What is Israel's Iron Dome? Here's how the missile defense system works
Designed to protect Israeli citizens from aerial attacks by launching guided missiles to intercept incoming rockets and other short-range threats, the mobile all-weather defense system has been fully operational since March 2011.
Israel's Defense Ministry says the system has been upgraded several times and "successfully prevented countless rockets from hitting Israeli communities."
The Iron Dome was developed in Israel by state-owned Rafael Advanced Defense Systems with U.S. backing — and Washington continues to provide funding for it.
Israel's Defense Forces say the Iron Dome is a compilation of several features: the technology itself, the machinery used to intercept incoming rockets, the soldiers who operate the system and the commanders who supervise the network.
In practice, the Iron Dome uses radar to track incoming rockets and determines whether the missile's trajectory threatens a protected area, such as a strategically important site or population center.
If the rocket does pose a threat, a command and control center responds by launching its own Tamir missile to intercept it.
The system is not configured to fire outside of a protected area, however, and rockets that don't endanger people or buildings are typically ignored and permitted to land.
A 2023 Congressional Research Service report described the Iron Dome as a mobile anti-rocket, anti-mortar and anti-artillery system that can intercept launches from 2.5 to 43 miles away.
It is estimated to have at least 10 batteries deployed nationwide, each of which is designed to defend a 60-square-mile populated area. Each battery is equipped with three to four launchers and each launcher contains up to 20 Tamir interceptors.
The Center for Strategic International Studies, a U.S. think tank, has estimated that a single Iron Dome battery costs more than $100 million to produce.
Since 2011, the United States has provided billions of dollars to Israel for Iron Dome batteries, interceptors, co-production costs and general maintenance since it became operational.
Much of this money has been appropriated by Congress, where bipartisan majorities have consistently voted in favor of providing funding to Israel's Iron Dome.
The Iron Dome has its weaknesses, however.
Analysts have warned that the defense system could encounter challenges when responding to heavy rocket fire.
The Center for European Policy Analysis, a U.S. think tank, said in June 2021 that the system was potentially vulnerable to a "saturation" attack, designed to overwhelm the Iron Dome shield with simultaneous missile attacks from multiple directions.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Epoch Times
26 minutes ago
- Epoch Times
New Settlement ‘Buries the Idea of a Palestinian State,' Says Israeli Minister
Israel's finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich, said on Thursday that a new settlement in the West Bank, east of Jerusalem, 'finally buries the idea of a Palestinian state.' Smotrich visited the area, near the existing Israeli settlement of Maale Adumim, on Thursday and said the new development, known only as E1, would get final approval later this month.
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
20 years after its landmark withdrawal from Gaza, Israel is mired there
Israel Gaza Withdrawal Anniversary TEL AVIV, Israel (AP) — Twenty years ago, Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip, dismantling 21 Jewish settlements and pulling out its forces. The Friday anniversary of the start of the landmark disengagement comes as Israel is mired in a nearly two-year war with Hamas that has devastated the Palestinian territory and means it is likely to keep troops there long into the future. Israel's disengagement, which also included removing four settlements in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, was then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's controversial attempt to jump-start negotiations with the Palestinians. But it bitterly divided Israeli society and led to the empowerment of Hamas, with implications that continue to reverberate today. The emotional images of Jews being ripped from their homes by Israeli soldiers galvanized Israel's far-right and settler movements. The anger helped them organize and increase their political influence, accounting in part for the rise of hard-line politicians like National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich. On Thursday, Smotrich boasted of a settlement expansion plan east of Jerusalem that will 'bury' the idea of a future Palestinian state. For Palestinians, even if they welcomed the disengagement, it didn't end Israel's control over their lives. Soon after, Hamas won elections in 2006, then drove out the Palestinian Authority in a violent takeover. Israel and Egypt imposed a closure on the territory, controlling entry and exit of goods and people. Though its intensity varied over the years, the closure helped impoverish the population and entrenched a painful separation from Palestinians in the West Bank. Israel captured the West Bank, east Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip in the 1967 Mideast war. The Palestinians claim all three territories for a future independent state. A unilateral withdrawal enhanced Hamas' stature Israel couldn't justify the military or economic cost of maintaining the heavily fortified settlements in Gaza, explained Kobi Michael, a senior researcher at the Misgav Institute and the Institute for National Security Studies think tanks. There were around 8,000 Israeli settlers and 1.5 million Palestinians in Gaza in 2005. 