Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
Updates on legislation and initiatives to strengthen the U.S.-Israel relationship, from AIPAC in Washington, D.C.
As missile threats continue to evolve from long range missiles to cheap off the shelf drones, having a layered missile defense system is not a luxury for America. It is simply a necessity. For decades, The United States and Israel have worked together to build some of the most advanced missile defense systems in the entire world. That partnership has helped protect American bases, service members, and even our allies. And just in the past few weeks, we learned that the Marine Corps began using Iron Dome technology on the island of Guam to defend itself against potential drone or missile attacks from China.
Deryn Sousa:Just the latest example of this partnership in action. Despite all of that, some in Congress are now questioning whether these programs should continue. So in this episode, we're gonna talk about it and take a closer look at what this cooperation actually does in practice, and ultimately, what The United States would lose if we cut it back. I'm Deryn Sousa, AIPAC's national spokeswoman, and today, I have two guests with me. Later on, I'll be joined by Israeli journalist and author, Yaakov Katz.
Deryn Sousa:But first, I'm joined by Bob Peters. Bob is a senior research fellow and assistant director in the Heritage Foundation Center for National Security. Before joining Heritage, he spent nearly twenty years at the Defense Department working on nuclear deterrence, missile defense, and counter WMD policy.
Deryn Sousa:So, Bob, thanks so much for being here with us today.
Bob Peters:Oh, it's my pleasure. Thanks for having me.
Deryn Sousa:So to start, I I wanna zoom out and look at the threat picture from an American perspective, which you are certainly an expert at. So if if we could just begin with the basics and and broadly speaking, when you look at threats facing The United States, whether just missile and and air threats in general, what worries you the most? What would you point out to Americans listening today?
Bob Peters:Well, what I would say is that we've seen our adversaries invest very heavily in missile threats, and those missile threats are ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, increasingly hypersonic missiles, drone threats. We've really seen the adversaries think hard about how they can weaponize aerospace, and how they can try to hit targets, whether those are targets amongst our allies and partners, whether those are American force deployments overseas at American bases, or potentially even the American homeland. You know, Russia has the world's largest stockpile of missiles across the board. China has the second largest stockpile. Iran had a very large stockpile up until the difficulties from a couple years ago, and then again with the degradation that happened in the twelve day war and epic fury.
Bob Peters:Even North Korea has invested heavily in these capabilities, and so what you've really seen over the last eight years is a deep deep investment in all types of aerospace threats. And so it's no wonder then that The United States and our allies have thought a lot about how we put systems forward to defend American force deployments through both close range defenses as well as exo atmospheric defenses, but then also about building golden dome to protect the American homeland. And this really does come down to it doesn't matter if you're a rogue or if you're a superpower like China. The adversaries are looking hard about how they can carry out deep penetrating strike.
Deryn Sousa:You mentioned Russia has the largest stockpile. When you're talking about our adversaries and the stockpiles that they have, could you walk us through where they can actually target? Like, how far their stockpiles can actually reach?
Bob Peters:So Russia to give you a sense of the scale of the Russian missile threat, the Russians have invested heavily in both cruise missiles and ballistic missiles, as well as these new hypersonic missiles. Cruise missiles, we all we've all seen in in movies and television and and some of the news in which they can carry relatively modest payloads, they're very accurate. And we've seen the Russians employ these things across the battle space in Ukraine. Ballistic missiles, those are the things that go outside of the earth's atmosphere and come back down, they can carry much much heavier payloads. Hypersonic missiles are these types of missiles that can go six, seven, eight, nine, 10 times the speed of sound, which makes it very difficult to track them and then intercept them and shoot them down.
Bob Peters:And so, to give a sense of scale, Russia has maybe 1,500, 2,000 of these ballistic missiles that can reach out and touch the American homeland. These are the doomsday weapons that we saw in Hollywood movies for the past several decades. But then they also have about 2,000 nuclear tipped intermediate range missiles that can cover all of Europe, and again put nuclear weapons basically anywhere on the European continent or in The United Kingdom or Iceland. We by and large got rid of this stuff at the end of the Cold War because we just didn't see any real utility in them. The Russians took a very different lesson.
Bob Peters:And so the Russians have invested tremendous amounts of money in developing these capabilities. And that's just the nuclear stuff. When you look at the conventional stuff, the stuff they've been pulling against Ukraine, their stockpile is far north of 10,000. And so when you look at the missile threat posed by Russia alone, it's staggering. And that's why we've been so concerned from missile defense perspective.
Bob Peters:China is far behind Russia in that sense, but they're building even faster than the Russians are. The Chinese are building not only missiles that can hit American bases in the theater, but they've been building advanced super heavy missiles that can target the American homeland. And, oh, by the way, hit American ships doing 30 knots over the horizon, either with a conventional warhead or a nuclear warhead. And that's really disconcerning from an American force planning perspective. The scale is staggering, and so that's why there's been such an enormous emphasis on building theater range missile defenses, but also homeland missile defenses.
Deryn Sousa:If you could speak a little bit to the Iron Dome and that short missile defense system because, you know, living between two very large oceans, we are not faced with the same threat profile that Israel is. But we've seen reports with the marines actually using Iron Dome currently. So just walk us through that if you could.
