Moderator: Brig. Gen. (ret.) Itai Brun
Gen. (ret.) Joseph L. Votel, Gen. (ret.) John R. Allen, Lt. Col. (ret.) Orna Mizrahi, Dr. Igor Yurgens, Maj. Gen. (res.) Nitsan Alon and Ms. Shimrit Meir
In the War Games scenario, in which Israel initiates attacks on Lebanon and Syria, Lt. Col. (ret.) Orna Mizrahi, representing Hezbollah, stated that although Hezbollah does not have an interest in war at this stage, it would respond by attacking military sites in the north, in order to weaken Israel. Gen. (ret.) John Allen, playing Syria, stated that Assad would like to hold onto some legitimacy and to be synonymous with Syrian sovereignty. Since his objective is regime survival, he needs to de-escalate as quickly as possible and also preserve the coalition with Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah. Russia will be key to de-escalating this conflict. Iran needs to get the Quds Force under control and stop them from launching attacks on Israel. Maj. Gen. (res.) Nitsan Alon (playing Israel) stated that Israel could risk attacking Lebanon and Syria due to US support for our move, economic pressure on Iran from sanctions, and the fact that Assad is still fighting for his survival. According to Dr. Igor Yurgens who played Russia, President Putin immediately would establish a hotline with Israel and open channels of communication with the United States, Khamanei, and Assad. Russia is most interested in a quick de-escalation of the situation. Russia has the best relations with Israel ever will seek to leverage them in making peace. However, if Israeli forces approach Damascus, Putin would have a serious domestic problem, and in that case, Russia would contemplate deployment of ground forces, although it would not be Putin’s first choice. Gen. (ret.) Joseph Votel in the role of the United States, stated that although war is not inevitable, nor is it desirable, the US operational response would include a direct response against groups in Iraq, which attacked American forces, support for Israel, and stopping Iran from further attacks. To keep Iran out of this broader conflict, the United States would use contacts with Russia to not escalate toward a direct US-Iranian confrontation.
Commanders’ Debriefing
Moderator: Brig. Gen. (res.) Udi Dekel
Lt. Gen. (ret.) Gadi Eisenkot and Gen. (ret.) David Petraeus
In the debriefing on the war games scenario, despite the assumption that the assassination of Soleimani would bring about a regional war, Gen. (ret.) David Petraeus stated this was not a time to show aggressiveness as Soleimani’s successor would need time to establish himself. He also agreed that Hezbollah’s response would only be symbolic, as it does not want to get into war with Israel as it did before in 2006. He further added that Israel has succeeding at deterring war, through David’s Sling and its defensive capabilities. Petraeus also agreed with the assessment of Assad, that like Hezbollah, he needs help from the Quds force but does not want to risk a full on war with Israel. Lt. Gen. (ret.) Gadi Eisenkot noted that Iran’s ability to harm Israel is much more limited than Israel's capabilities vis-à-vis Hezbollah and Syria. For the last six years Israel has had relative quiet, and deterrence has been the key ingredient here. During this time, Israel has worked to prevent Iran’s entrenchment in Syria, to degrade the precision missile project, and to assist in defeating the Islamic State. According to Eisenkot, a confrontation with Iran would be extremely complex, but Israel possesses significant capabilities. Despite the quiet since 2006, Hezbollah’s/Iran’s desire to threaten Israel has not diminished. Petraeus added that it is conceivable that the United States would need to respond to an attack on Israel, but that would happen after a longer series of steps in the interim. Meanwhile, Putin will want to get involved and be the main powerbroker. As for Assad, Petraeus stated that all sides would like to see him removed from Syria, but that would not necessarily bring about a unifying force in his place, nor is the country unified or sovereign in any real sense. So even if Assad is removed, some other group would come in and everyone in Syria will pledge allegiance to him. Eisenkot concluded by saying that even though Israel’s strategic situation has improved relative to prior years, Israel still faces serious threats and can end up in an escalation due to miscalculation. The central lesson here is to continue operating in our interest, cooperating where possible with regional partners, and do as much as possible to retain the quiet we have enjoyed for these past years.