'There was no chance for these settlements to exist or flourish or become meaningful enough to be a strategic anchor,' he said. By contrast, there are more than 500,000 Israeli settlers in the West Bank, most living in developed settlement blocs that have generally received more support from Israeli society, Michael said. Most of the world considers the settlements illegal under international law. Because Israel withdrew unilaterally, without any coordination with the Palestinian Authority, it enhanced Hamas' stature among Palestinians in Gaza. 'This contributed to Hamas' win in the elections in 2006, because they leveraged it and introduced it as a very significant achievement,' Michael said. 'They saw it as an achievement of the resistance and a justification for the continuation of the armed resistance.' Footage of the violence between Israeli settlers and Israeli soldiers also created an 'open wound' in Israeli society, Michael said. 'I don't think any government will be able to do something like that in the future,' he said. That limits any flexibility over settlements in the West Bank if negotiations over a two-state solution with the Palestinians ever resume. 'Disengagement will never happen again, this is a price we're paying as a society, and a price we're paying politically,' he said. An early settler longs to return Anita Tucker, now 79, was part of the first nine Jewish families that moved to the Gaza Strip in 1976. She and her husband and their three kids lived in an Israeli army outpost near what is today Deir al-Balah, while the settlement of Netzer Hazoni was constructed. Originally from Brooklyn, she started a farm growing vegetables in the harsh, tall sand dunes. At first relations were good with their Palestinian neighbors, she said, and they worked hard to build their home and a 'beautiful community.' She had two more children, and three chose to stay and raise their families in Netzer Hazoni. She can still recall the moment, 20 years ago, when 1,000 Israeli soldiers arrived at the gate to the settlement to remove the approximately 400 residents. Some of her neighbors lit their houses on fire in protest. 'Obviously it was a mistake to leave. The lives of the Arabs became much worse, and the lives of the Jews became much, much worse, with rockets and Oct. 7,' she said, referring to the decades of rockets fired from Gaza into Israel and the date in 2023 of the Hamas attack that launched the ongoing war. Despite the passage of time, her family still is 'yearning and longing for their home,' she said. Several of her 10 grandchildren, including some who spent their early childhood in the Gaza settlements, have served in the current war and were near her old house. 'It's hard to believe, because of all the terrible things that happened that we predicted, but we're willing to build there again,' said Tucker. Palestinians doubt Israel will ever fully withdraw from Gaza again After Israel's withdrawal 20 years ago, many Palestinians described Gaza as an 'open-air prison.' They had control on the inside – under a Hamas government that some supported but some saw as heavy-handed and brutal. But ultimately, Israel had a grip around the territory. Many Palestinians believe Sharon carried out the withdrawal so Israel could focus on cementing its control in the West Bank through settlement building. Now some believe more direct Israeli occupation is returning to Gaza. After 22 months of war, Israeli troops control more than 75% of Gaza, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks of maintaining security control long term after the war. 'Over the past 20 years we were relieved of occupation, shelling and seeing the Jews. Now we hear that they want to occupy here again after two years of war," said Sabah Abu Audeh, a 67-year-old grandmother who was displaced to Gaza's Shati refugee camp. Aouni Timras, 55, from the Nuseirat refugee camp said he felt optimistic when Israel pulled out, thinking things would get better. 'We were hopeful but now the occupation returned for the second time,' Timras said. "What can people do? This is what we live through. We hope that there will be a truce so that people can stand up again.' Amjad Shawa, the director of the Palestinian NGO Network, said he doesn't believe Netanyahu will repeat Sharon's full withdrawal. Instead, he expects the military to continue controlling large swaths of Gaza through 'buffer zones.' The aim, he said, is to keep Gaza 'unlivable in order to change the demographics,' referring to Netanyahu's plans to encourage Palestinians to leave the territory. Israel is 'is reoccupying the Gaza Strip' to prevent a Palestinian state, said Mostafa Ibrahim, an author based in Gaza City whose home was destroyed in the current war. Missed opportunities Israeli former Maj. Gen. Dan Harel, who was head of the country's Southern Command during the disengagement, remembers the toll of protecting a few thousand settlers. There were an average of 10 attacks per day against Israeli settlers and soldiers, including rockets, roadside bombs big enough to destroy a tank, tunnels to attack Israeli soldiers and military positions, and frequent gunfire. 