Bob Peters:Yeah. So Iron Dome is really more of a short range defense system that's meant to engage a huge number of small threats of of rockets and mortars and artillery rounds that are coming in. And so the utility of Iron Dome in a place like a small island off the coast of China, is that you could see the Chinese try to overwhelm missile defenses using very low level stuff. Right? And so you wouldn't want to use a THAAD that's shooting a multimillion dollar missile interceptor to take down a $500,000 drone, or to take down a rocket that they built for $20,000.
Bob Peters:But what you do need is a a missile interceptor system that can take on a host of different inbound threats that are coming at you in large amounts. And that's where Iron Dome could be really helpful in the Pacific, and was why the Marines are experimenting with it.
Deryn Sousa:So and just help us understand. If you think forward and in the event that that something breaks out in the Indo Pacific theater, threat specifically would our troops be facing of of what you just described? Yeah.
Bob Peters:So let's just say that we're on Guam is American territory, and we've got a naval base there and a big air base there. So if you're a soldier or an airman or a sailor on Guam, you could expect to see salvos of sixty, seventy, eighty, ninety, a 100 ballistic missiles coming at you within a fifteen minute period. And those would be mixed salvos of of various types of ballistic missiles. You could also see cruise missiles coming at you, and what those are trying to do is is not kill the civilian populations at Guam, but really overwhelm the American air defenses that are there on the island of Guam, and then crater and rubblize the American air base on Guam, so that The United States is unable to prosecute a war in the Western Pacific in defense of one of our allies, such as Japan or Korea. Or you're on an American base, like in South Korea or Japan, and you could see something similar that's generated by China or North Korea.
Bob Peters:And you would see these sustained mixed salvo attacks that are meant to overwhelm American air defenses or whatever air defenses that a host nations have so that essentially we go empty on missile interceptors and then they're able to hit barracks or weapons depots or diesel or jet fuel storage tanks, or runways, and so forth. And so the missile threat is very acute.
Deryn Sousa:And how would you describe or how would you rate our current defense system against that?
Bob Peters:Our defenses are astonishingly good. And so what you've seen play out in both tests that we've carried out in the American homeland, what you've seen with American made systems play out in The Middle East, and also Ukraine, has shown astonishingly effective missile defense capabilities. And so whether you're talking about a theater defenses such as THAAD, or more shorter range defenses such as Patriot PAC three systems, they are very very good. The problem is numbers. The problem is for every one interceptor that we have, the adversary has maybe 10.
Bob Peters:Right? And so it becomes a math problem that we simply do not have enough interceptors to be able to shoot down the enemy inbound threats. And for every enemy inbound threat, we may wanna fire two, three, or even four missiles to make sure that that missile doesn't touch down and kill Americans, or kill Allied personnel.
Deryn Sousa:So if you had to name one threat, I mean, you you just mentioned several threats in our defense stacking up against it, but what threat keeps you up at night?
Bob Peters:So I'm really concerned about an adversary who is engaged in a protracted conflict with The United States. But then the adversary starts to lose, and then they say, well, I've got all these nuclear tipped, very high speed missiles. If I fire three of these things, the American homeland, it's not gonna end American society. And I can hit them at key bases. You know, I can hit them at the shipbuilding yards in Norfolk, Virginia, or I can hit Camp Pendleton in California, and demonstrate my ability to hold the American homeland at risk, the Americans may say, woah, woah, woah, isn't worth it for us.
Bob Peters:We just saw six or even 10 nuclear weapons go off in the American homeland. I don't know that this is worth it. And that's what really worries me, particularly if they use a low yield weapon, and we do not have enough missile defenses. An adversary could be tempted to carry out that kind of high risk attack, but they're taking that risk in order to avoid losing a conventional conflict with the American led coalition. That's what's most worrisome to me.
Deryn Sousa:I think what you're saying is in a prolonged conflict, an adversary really targeting the American will rather than a sophistication. Club. But the actual will so so on that, Iran continues to to use drones, ballistic missiles, and, you know, we we've seen a willingness to attack the will. How have military strategic planners here in in The United States taken that? Are they putting that into their strategy?
Deryn Sousa:How has that evolved the conversation?
Bob Peters:We value the lives of individual Americans. We value the lives of our allies and partners. But we recognize that very often our adversaries do not. And so do we really believe that the Ayatollahs in Tehran or IRGC commanders in in Tehran value individual lives in Iran? Or that Vladimir Putin and and his cronies value the lives of individual Russians, or Xi Jinping values individual lives of Chinese citizens.
Bob Peters:I don't think the evidence is there to to support that claim. And so there's an asymmetry there in which the adversaries are able to attack the political will of the American people, and because we're a democracy, that can be powerful. But even if we were to attack the political will through an adversary's national citizenry, I'm not sure it would have any effect on the decision makers of the autocrats in Tehran, or or Beijing, or Moscow. And so that has a real effect on military planning. And that's why in World War two, The United States did not engage in counter value targeting during bombing campaigns against Nazi Germany because there was no evidence that the Nazis really cared about individual German lives.
