anti-ballistic missile project—Arrow. In record time the ﬁrst Arrow 2 battery was deployed, early in 2000, with two more later. Israel is working 62 DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY INTERNATIONAL JUNE 2008 on a third version, Arrow 3, aimed at intercepting Iran’s more advanced long-range Shahab-3 missiles. Does Israel place a priority on countermeasures to stop the Qassam rockets from Gaza, or the long-distance missiles being developed by Iran? The technological problems involved in developing an ultrashort-range anti-rocket system are immense. A countermeasure has more time to react the longer the distance between a missile or rocket launch. Then there are two alternatives to destroy the weapon. One is the “hit-to-kill” system, which destroys the missile or rocket on impact and requires sensitive homing devices to hit the warhead. Without destroying that, the intercept is worthless. Israel has opted for another method, the proximity explosion, which is far less costly and requires less onboard sophistication. So far, multiple tests have proven this concept. The problem is that with short-range rockets, reaction time is measured in seconds—and until recently no one has come up with any solution, apart from anti-mortar or counter-battery ﬁre, neither of which can cope with the threat. To counter time-critical threats like Qassam or Katyusha rockets, only high-energy laser weapons achieve the required response between launch and impact. We are speaking of ranges between 4 and 30 km. (2.5 and 18 mi.). The laser operates at the speed of light and virtually “boils” the warhead until it disintegrates in the air. But the problem is that destroying such a small target requires hitting a precise point in the warhead, usually no more than a few centimeters in diameter; anything less fails to explode it. We worked with TRW (now part of Northrop Grumman) a few years ago to develop a demonstrator called Nautilus. One of the challenges included engineering a highly sensitive optical designator capable of hitting a 12-cm. (5-in.) target, the size of the warhead point on a Katyusha, up to 10 km. away. The laser needed to direct su cient energy to boil the target spot and destroy the warhead. A few years ago this was a new world in technology. The outcome was the Nautilus testbed demonstrator, a huge complex, which was only built to test the theory. But it actually worked in several ﬁeld tests at White Sands Missile Range, N.M. Why didn’t Israel adopt Nautilus as a countermeasure for Qassams? This became a political issue that was misunderstood in Israel. Nautilus was a monster. To move it to Israel would have cost a fortune and been counterproductive to morale. It would also present a lucrative target for Hamas, since it would have been set up in sight of an observation post only a few kilometers away. It would have needed continuous maintenance since it AviationWeek.com/dti http://AviationWeek.com/dti

Table of Contents Feed for the Digital Edition of Defense Technology International - June 2008

Defense Technology International - June 2008 Contents Around the World Science Watch Tech Watch Basic Black Self-Defense Fire-Resistant Perfezione Hyperspeed Trial Big Sky Cashing In Digital Links Hang Ten Sea Change Programs Update Two Steps Back Direct Hit Staying Power Potent Stinger Do No Harm Guard Duty The Net Cutting Edge First Person In Review Insight

Defense Technology International - June 2008

For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.