'Bringing a school bus of kids from one place to another required a military escort,' said Harel. 'There wasn't a future. People paint it as how wonderful it was there, but it wasn't wonderful.' Harel says the decision to evacuate Israeli settlements from the Gaza Strip was the right one, but that Israel missed crucial opportunities. Most egregious, he said, was a unilateral withdrawal without obtaining any concessions from the Palestinians in Gaza or the Palestinian Authority. He also sharply criticized Israel's policy of containment toward Hamas after disengagement. There were short but destructive conflicts over the years between the two sides, but otherwise the policy gave Hamas 'an opportunity to do whatever they wanted.' 'We had such a blind spot with Hamas, we didn't see them morph from a terror organization into an organized military, with battalions and commanders and infrastructure,' he said. The Oct. 7 attack, Israel's largest military intelligence failure to date, was not a result of the disengagement, said Harel. 'The main issue is what we did in the 18 years in between.' ___ Associated Press writers Fatma Khaled contributed from Cairo and Wafaa Shurafa from Deir al Balah, Gaza Strip. Solve the daily Crossword
Business Insider
an hour ago
- Business Insider
South African general's unapproved visit to Iran may signal complex US relations
The move, which did not receive government backing, has drawn sharp criticism from members of South Africa's governing coalition, who described the visit as ' reckless grandstanding.' The row comes as South Africa navigates tense relations with the US, which has taken exception to the country's ties with Iran, Russia, and its strong affiliation with BRICS. According to Iranian media outlet WANA News Agency, Iran's Chief of Staff, Major General Mousavi, condemned what he called the crimes of the Israeli regime in the region—particularly genocide in Gaza—and praised South Africa's decision to file and pursue a genocide case against Israel at the International Criminal Court. General Maphwanya noted that the two countries shared common goals and always stood ' alongside the oppressed and defenceless people of the world, ' according to the Iranian publication Tehran Times. He also criticised Israel over the ongoing war in Gaza, reiterating support for the Palestinian people and telling officials his visit ' carries a political message ' from Ramaphosa's administration as per The BBC The South African government, however, has denied authorising these comments. According to the South African Defence Department, the general's statement was 'unfortunate,' while the Foreign Affairs Ministry said they ' do not represent the government's official foreign policy stance.' President Cyril Ramaphosa's spokesperson, Vincent Magwenya, confirmed that the president was unaware of the trip and had not sanctioned it. ' The visit was ill-advised and, more so, the expectation is that the general should have been a lot more circumspect with the comments he makes,' Magwenya told reporters. The Democratic Alliance, a member of South Africa's governing coalition, called for General Maphwanya to be 'court-martialled.' The presidency also confirmed that President Ramaphosa intends to meet with the general to discuss the implications of what he called an 'ill-advised' trip. South Africa's waning U.S. relations South Africa's ties with Iran could likely be one of the issues that influenced President Donald Trump's decision to impose tariffs, even though they were officially justified by trade imbalances. Under Trump, US trade policy increasingly blended economic and geopolitical concerns, and Pretoria's growing engagement with Tehran through diplomatic and military discussions raised Washington's alarm. These interactions likely reinforced the perception that South Africa was aligning with a country at odds with key US strategic interests. While the visit has not yet directly altered bilateral relations, analysts warn that it could complicate South Africa's already delicate relationship with the United States, which has long expressed concerns over Pretoria's ties with Tehran and other contentious international partnerships. South Africa's Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO) said in a statement that it had noted recent media reports on comments attributed to General Rudzani Maphwanya but stressed that the formulation and implementation of the country's foreign policy is the responsibility of the Presidency, supported by DIRCO. ' Consequently, any statements made by an individual or a department other than those mandated with foreign policy should not be misconstrued as the official position of the South African government. The remarks attributed to General Maphwanya, therefore, do not reflect the government's official foreign policy stance, ' it said.