Bob Peters:And so I really think that when it comes to how you impact the adversary's will, for an American planner, we have to think about the will of the individual autocrat that's ruling in Tehran, or Beijing, or Moscow, and then their capabilities. Whereas the adversary says, we can't beat the American capabilities. No one can. But we can potentially try to weaken the will of the American people. And I think that's in part why they've put so much investment into into aerospace threats such as such as missiles.
Deryn Sousa:So here at AIPAC, we think that the US is our relationship is a a key piece of American national security priorities. Could you just walk us through the history of the partnership on missile defense cooperation?
Bob Peters:So it really has its origins in the Gulf War. So in 1991, we put Patriot systems into Israel to help defend Israel from any Iraqi attacks. Those were somewhat successful, I think, at the time the the success rates were overblown. But there was a recognition that that again, you'd have an autocrat who had tried to attack the will of a of a western democratic state like like Israel through their population. And so for thirty five years, there has been cooperation between The United States and Israel, both at the government to government, [military] to [military] levels, but also between private industry to build these capabilities cooperatively and in parallel.
Bob Peters:And so after the Gulf War and the early 2000s, you saw the the creation of the Arrow program, you know, following the rocket attacks with Hamas and Hezbollah. The US and and Israel developed Iron Dome in 2011, and that came with significant technological backing from The United States, but also very significant US financial backing. And Iron Dome turned out to be the real first true success story when it came to defending against rocket attacks that were emanating out of Gaza, Southern Lebanon, and also the West Bank. And so what we've seen, I would offer in Israel, is the best example of American and Israeli defense cooperation and technological innovation in a way that surprised even missile defense advocates like myself following the October 7 attacks. I mean, what was been done over Israel proved for a fact that missile defenses can work well against multivariate threats.
Bob Peters:Whether you're talking about a drone, whether you're talking about a cruise missile, or whether you're talking about an exoatmospheric ballistic missile.
Deryn Sousa:In the aftermath of October 7, Israel was faced with day to day real live fire where they had to figure out how to make these systems better. What is the value add for American systems because of that?
Bob Peters:The Israelis were doing almost real time improvements of of their tracking engagement systems and how they can better target and destroy incoming threats. So you're totally right about that. But I think the real value was thinking about how you do data integration and between where you're getting sensor data from incoming threats. So some of that sensor data was was ship based, some of it was airborne based, some of it was from fixed sites on the ground, and then they did data integration and figured out, okay, which system are we gonna use to shoot down these threats? And so during during the Iran salvos, what you saw was a multinational effort that was led by The United States and Israel, but included other partners as well.
Bob Peters:And so you had F-18s and F-35s firing air to air missiles against against some inbound threats. You had short range defenses, you had exo atmospheric engagements, you had destroyers that were using the Aegis missile defense system to do intercepts from the sea, and there was an enormous data integration and battle management effort, and that would not have been possible without this three decades long partnership between The United States and Israel when it comes to missile defense.
Deryn Sousa:So how would you explain to someone who maybe says, you know, America has THAAD and Patriot. We've had it for a a long time. They seem to be, you know, exactly what we need. Why do we actually need to continue missile defense cooperation with Israel?
Bob Peters:Well, what I'd say is THAAD and Patriot are great systems. And by all means, we should continue to field THAAD and Patriot. But the missile threats evolve, and so therefore does our need to field ever better and more credible missile defenses. If we just sat on our laurels and said, well, we've got THAAD, we've got PAC threes, those are good systems, they probably won't be great systems in fifteen years if we don't continue to improve them.
Deryn Sousa:You've had a long career in monitoring missile defense and and strategizing through that. Has there been one moment where you kind of had a moment of how significant the value add for America is from The US Israel Missile Defense Cooperation?
Bob Peters:Like, for many, many decades, there are people in Washington who have said missile defenses are destabilizing, and missile defenses don't work, and missile defenses will simply cause our adversaries to take aggressive actions against ourselves. And therefore, defenses are self defeating, so the best thing that America can do is to disarm its missile defense capabilities. And there are people who ostensibly were serious and made this argument for two decades. And then seeing the incredible effectiveness of Israeli missile defenses in 2023, 2024, including the exo atmospheric intercept of a ballistic missile that was fired by Iran that was meant to rubblize a probably a pretty big chunk of Israel, and they destroyed that missile exoatmospheric in space. That was the first time that's ever happened in combat operations.
Bob Peters:And for the missile defense advocates, we said, you see, we told you that this stuff works, and that the American Israeli Defense Cooperation on this stuff has spent some of the best money we've ever spent. And the response from the critics of missile defense was crickets. They said nothing because there was no answer to that.
Deryn Sousa:Well and I think it's important for our AIPAC members that, you know, as as we're talking about the cooperative missile defense programs that all of our members have been working on for decades to ensure that Israel has the ability to defend itself. We saw that play out in real life, which is important, and I think is just a a proud moment for everyone here at AIPAC.
Bob Peters:Look. I totally agree. And whenever people talk about the cost of missile defense, you always have to say, yeah, by all means, think about how much it costs for that one missile interceptor. But also think about how much we are saving when we defend the lives of our citizens, whether those are American citizens or Israeli citizens. What is the price you're gonna put on those lives?
Bob Peters:And you have to take that in.
Deryn Sousa:And the reality is our shared adversaries would be firing those missiles and rockets, whether missile defense existed or not.
