Operation
morale boost
The crisis sparked by the
recent wave of casualties in Lebanon - and the soldiers' reaction to it - caught
the army by surprise. This week, the IDF set out to shine up its fighting spirit
Operation morale boost
.In a convoy on its way to the Taibeh outpost in South Lebanon last Sunday
evening, the communications officer of a Paratroop battalion asked for the
press's consideration. "Every word you write about us is read very
carefully at home," he said. "You need to show a little
responsibility; your reports are messing up morale over here." One week
after a wave of heavy losses, every soldier in Lebanon has become a potential
media adviser. Reports of statements by soldiers in favor of a unilateral
withdrawal have stirred up a storm that almost equals the shock of the losses
themselves. The army is now trying to minimize the damage. The Northern Command
is comparing the clash with Hizbullah to an ongoing boxing match "that
won't be decided by a knockout." Using the same imagery, it might be said
that the "Israel" Defense Forces (IDF)* devoted the past week to
recovering from the blow it took, and to convincing itself and the press that it
is as clear-headed and imbued as ever with a fighting spirit.
The trip from the border kibbutz Misgav Am to Tayiba, in the central sector of
the security zone, takes around 10 minutes. But the rain, mud and fog make the
trip a harrowing experience. In the meantime, mortar bombs are being fired on
the Tayiba outpost, unlike the missiles being rained on the more northerly
Beaufort and Dla'at outposts.
The long waiting period leaves the soldiers plenty of time to read the
newspapers - and to get angry. The company commander, Captain Avi Balut, of Neve
Tzuf, just returned from a long ambush and had not yet heard about the public
uproar in "Israel", but the soldiers were very busy with it.
"Just don't cause us any embarrassment like they did in Givati," one
soldier whispered as his friends sat down to speak to journalists. The comments
from the soldiers at the Tayiba outpost present a totally different outlook from
that presented by other soldiers in the media last week. It was no longer just
bearing with the situation and crying about it.
The lead company of Battalion 890, the pride of the Paratroop brigade (once
simply referred to as "the battalion," a springboard for future chiefs
of staff) has decided to restore the army's luster. They will not be caught
hesitating. True, soldiers from their battalion in the Galgalit outpost earlier
said otherwise. But those were young soldiers, who were perhaps scared after a
clash in which three soldiers at the outpost were killed by a missile.
"What do they know?"
The paratroopers from the veteran company speak almost unanimously. They radiate
determination, and explain that image is more important than anything else. Ofir
Buchnik, of Be'er Sheva, says: "Every soldier in Lebanon knows it's not
easy, there are difficult moments. But you can't say such things. You have to
hang in there. The minute a soldier cracks, he damages the IDF's image."
Kobi Petel, of Jerusalem: "The comments that appeared in the press hurt the
soldiers here in the outpost and endanger us." Dotan Garbeli, of Be'er
Sheva: "It doesn't matter what a soldier thinks, he has to radiate
confidence. I tell my mother all the time: Everything's okay. If I say that we
should leave here, soldiers who're here with me will start to be scared. All the
motivation will drop." Rudy Sa'ar, of Yanoah : "There's nothing to
worry about. We're strong. We'll stay here until decisions are made by the
government. That's our job."
An experienced officer who has spent many years in Lebanon recommends not making
too much of soldiers' declarations one way or the other. Everything depends on
where the missile hits and the time that passes, he says. "Whoever endured
a missile hit will talk differently from someone who didn't absorb a hit, and
things will sound different as time passes after the missile strike, because by
then the soldiers have had a chance to recover from it." There is more than
a little hypocrisy in the military approach to the soldiers' positions here, he
added. "Until a few months ago, when soldiers were more motivated, you
could talk about everything. Now that some of them have changed their views,
everyone's panicking. Suddenly, you're not allowed to talk politics."
Morning patrol with the commander
Last week's morale crisis caught the army, as usual, by surprise. Urgent
consultations took place between the chief of staff and the head of the IDF
manpower branch. One senior officer proposed taking away the combat-soldier
certificates of the soldiers who had spoken out, but the Northern Command
stopped the witch hunt in time. Psychologists and military education officers
advised that the matter be handled by the commanders in the field - and so it
was. "First of all, it's our problem," said the commander of the
Galilee battalion, Brigadier General Moshe Kaplinsky (Kaplan), to troop
commanders in his sector. "A soldier whose troop commander goes with him on
morning patrol will not talk that way." The regular army brigade commanders
went to talk with their soldiers in Lebanon.
In the background are the increasingly worried parents, whose feelings were
given new legitimacy after remarks by some of their sons. It would be difficult
to find a parent of a soldier in Lebanon who does not support an immediate
withdrawal. "At home, they don't want us to be here," acknowledges
paratrooper Ayal Katz, of Ra'anana. "The last time I came up to Lebanon, my
sister tearfully pleaded with me not to go back there."
The battalion commander responds with a speech, the gist of which is that we
must continue fighting. "The situation has always been and still is that
some of us, each in due course, bear the burden of defense. Either in Lebanon,
Sinai or Jerusalem. It's a matter of how they're sleeping tonight in Metulla.
I'm proud that today, while you're here, the pub in Misgav (Am) is full. My
parents and your parents did it; now it's our turn, to obtain quiet and enable
the political echelons to make the best possible agreements." You have
nothing to apologize for, he tells the paratroopers.
