Will Israel's interceptors outlast Iran's missiles? The answer may shape the war
Jerusalem: Aside from a potentially game-changing US intervention that shapes the fate of Iran's nuclear program, two factors will help decide the length of the Israel-Iran war: Israel's reserve of missile interceptors and Iran's stock of long-range missiles.
Since Iran started retaliating against Israel's fire last week, Israel's world-leading air defence system has intercepted most incoming Iranian ballistic missiles, giving the Israeli air force more time to strike Iran without incurring major losses at home.
Now, as the war drags on, Israel is firing interceptors faster than it can produce them. That has raised questions within the Israeli security establishment about whether the country will run low on air defence missiles before Iran uses up its ballistic arsenal, according to eight current and former officials.
Already, Israel's military has had to conserve its use of interceptors and is giving greater priority to the defence of densely populated areas and strategic infrastructure, according to the officials. Most spoke on the condition of anonymity to speak more freely.
'No one envisaged we would be fighting on so many fronts and defending against so many rounds of ballistic missiles.'
Zohar Palti, former senior Mossad officer
Interceptors are 'not grains of rice,' said Brigadier General Ran Kochav, who commanded Israel's air defence system until 2021 and still serves in the military reserve. 'The number is finite.'
'If a missile is supposed to hit refineries in Haifa, it's clear that it's more important to intercept that missile than one that will hit the Negev desert,' Kochav said. Conserving Israel's interceptors is 'a challenge', he added. 'We can make it, but it's a challenge.'
Asked for comment on the limits of its interceptor arsenal, the Israeli military said in a brief statement that it 'is prepared and ready to handle any scenario and is operating defensively and offensively to remove threats to Israeli civilians'.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News AU
an hour ago
- Sky News AU
Global Islamic politics expert says Israel's claims about Iranian nuclear weapon 'at odds' with intelligence reports as Netanyahu 'desperate' to involve Trump in war
An Australian global Islamic politics expert has urged the world to be "sceptical" of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claims after numerous intelligence reports concluded that Iran is not "close at all" to building a nuclear weapon. Professor Greg Barton from Deakin University told Sky News Netanyahu's strategy to close down Iran's nuclear program may not be as "clear cut and simple", as he would present it to be to President Donald Trump, in an attempt to persuade the US to join the Israeli assault. "I think that the way that Benjamin Netanyahu will sell it to Trump is that you just send in a couple of B2s over Fordow and it's done," Mr Barton told Sky News host Steve Price. "You've closed down the nuclear program and we're good. "But of course, it is not likely to be so clear cut and so simple." According to Axios, President Trump believes the US has leverage over Iran due to its bunker buster munitions – which Israel does not have – that are capable of destroying the Fordow nuclear enrichment facility that sits deep under a mountain. Mr Barton added the bunker buster bombs are unlikely to demolish Iran's nuclear program and could instead result in dangerous escalation of war in the Middle East. 'First of all, those B2 strikes with massive ordnance, penetrator bombs over Fordow, 90 metres underground, that likely wouldn't finish Iran's nuclear program,' he said. 'They'd probably scramble to take what they have left and actually move towards nuclear weapons. 'In the meantime, they're likely to strike out against US targets all around the Middle East and use their proxies to do so. 'So a very dangerous risk of escalation and a prolonged conflict.' When questioned about the validity of Netanyahu's claims about Iran's existential threat to Israel, Mr Barton said they were 'at odds' with other publicly available intelligence reports have said, including what Trump was briefed on by his own security adviser. Mr Barton highlighted Israel's remarkable capabilities at penetrating Iranian society and its defence apparatus, but noted other intelligence reports suggest 'Iran is some way off, it's not close at all' to building a nuclear weapon. 'It is possible they know something that no one else knows, but what all the other intelligence reports are saying is that Iran is some way off, it's not close at all,' he said. 'We can't know, we're sort of making a claim from Netanyahu who is desperate to involve Trump and America in this programme, and on balance you sort of want to be a bit sceptical about what he's saying for that reason.' Israel has been trading missiles with Iran since last Friday in an attempt to shut down any efforts of Tehran building an atomic weapon to wipe out the existence of the Jewish state. Netanyahu said the operations were to "strike the head of Iran's nuclear weaponisation program". White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told a media briefing on Thursday, local time, she had been asked to pass on a 'direct quote' from President Trump on the possibility of US intervention in the Israel-Iran war. 'Based on the fact that there is a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future, I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks,' she said, quoting the President. Ms Leavitt also urged sceptics of US involvement to 'trust' in President Trump's judgement, before emphasising his 'top priority' was to prevent Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon.
The Age
2 hours ago
- The Age
Few believe Iran has nuclear weapons. We can't afford to repeat the Iraq War lie
The Middle East is once again in danger of exploding, with massive global geopolitical and economic implications. The leader who bears most responsibility for this is undoubtedly Benjamin Netanyahu. For years, the Israeli prime minister has doggedly pursued the demise of the Iranian Islamic regime in line with his power interests and his vision of Israel's security requirements. His stated goal has long been to bring down the 'Islamic empire in Iran', 'expand the Abraham Accords with Arabs' and once and for all end the Palestinians' aspirations for an independent state. As part of this Middle East master plan, he has also zeroed in on Iran's nuclear program. But let's not forget: No concrete evidence exists that Iran has been manufacturing nuclear weapons. In a congressional hearing earlier this year, the United States' Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard confirmed this fact. And earlier this week, Rafael Grossi, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said that 'on the basis of our evaluation, we came to the conclusion that we could not affirm that there is any systematic effort in Iran to manufacture a nuclear weapon'. Despite this, Netanyahu continues to insist that Iran is on course to produce nuclear weapons within weeks, and the US is teetering on entering the war in Israel's support. Meanwhile, he omits the fact that Israel itself has its own nuclear program. Though Israel has never formally confirmed or denied its nuclear arsenal, its national Atomic Energy Commission was established in 1952. By 1958, researchers believe the government had established a weapons development site in Dimona, and American intelligence from the 1960s stated that there was a reprocessing plant for plutonium production at the site. Loading As the Federation of American Scientists wrote in 2007, 'the existence of Israeli nuclear weapons is a 'public secret' by now due to the declassification of large numbers of formerly highly classified US government documents which show that the United States by 1975 was convinced that Israel had nuclear weapons'. According to the Centre for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, Israel today has at least 90 nuclear warheads and enough material to produce hundreds more. The United Nations' nuclear watchdog has also found that of the 30 countries capable of developing nuclear weapons, Israel is among nine that possess them (Russia, US, China, France, United Kingdom, Pakistan, India, Israel and North Korea).