Bob Peters:Exactly. Exactly.
Deryn Sousa:I'm sure you're following this and you're aware, but missile defense funding is currently being worked through congress both in the appropriations and the authorization process. And there are members of congress who are advocating for actually cutting this program funding. From where you sit, how would you address that? I mean, how would you point out what the real impact would actually be on American security and ultimately American troops?
Bob Peters:What I would say to those who would wanna cut funding is that we are right now in a moment where we are taking all the data that we've learned from Israel, Ukraine, these real world battlefield examples of missile defenses working. And this is the moment right now to make the next leap in missile defense technology so that we can better defend ourselves against ever more advanced missile threats, whether those threats are coming from Iran, Russia, or China. And if if we think that the Chinese are not watching what has worked and what has not worked in Russia, and what has worked and what has not worked in Iran, we're fooling ourselves.
Deryn Sousa:Do you think that adversaries like China, Iran, and Russia understand how much we benefit from that partnership?
Bob Peters:I think they absolutely do. And I think they're terrified of it. I think they hate it. 2023 to 2026 has demonstrated how effective the American and Israeli militaries can be when they work shoulder to shoulder in collaboration with one another. And it's beyond simply the kinetic effects, it is the technological developments.
Bob Peters:And so I really do think that they understand it, and they're terrified of it, which I'm perfectly happy with.
Deryn Sousa:Me too. I certainly want to continue ensuring that America's first in line for all of the advancements that Israel's making and all of the lessons that they're learning. So my last question, you have had a a long career in America's defense. So for you, as we're celebrating our two hundred and fiftieth year of independence, why does that matter to you?
Bob Peters:I I believe in in a strong national defense for The United States and our allies because I really believe in peace. I mean, it's easy to say that while you want all these systems and all these capabilities because you wanna go fight a war, my response is the exact opposite. What we've seen is when we do not invest in defensive capabilities, that's when the war breaks out. I mean, when World War two broke out, we had a smaller military than Poland. And when we field capabilities that are capable enough to give our adversaries pause, that's when you have peace.
Bob Peters:I mean, and that's when Americans are able to live and enjoy peace, security, prosperity, and faith with their families. And that's what I want. And the best way to do that is through peace through strength.
Deryn Sousa:Well said. Thank you so much for being with us today, Bob.
Bob Peters:It was my pleasure. Thanks so much for having me.
Deryn Sousa:Next, I'm joined by Yaakov Katz calling in from Israel. Yaakov is an author and journalist who spent almost a decade as editor in chief of the Jerusalem Post. He's the author of several books, including Weapon Wizards, How Israel Became a High-tech Military Superpower, and most recently, Why Israel Slept. He's currently a senior fellow at the Jewish People Policy Institute and joins us from his home in Jerusalem today.
Deryn Sousa:Hi, Yaakov. It's nice to see you. Thanks so much for joining us today.
Yaakov Katz:Great to be with you.
Deryn Sousa:So I'll I'll start with, you've used the phrase innovation under fire to describe Israel's approach. Can you just talk a little bit about for those who haven't read Weapons Wizards or or any of your other works, what does that really mean?
Yaakov Katz:Well, first of it's great to be with you. Israel is a country that I think everyone knows has limited resources, limited capabilities, limited finances, and manpower. And as a result, whenever it's had to fight a war and whenever it's been in a conflict, it's had to make the most of what it had available. We see this starting back already in the war of independence in 1948 when is the country just just starting even before it was declared a state was making bullets out of lipstick cases to the point that, just fast forward a few years later when innovative, really creative officers in the IDF decided to take toy airplanes and attach a camera to it on a timer and fly it over to see where the Egyptians had deployed their troops post the Six Day War of 1967. But as we look throughout all of the different wars and definitely in more recent years, each conflict brings with it a unique set of challenges.
Yaakov Katz:So for example, if we look at, after October 7, Israel goes into Gaza and is surprised, in fact, is quite shocked by the extent of the tunnel infrastructure that exists underneath the Gaza Strip at some point leading to estimates that there might have been, basically, the London underground, the New York subway put together all in one under Gaza. The entire place crisscrossing with different tunnels, but Israel now has to deal with this underground subterranean city. And it had used over the years different capabilities, like dropping a bunker buster buster bomb in the sand to try to blow up a a tunnel hatch, but this is not at all applicable here. Right? You're not gonna use a bunker buster bomb for hundreds and hundreds of miles of tunnels.
Yaakov Katz:So what do you do? How do you now destroy this tunnel infrastructure? And they came up with all these different ideas. They brought pipes from the Mediterranean, and at some point, they tried to flood the tunnels with seawater. Didn't work out so well because the sand of Gaza was absorbing the seawater.
Yaakov Katz:But then they came up with different explosives technologies and different ways to use robots to map out the tunnels and different imagery and and and ways to detonate. So I could give many more examples. Right? But these are just some of the recent ones and some of the more historic ones of how under fire in conflict, Israel finds and I'll just maybe I'll finish with one line that I heard once because I really think it's it's stuck with me, and I think it's powerful. It was by a man by the name of Chaim Eshed, who was the person who came up with the idea that Israel can build and launch its own satellite into space in the nineteen seventies, and people thought he was crazy.