The paratroopers' enthusiasm is genuine, but it is difficult to avoid the
impression that it is somewhat calculated. "You can think what you
want," says Dotan Garbeli, "but think twice, before you tell it to the
press." The battalion commander, Lieutenant Colonel Moti Baruch, says that
every soldier speaks freely and no one has been told what to say, but also
admits that "we briefed them before the visit." Baruch, whose signal
operator was killed in the Galgalit clash, does not see a motivation crisis in
the battalion. The Golani brigade, which is to replace his soldiers here, will
have more difficult psychological preparations to do, say the paratroopers.
(Indeed, Golani is preparing its soldiers in the usual way. One day later, its
brigade commander, Colonel Shmuel Zakai, caused a stir when he asked his
fighters not to pay attention to "Four Mothers, four rags").
Officers in the line of fire
Over a year ago, Golani battalion commander Lieutenant Colonel Ilan sat
in the same room. Last August, he was moderately wounded during a clash with a
Hizbullah unit. The commanders in Lebanon pay personally. Moti Baruch himself
was seriously wounded in 1997, while serving as commander of the Paratroop
reconnaissance unit, during a clash in which his deputy, Eran Shamir, was
killed. The most senior officers frequently endanger themselves. Every convoy
arriving brings with it endless suspicions and warnings. The Northern Command
realizes that Hizbullah is looking for demonstrative accomplishments and that
includes striking at a senior officer.
The death of Brigadier General Erez Gerstein last February was a huge blow to
morale for the army, and the assumption is that other officers are also in the
line of fire. The commander of the area brigade, Colonel Moshe Tamir and
battalion commander Baruch were themselves nearly wounded at Galgalit. Tamir has
been serving in this sector for almost 18 consecutive years, as a soldier,
commander of the Golani reconnaissance unit, commander of the Egoz unit and
brigade commander. His wife said last week that she sleeps in a sweat suit in
case there is a late-night visit from the local army liaison.
Uncertainty for the SLA
Given the frenetic pace of events, the situation of the South Lebanese
Army (SLA)** has been almost forgotten. The "Israeli" losses
emphasized the need to deal with the guilty parties, but the defense
establishment is very concerned about the SLA's behavior in the coming months.
In the meantime, there is no real solution for the militia. Most of its
commanders are not willing to move to "Israel" - they want to remain
in their own country. An "Israeli" withdrawal without an agreement
will force them to deal with the stiff jail terms they were sentenced to in
absentia in Beirut (although experience from the withdrawal in Jezzine shows
that the Lebanese administration was relatively lenient there).
The big question is how long the SLA will hold on: A new wave of losses could
disrupt its operations. "Israel's" difficulty stems from the
logistical dependence on the Lebanese contractors developed by the outposts: All
convoys to IDF outposts are today arranged through them. Such convoys also risk
the infiltration of explosive devices into the outposts.
Meanwhile, the security zone is gradually shrinking. First, the Huna outpost was
moved southward. Two weeks ago, Sujoud was also abandoned in a panic under
pressure from the shelling. The IDF outposts in Reihan and Aishiye have become
the northernmost front line.
"Senior SLA people are quietly approaching me, one by one," claims a
veteran officer in the IDF's Lebanon Liaison Unit. "They ask, 'What's
happening? Are you really going to run away from here without an
agreement?'"
This week, senior SLA officials warned that their soldiers may stop obeying
orders and start worrying about themselves. ""Israel" is
abandoning us," they claimed. The killing of Deputy SLA Commander Colonel
Akl Hachem created a leadership vacuum in the militia. Its commander, General
Antoine Lahad, is again in Paris. As usual, he spends a few weeks in France
after every month spent in Marjayoun. Habits do not change, not even in tough
times.
Dreaming of an offensive
This week, everywhere the chief of staff went, he heard firm demands for
action. Officers and fighters told him they felt as if their hands were tied.
The paratroopers in Tayiba feel the same way. Ofir Buchnik says that "it's
not the Lebanon we wanted. I didn't plan on sitting and absorbing missile
strikes. Let us respond." His company commander, Avi Balut, thinks that
"if Hizbullah has changed its pattern of operation, we have to change ours.
I thought even beforehand that in a situation where we're doing bunker warfare,
eventually they'll get a goal in."
In light of this situation, Chief of Staff Shaul Mofaz told the Knesset that he
would propose firing on villages from which Hizbullah was attacking, in
violation of understandings. The ministers did not like his appeal to the press
a day before the cabinet meeting, but this is exactly the sort of thing that
makes the chief of staff popular with his subordinates.
Apart from dreaming of an offensive response, the IDF was engaged this week
primarily in finding ways to improve defenses against anti-tank missiles.
"Missiles being fired at Tayiba is not a fictional scenario," said
Commander Tamir to the paratrooper commanders. "The last time I said
something like that was in Galgalit, a minute before the boom. They have no
problem getting to the village of Kantara with a donkey and launching a missile
against us from there. Hizbullah's success will lead to more attempts. It's a
lot easier to fire a missile than to infiltrate a group of explosive
devices." Hizbullah's next operating method is likely to be close-range
attacks against the outposts. The natural reaction to absorbing missile strikes
is a reduction of the above-ground presence, which creates an ideal opportunity
for raising a Hizbullah flag over a battery in an IDF outpost. The last time the
organization did so (in Dla'at in 1994), the "Israeli" press discussed
it for a long time.
1-
Ha'aretz, 18-2-2000.
*
It is an "Israeli" nomination we absolutely reject for it contradicts
with Lebanon's independence and sovereignty. This army is not but an
"Israeli" agent working for realizing "Israel's" goals in
Lebanon.
* This term is absolutely unacceptable. "Israel's" Army is that of war and aggression for it protects land gained by force, confiscation and war in contradiction with the simplest rights of human confessed by the international laws and conventions.