SBS Australia
2 hours ago
- SBS Australia
'Unmitigated disaster': What Donald Trump could be weighing up on Iran
US President Donald Trump says he's considering whether or not to involve the US in the Israel-Iran conflict. Source: AAP, Press Association / Suzanne Plunkett As hostilities between Israel and Iran continue, United States President Donald Trump is keeping the world guessing as to what he might do next. Israel launched a sweeping aerial campaign against Iran a week ago, calling it a "pre-emptive" strike to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Iran has denied plans to develop such weapons and retaliated by launching counterstrikes on Israel. Trump has repeatedly criticised Iran, called for an "unconditional surrender", and floated the possibility of US action in Iran. On Thursday, Trump said he has yet to decide how the US would proceed, but will do so in the next two weeks. He has indicated there is still a chance of negotiating with Iran. "Based on the fact that there's a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future, I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks," press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters, quoting a message from Trump. Leavitt told a regular briefing at the White House that Trump was interested in pursuing a diplomatic solution with Iran, but his top priority was ensuring that Iran could not obtain a nuclear weapon. Professor Wesley Widmaier, from the Australian National University's Department of International Relations, said domestic policies could play a major role in Trump's decision. Widmaier said a portion of Trump's voter base may not support involvement in the conflict. "I think right now he is poised on the horns of a dilemma between the isolationist MAGA [Make America Great Again] coalition base and anti-Iran pro-Israel kind of foreign policy imperative," he said. "And politicians like to keep things ambiguous for as long as possible; it gives them maximum mobility." Widmaier said the two-week time frame will provide Trump with an extension to weigh up tensions in his supporter base, political strategy and pressure, and the US relationship with Israel. Michael Green, professor and CEO of the United States Studies Centre at the University of Sydney, said Trump is likely deciding whether or not to use a 13,000kg Massive Ordnance Penetrator 'bunker buster' bomb on an Iranian underground nuclear facility. Only the US military has the bunker buster bomb. "I believe that the decision he has to make is whether or not the US drops that bunker-busting bomb on Fordo, the remaining intact part of Iran's nuclear weapons programs," he said. "The reason he might do it is because the Israelis believe that the Iranians are weeks away from creating nuclear weapons capability. The reason to not do it is because there's no guarantee of success." Trump has not outlined exactly what US involvement in Iran could look like, but he has floated several possible scenarios. Comments and social media posts about his plans have veered from proposing a swift diplomatic solution to suggesting the US might join the fighting on Israel's side. On Wednesday, he said nobody knew what he would do. A day earlier, he mused on social media about killing Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, then demanded Iran's unconditional surrender. Iran has warned of "all-out war" if the US joins the military action. Green said while the Iranian regime is vulnerable, it could still "lash out" and cause threats to US forces and allied interests. He said Trump may be hoping the threat of the bunker buster bomb could influence Iranians to agree to peacefully give up their nuclear capability. "I am sceptical that Iran will, even under this huge amount of pressure, give up their nuclear program, [but] they might agree to meet, they might agree to talk about it, to dissipate the pressure," he said. "The most likely scenario is they put something out there to save themselves and it will be debated whether it's enough, and Donald Trump may or may not take it." Widmaier said he believes the US bombing Iran would be a "disaster". "My sense is this would all be leading to a disaster. It would just be a disaster for the region, it would be a disaster for American foreign policy," he said. If the Trump administration decides to pursue US action in Iran, Widmaier said it would need to have clear aims and a clear exit strategy. He said the US government would also want to be sure of public support if it were to take action. "These are lessons of the Vietnam war, these are lessons of the Iraq war, and I see no sense that they really know what they want," Widmaier said. Wars are easy to start, but hard to end. Wesley Windmaier "I say with a high level of confidence that it would be an unmitigated disaster, and it's something absolutely to be avoided. "I don't think you need a PhD to see that, given the disastrous military interventions that are a history of US foreign policy." While Trump has publicly criticised Iran and sided with Israel, US action against Iran is not guaranteed. In the next two weeks, Trump will weigh up different factors and scenarios, including opposition from some of his Republican colleagues, some of whom have said the US should avoid war. Kentucky senator Rand Paul said he hoped Trump would not give in to pressure to get involved. "It's not the US' job to be involved in this war," Paul said on NBC's Meet the Press on Sunday. Republican representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky said on X: "This is not our war. We should not engage our military here." Widmaier said it's possible the president could opt out of the US becoming directly involved in another Middle East conflict. He pointed out Trump does have a record of holding off in the context of Iran. "In his first term, he came right up to the brink of ordering some strikes against Iranian sites, and he backed off at the last possible minute," Widmaier said. "So he does seem to have some inhibitions against, it may be that at the last minute he pulls back ... he does have a pragmatic streak too." — Additional reporting by Reuters and the Australian Associated Press