Yaakov Katz:Right? 1970s, Israel's not even 30 years old yet. And he he coined this phrase, "The shadow of the guillotine sharpens the mind." And I think it was so true then, and it's still very true today, that because of threats we face, our back is up against a wall, we innovate.
Deryn Sousa:I think as Americans, it's easy to forget the the real time threats that are adapting. So for you, as an Israeli sitting in Israel, what is the new threat that you're saying that, you know, keeps you up at night?
Yaakov Katz:Well, I can't say it's necessarily new, but what we have seen over the last eighteen months or so of Iran's ability to be able to launch long range ballistic missiles into Israel, and I have to say, with with quite remarkable precision and accuracy, is something that really has to keep us up at night. Because while we look at what Israel together with The United States has been able to do in now four different rounds of conflict with Iran, most recently during the war that began on February 28, we've seen just how many hundreds and hundreds of ballistic missiles Iran has, how they are able to strike and what happens when they hit because of their size and their capacity and their warheads,
Yaakov Katz:And now imagining that if they are allowed to continue to develop and manufacture these missiles without any restrictions, it would could reach the point, and this was the Israeli fear for which it went to this war in February, that it would have 10,000 of these missiles, if not more. And that could no matter how great a missile defense architecture we have, and we have one that's pretty remarkable, it could outnumber the number of interceptors and the capabilities that we have.
Yaakov Katz:So that's something that we have to definitely keep in mind. It's not going away. It's here to stay, and we need to come up with more of what we have, some more THAAD interceptors that the United States has provided, more Arrow-2s, more Arrow-3s, more future arrows, but also laser capacity and capabilities that Israel's working on. Space based lasers. I know that sounds a little crazy, but Israel and other countries in the world are looking very seriously at how to get lasers on space vehicles or satellites in space that can then strike missiles as they're in what's called the boost phase or in the mid air phase.
Yaakov Katz:That would be something that would be remarkable. I would say, though, one other challenge and threat that we do need to be aware of, because we don't yet have a perfect solution to it. And you said what's keeping me up at night, so, you know, our I have one daughter who just got out of the army. I have one daughter who's just going in in a few weeks, so I'm I'm in between, but I do have a few nephews who are currently deployed in Lebanon. And anyone who has a family member in Lebanon right now, they are very concerned about the FPVs, these drones that Hezbollah has been able to use very effectively.
Yaakov Katz:And just so our maybe our listeners understand, there are two types of drones. Right? These are very small quadcopters. They carry a little explosives. The ones that fly, you can use some sort of jamming capability and kind of bring them down with electronic warfare.
Yaakov Katz:What FPVs are is they run with a fiber optic cable, dozens of kilometers potentially. It's very thin, very small. It's got a spool of the cable, and it kind of it falls out as it flies, and that is is immune to jamming technology, which means you can only really shoot it when you see it. And the IDF has given, for example, shotguns to soldiers to shoot at these FPVs if they see them, but you can imagine, Deryn, that they're only able to shoot once they see it coming their way. So there is something that Israel's working very, very, I say, intensively right now to come up with a different solution, and there are some.
Yaakov Katz:There's different radars. There's different lasers, but nothing that we can say is immediate that can really bring about the defense that we'd like to have for the soldiers up there.
Deryn Sousa:Could you actually walk us through the Israeli missile defense layers?
Yaakov Katz:So Israel, back in the 1990s, developed and then deployed the Arrow. That was its first missile defense system. It was created in the aftermath of the nineteen ninety one first Gulf War when about 39, I think, SCUD missiles were fired by Saddam Hussein at Israel, and and and the country realized that it didn't have a capability to be able to defend itself.
Yaakov Katz:And then there's the short range rockets, those Qassams or Katyushas or Grad rockets, the tens of thousands of which we've seen, unfortunately, fired into Israel over the last twenty five years or so from Gaza and from Lebanon. It's the backbone of the terrorist groups that surround us on our border.
Yaakov Katz:It's of their arsenal. For that lower range, we have the Iron Dome, and for the medium range, plus the cruise missiles, we have a system that's called David Sling. Now, I just want to add in two other points to all of this. All three of these systems are jointly developed by Israeli companies and American companies. So I've been to Huntsville, Alabama, as an example, and in Huntsville, Alabama, there is a Boeing facility where they make components of the Arrow missile.
Yaakov Katz:The Iron Dome and David Sling are jointly developed. There's a lot of companies that are in the mix, but you have Raytheon that helps out also with developing and manufacturing of some of the components of those different missile defense systems. So those are the three primary Israeli systems. Now, what changed in the recent war, and this is what was really fascinating for missile geeks like myself, is you had Iron Dome, which basically, when it was originally developed, was meant to be able to intercept missiles from anywhere from like a zero kilometer range up to about 80, at the max, 90 kilometers. David's sling for in the middle, and then arrow, like we said, something flying from Iran, 2,000 kilometers.
Yaakov Katz:Suddenly, in the war, and the IDF didn't want to talk about this, I can tell you that one of the ways it came out was I I came across a video of a ballistic missile coming from Iran in its terminal phase. So you see this flash of the light, and it was caught on video by someone and started to make the rounds on social media, and it looks like this firework. They are just shooting star that's dropping really, really fast. And then suddenly, you see a projectile that's launched and meets the incoming Iranian missile very, very close to the the ground, to the surface. That's not an arrow, and that's not a David's Sling.
Yaakov Katz:That's Iron Dome. In other words, Iron Dome was configured to also be able to intercept incoming Iranian ballistic missiles in their terminal phase, which is something that no one ever would have imagined is possible for Iron Dome when it was initially developed. Right? And and it's not that they've necessarily changed the hardware. This is what makes it even cooler innovation.
Yaakov Katz:It's not the hardware that's necessarily changed. It's it's the software. It's redesigning the code and the maneuvering of the of the Tamir interceptor that it so it can be able to intercept these incoming ballistic missiles. So right. So Iron Dome can shoot down a mortar, can shoot down a Grad Qassam Katyusha that's flying five, ten kilometers, and an Iranian ballistic missile on its terminal phase about to strike and potentially take out two apartment buildings.
Deryn Sousa:So if if you were to speak to a congress member or just everyday American who says, well, America already has THAAD and and Patriot, and and we develop those on our own. So, you know, why do we actually need the joint development with Israel, or why do why does Iron Dome help if we already have these two things?
Yaakov Katz:Well, first of all, it's true. America does have the THAAD and their PAC three or Patriot missile capability, which is can also be used for some of the longer range missiles in the medium range, but there is no solution that The United States has come up with yet for those shorter range missiles and rockets that we've seen just with what great effectiveness they've had in this recent war attacking American bases throughout the Persian Gulf by Iran. Those are not long range ballistic missiles. Those are short range rockets. So those are drones.
Yaakov Katz:So number one, Iron Dome is definitely needed because there is no other solution at the moment. The second reason I would say is the more systems we have, right, and the redundancy that's required here, creates just a greater line of defense. So the more we, in other words, not just Israel, but I would say the whole Western world, is able to defend itself and create systems that can make those missile arsenals less relevant and less potent, can disarm them or make them just not even worth using by potentially the enemy because they they they they're not effective at all. And I think that this is where we see the ability of how the two countries can work together in in creating interoperability between their different systems. You know, what we saw, Darren, during this recent war was really something that we've never seen before in the Israeli US alliance, right, and the histories of of the relationship between the two countries.
Yaakov Katz:You had command centers in Israel, as well as bases in The United States, where you had Israeli officers and American officers sitting at the same tables, looking over intelligence together, planning missions together, connecting their different computer systems together, so that when a missile is launched from Iran, it's not that you and I have to get on the phone and I gotta say, okay. So, Darren, should we should we shoot it shoot it down with THAAD, or should we use the Arrow, or should we use David's Sling, or the iron dome? It's already built in. It's it's automated at this point.
Deryn Sousa:I I couldn't agree more. And, you know, basically, I think what we're saying is the innovation under fire that that you talk about, it doesn't stay in Israel. And I think about if we didn't have the ability to learn from the technology that comes out of Israel, you know, if we didn't have that, I think about what we would have to guess how our enemies are adapting. And then we'd also have to spend our own money to then test our own systems in a sterile testing range here in The States, whereas Israel is is oh, go ahead.
Yaakov Katz:No. Was on that point, I think you're you're so right because what what we've seen, and it's I I laugh, but I say this with sadness, unfortunately. It's tragic, but it's the reality. Every war that Israel has fought, every threat that it has faced over time, it begins here, but it eventually crosses the Atlantic. It goes to other places.
Yaakov Katz:It it is a threat to Europe, it's a threat to The United States. Whether it's missiles, whether it's suicide bombers, whether it's roadside bombs. Right? I mean, let's go back in time for just one moment during the Second Intifada, when Israel is is getting hammered by explosives and roadside explode bombs and suicide bombers, America goes to war in Iraq, faces the roadside bombs designed, by the way, at the time, by the Iranians. Who does it come to to buy armor for its vehicles from?
Yaakov Katz:An Israeli company called Plasan Sasa, up in the north on the border with Lebanon, the same company that still manufactures and develops some of the most sophisticated armor that's used by Israeli vehicles, whether it's the Mirkavat tank or some of the the APCs, the armored personnel carriers that Israel uses. It's what you learn here. This little country, unfortunately, tragically, is a laboratory of warfare. Right? We would prefer not to be, but that is what is compelled and forced upon us due to the different threats and challenges and enemies that we have here.
Yaakov Katz:Israel goes into Gaza after the massacre by Hamas on October 7. It encounters the subterranean warfare. I put money down today that sometime in the next ten years, there will be a war somewhere else in the world that some Western power will face off against an enemy that is deeply embedded and entrenched within underground systems and infrastructure? And who will they turn to to ask, what do we do? Who did it the most effectively?
Yaakov Katz:How do you maneuver? How do you move inside these tunnels? Right? How do you do hand to hand combat? What do you send in first?
Yaakov Katz:What kind of drones even can fly in there? Is it one that flies, or is it a robot on the ground? And then how do you destroy them? Israel has perfected that capability today. Right?
Yaakov Katz:So if anyone wants to learn that, and by the way, that's why NATO, so many officers throughout the war, came to Israel to sit in some of those forward positions and command centers on the border with Gaza, and even go into Gaza, to learn from the IDF. In terms of saving lives, right, what the medical corps has been able to do in EVACing and getting people out from Gaza or from Lebanon after sustaining very severe injuries and to save their lives. All of this stuff is exactly what any military will need for its future, and Israel has all that experience. So I think when you look at Israel's history, this is exactly what you see, and I don't wanna go too far back in time, Darren, but, I mean, you know, the older people who on this podcast will remember, of course, the Cold War, right, when The United States was was in that Cold War with the Soviet Union, and who was fighting against Soviet military platforms here in the Middle East was Israel, whether it was Syria, whether it was Egypt at the time. So who knew best how to combat with MiG fighter jets?
Yaakov Katz:Well, no one but the state of Israel. And I just think that's something that has continued to repeat itself over and over again.
Deryn Sousa:Absolutely. And in the same way that we're able to learn lessons from Israel, enemies learn lessons from Israel's enemies as well. You have our adversaries looking to see what they can learn at the same time. And if we need to be able to compete with China, Russia, other adversaries, we have to be able to work with our allies who have real technology and battlefield tested lessons to share. I would love for you to just spend a little bit more time maybe on the psychology from your perspective of this notion that Israel can move at such a fast pace of not only the innovation, but more so about how they're able to solve problems so fast and then actually implement them.
Yaakov Katz:So it's like a culture here. I think it's really it's a cultural phenomenon. Anyone who's been to Israel, anyone who has met Israelis knows that we are a people very informal, very outspoken, and we know how to get our opinions across, and and we don't shy away from sharing them. Now take that DNA of a society and apply that now to a military setting. Now Americans tend to look at military as being very hierarchical, very disciplined, very structured.
Yaakov Katz:In Israel, it's not like that at all. And I've spoken to countless American military officers and personnel who've spent time in Israeli bases, who are always blown away by just the informality of it all. How young junior officers, or even non commissioned officers, will argue with generals. How young soldiers will pick up their hand and speak to the IDF chief of staff and call them out for something that they feel that he has done wrong. A part of that, I think, has to do with it it stems from just the Jewish chutzpah, the DNA, the questioning of authority, it's built in, it's in our blood.
Yaakov Katz:But it also has to do with the fact that we are a country with a compulsory military service. So, because of that, because all of us are asked to serve, because a lot of us do serve, it it creates a different kind of relationship between the average citizen and the military. It's not some faraway idea. It's real because I've served there. I I continued to do reserves for many years.
Yaakov Katz:Right? People still do reserves, right, and go back and forth from their lives to the military. And therefore, the IDF, as it likes to call itself, a people's army understands that it plays a different role in society. It's embedded so deeply into every each and every one of our lives. But what it also does, and I think what Israel has, which is a unique national asset, is this people's army and is the reserve corps.
Yaakov Katz:Because go back to that story I told of that engineer who worked at Israel Aerospace Industries and also served in Miluim, in the reserves. He goes off to reserves. He sees a problem, a operational challenge. He goes back to his engineering company, and he solves the problem. Right?
Yaakov Katz:That constant move back and forth between civilian life and military life, The battlefield experience, it's not a foreign concept or idea. So if if I work at Lockheed Martin and I'm an engineer, but I don't serve in the military, so I need someone from the US military or the air force to come talk to me, explain to me what the challenge is. I can't really visualize it. I haven't really experienced it. So I need someone to translate it and make it real for me.
Yaakov Katz:In Israel, the engineer at Raphael or Elbit or Israel Aerospace Industries or any one of the companies has spent time in the military. So even if they weren't under that same missile threat or they didn't fly in a cockpit, they know the language. Right? The the the the shorthand, all the acronyms, it's we all know what they mean already. I don't need someone to translate it for me.
Yaakov Katz:I don't need someone to come and explain to me what am I facing in the battlefields of Gaza or Lebanon, because I've been there. Right? And that creates that speed we spoke about. That enables things to move much faster because you don't have anything lost in translation. So you have the chutzpah to question the authority, to break down the barriers, to cut through the red tape, but also the fact that since we not all, and and service is a touchy issue right now in Israel, a 100%, but a lot of people serving, you have this ability to really move fast in a way that no other country that I know of has.
Deryn Sousa:Well, and again, I just keep going back to that quote of the shadow of the guillotine sharpens the mind, and I mean, I think Israeli society as a whole has a very real understanding every day when they get up and out of bed that the threats are real, the threats are at the door, and that survival relies on their ability to problem solve. Looking at October 7 and some of the intelligence failures and security failures there, as things have been reexamined, do you think that there's anything missing?
Yaakov Katz:So I think one of the important elements that has changed in Israel, and I think needs to continue to change. We're having a brilliant conversation about military technology and innovation, and what Israel's able to develop, and how it does that. But we can't forget the basics, and sometimes that is the great challenge or problem that you deal with when you are so heavily reliant on technology. So if you look at Gaza as an example, we had a very sophisticated barrier there. We had an underground wall.
Yaakov Katz:We had multilayered barriers of arm barbed wire and concrete and electronic fences and remote control weapons, and the female soldiers known as the tatzpitaniyot, the spotters who sat on the border and watched everything that was happening there. And despite all that, but there was a belief that it was impenetrable, Hamas quickly got across that border. We were so heavily reliant on intelligence gathering through technology that we neglected human intelligence assets inside Gaza. Going back to basics, so that's we saw a very sharp turn to go back there, and go back to basics for the Israeli military. I think now we're back to somewhere in the middle, still looking to find the equilibrium.
Yaakov Katz:That's gonna be the great challenge. So it's about finding the right balance between technology, but not forgetting you need a man at the border to look across and just see someone coming. Not forgetting that even if you can listen to every phone call and intercept every email and every text message, you still need some guys on the ground who will pick up the phone and say, hey, we're coming. Right? You need those human assets, and I and I think that that balance is gonna be something for Israel to really look at in the in the years ahead, and to make sure it doesn't go too far in one direction.
Yaakov Katz:It doesn't neglect technology, but it also doesn't neglect the basics.
Deryn Sousa:Well, and I think that's an important reminder for American security too. You can't let reliability on your sophistication become a liability. I I think that was well put. Thank you. I'll just I'll add this.
Deryn Sousa:I don't know if you're following, but here in America, the US Congress is moving on security assistance to Israel, but also these cooperative defense joint programs. And there are elements within congress who are speaking up against it and and questioning it. The point I would make is that you're not just harming Israel. You are harming the real world advancements and technology benefits that our American troops get in real time.
Yaakov Katz:You know, I I don't wanna sound patronizing or condescending and telling members of Congress what they should do or, you know, decisions like that. And, obviously, political disagreements always will be there, and they and they should, and that's the sign of healthy, robust relationship and definitely within democracies like Israel and The United States. But the relationship has sustained itself because of the recognition that it is mutual beneficial to both sides. And and I'll just give you one example that I heard recently from two officers in CENTCOM. Okay?
Yaakov Katz:Because I think this just tells the whole story. And we spoke about the FPVs, and we spoke about the drones that Israel's facing in Lebanon, and the drones that unfortunately struck in US bases and claimed the lives of US military personnel in this war. Israel has some of the most cutting edge technology today when it comes to identifying and detecting and intercepting these drones. We're talking about a tactical threat, not even a strategic one. Why deny yourself the ability to work together, to benefit?
Yaakov Katz:Because we're both facing the same the same threat. We both need a solution to the same threat, and we're both facing the same enemy. Can't let politics get in the way of that.
Deryn Sousa:Well, Yaakov, thank you so much for joining us today.
Yaakov Katz:Happy to help. Thank you, Deryn.
Deryn Sousa:And now I'm pleased to share some personal reflections from our very own Larry Genet. Larry is an AIPAC member, and I have to say our AIPAC members are among the most passionate and dedicated advocates you'll ever meet. And I'm really looking forward to sharing not only Larry's story, but many others.
Larry Genet:With the two hundred and fifty year anniversary of America, it's important to, I think, step back and take a look at how critical Jews have been in America since its founding. We've been involved since the days of Washington, ensuring that America was successful and survived. My great grandfather came to America from various places in Hungary. My mom's side came from Eastern Europe. So, we've been in The United States pre-World War II.
Larry Genet:America matters to me because it's my home, it's the place I grew up, it's the place that I love and cherish, it's afforded me incredible opportunities. I'm proud of what our country stands for. I feel very grateful and and very lucky to have been born in The United States and I don't think what I've done in my own life would have been possible anywhere else. After October 7, I was in a really dark place. I was depressed.
Larry Genet:And it wasn't until I found a voice through AIPAC, in addition to traveling to Israel, that I was able to kind of come out of that. Since October 7, I've felt determined. Determined to do as much as I possibly could to help Israel, help the Jewish people, to effect as much positive change as I could. You want your children and hopefully your grandchildren to see that you've done something important beyond just taking care of yourself and taking care of your family, and that you're someone who took action when it was most needed. It's the most American thing you can do, getting involved in politics.
Larry Genet:We're never gonna be the loudest group. We're never gonna drown out the noise on social media. We can very strongly and clearly stand up for our morals and values. I think there are a lot of people out there who are pro Israel and pro American who don't really have a place to go. Whatever side of the aisle you're on, whatever your political leanings, it doesn't matter.
Larry Genet:AIPAC is a place where you can come and you can be yourself. My father deeply loved Israel. My mother deeply loves Israel. My grandparents on both sides were very proud Zionists and strong fighters. I feel it deeply in my bones, in my DNA, in my soul.
Larry Genet:I instill it in my children. And for the Genet family, it's very, very critical that we're loud, unapologetic, strong Zionist and pro American. I'm very proud to have been here and I'm very proud to be Jewish. I'm a dad, a husband, a Zionist, a fighter. I'm an American.
Larry Genet:I'm proud of that.
Deryn Sousa:Well, Larry, thank you so much for sharing that perspective. I'm really pleased that all of our listeners got to hear it as well. Look, we we covered a lot of ground today. And if you remember one thing from this episode, I hope it's this. The US Israel relationship ultimately helps The United States keep its edge in a very dangerous world.
Deryn Sousa:Thank you so much for listening. And to stay up to date, please follow AIPAC on social media. The links are in the show notes, and we'll talk again soon.