1

Avishai Halev
ENGL 105
Ted Scheinman
9/29/14
A Dome Made of Iron, Completely Invisible
In Protecting the Skies, a Blessing and a Curse

July 8, 2014: 156 rockets were fired into Israel from Gaza. Not a single Israeli
was killed.
July 9: 130 rockets; again, no deaths.
July 10: 197 rockets, no deaths.
Over the course of the month-long spate of violence between Israel and Hamas
this summer, nearly 3000 rockets were launched into Israel. Yet there were only 67 total
Israeli casualties the vast majority killed in action. In retaliation, Israel struck 3834
targets within Gaza, killing 1881 Palestinians; in this case, the vast majority were
civilians. Such a disparity can not be explained by population density, or Hamass
supposed use of civilians as human shield, or a large degree of incompetency by those
aiming Hamas rockets. Such a disparity can only be explained, by Iron Dome.
April 7, 2011: a Haaretz subtitle proudly proclaimed that Israels new Missile
defense system makes world history by intercepting a short-range Grad rocket fired at
Ashkelon. It was, indeed, an historic event: often likened to hitting a bullet with
another bullet, active missile defense systems are notoriously difficult to implement and
have long been fraught with complications and low accuracy rates; a successful system

2
could change the future of airborne warfare. And while Iron Dome certainly has its
skeptics, the people on the ground Israeli civilians believe it is a true revolution in
defensive military technology.

Engineered by Rafael, an Israeli military armaments company, Iron Dome

employs two main elements a central radar system and a collection of interceptor
batteries located strategically about the country. When a rocket is fired into Israel, it is
located by radar and its trajectory calculated; projectiles headed for populated regions
lead to the launch of an interceptor while those aimed towards open areas are allowed to
make impact, saving precious dollars on defensive rockets. These small missiles
approximately 10 feet long by 6 inches wide are set on a collision course and contain
sensors that are meant to allow the interceptor to release small shrapnel when it is near a
rocket. This explosion happens almost instantaneously when the sensor is tripped; as a
result, Iron Dome is most effective when approaching a missile head on: when the
fragments will hit and thus detonate the warhead. Interceptors approaching incoming
rockets from the side or from behind are likely to hit the rocket but miss the warhead
disabling the thrusters but leaving the rocket intact.
Which is where most of the skepticism of the system originates. Back in 1992,
Theodore A. Postol, a professor of physics and national security policy at MIT, proved
the exaggeration of Patriot anti-missile accuracy rates by analyzing pictures and videos of
interceptions. Using the same method, Dr. Postol once again took to physics to examine
the claims by the Israeli government a supposed success rate of 84%, significantly

3
higher than the 1992 claims by the American Army, which boasted about rates around
40%.
If Dr. Postol is to be believed, Iron Dome is hardly an advancement from the
Patriot systems, at least in terms of accuracy. He claims to have examined hundreds of
photos, from which he has found only one clear hit. If this were accurate, it seems
extremely unlikely that the Iron Dome system would be intercepting 90 percent of the
artillery rockets it engaged.

Yet wherein lies Israels motivation to grossly overestimate their figures?

Although Iron Dome has only been deployed in the Jewish state, it is not solely the
brainchild of Israel; the program is jointly funded by Israel and the United States. Since
World War II, no country has received more financial assistance from the US than Israel;
in 2014 alone, Congress appropriated $3.1 billion in foreign military funding to Israel.
That figure does not include an additional $504 million dollars allocated specifically for
missile defense $235 million of which went to Iron Dome. Financial concerns were the
source of the largest criticisms of Iron Dome, and while the rockets themselves are
relatively cheap approximately $10 thousand versus the $1 to 6 million it cost per
Patriot interceptor it is unlikely the system would exist today without American fiscal
backing.
Which is not to say the money was only provided to curry favor. It is very much
within Americas interests that Israel remain a viable state with a considerable military
presence; as the only Western-style democracy in the Middle East, it remains one of
Americas most strategically significant allies. The country also serves as a buffer of

4
sorts: every terrorist attack directed towards Israel is one not targeting the United States.
Because the States are often seen by jihadists as the pinnacle of the evil that is Western
Civilization, this is no small consideration.
America also has hopes of adopting the missile defense system for itself; in some
circles, the systems use in Israel may be viewed as a trial run of sorts. The interceptor
batteries themselves are relatively mobile; Israel is drawn to the system partially because
of its ability to quickly transport the launchers aboard trucks to apprehend the most
imminent threat at any given border. For the States, this mobility holds mass appeal in
defending troops operating overseas; a truck that can travel with a convoy is much more
useful than an artillery battery that must be planted to be engaged. This is made possible
by the two-element nature of Iron Dome the radar can be active wherever headquarters
are, the batteries can travel as necessary.

Dr. Eli Dresner lives with his wife and two daughters in Tel Aviv, Israel at just less than
70 km away from Gaza City, the largest metropolitan area in Israel is well within the
range of all Hamas rockets except those they engineer themselves. After enduring sirens
for a week and a half, Dresner decided to temporarily relocate his family to Jerusalem
until the fighting died down. Notably, he did not make this decision out of fear of
incoming projectiles; he was simply tired of the inconvenience of heading to an air raid
shelter every time trouble shows in the sky. This precaution Israel still takes even though
they claim Iron Dome has the skies covered; while some Israelis decline to take shelter in
hopes of seeing a rocket interception, many still head for safety. With two children,
Dresner and his wife always performed the latter that is, until they relocated.

Back in 1991, Patriot missile defense systems were used by Israel to defend against Iraqi
rocket attacks; the results were vastly different from this summers violence. Dresner
noted how little the rockets disrupted life this summer as opposed to twenty three years
ago this summer, bomb shelters were seen as an extra precaution rather than a matter of
life and death; this summer, Israelis were not living in constant fear of bombardment.
This summer, there was no never-ending trepidation, no endless hours spent simply
waiting for the next rocket to hit the city. As far as Dresner is concerned, Iron Dome did
its job if it hadnt, he guess[ed] we would see more rockets coming down on Tel Aviv.
The psychological aspect of Iron Dome is not to be understated not just for Israelis but
for those around the globe. For the former, the sense of security it provides is
unparalleled. There also exists significant pride in their countrys abilities to produce such
advanced technologies, to be seen as a very intelligent people as Dr. Dresner put it, it
gives the impression, I think, that Israel is a very robust technological industry.
Unfortunately for Israelis, that is not the whole of it. With America as an exception,
Western countries generally view Israel unfavorably. Look no farther than the United
Nations Human Rights Council, which has issued 44 resolutions on Israel since its
inception in 2006 14 more than the next three egregious countries, combined. On July
23, the Council adopted its most recent resolution, condemning in the strongest terms
the widespread, systematic and gross violations of international human rights and
fundamental freedoms arising from the Israeli military operations carried out in Occupied
Palestinian Territory since 13 June 2014 that may amount to international war crimes.

6
Twenty nine countries voted for this action, with seventeen abstentions and one dissent.
That lone objection? The United States of America.
Anti-Semitism in Europe was rampant this summer, mainly spurred by Israels
actions in Gaza. While Americans are largely sympathetic towards Israel, the same
cannot be said of Europeans: many view the Jewish state and by consequence, Jewish
people in general, unfortunately as bullies.
A perception to which Iron Dome contributes. The main motivation behind
Israels foray into Gaza this summer was not just rockets but a vast system of tunnels
penetrating the Jewish state; the images of these tunnels do not have the same power on
the worlds collective psyche as images of terribly injured children and grieving mothers
prevalent in the densely populated Gaza strip. By preventing Israeli deaths, Iron Dome
may actually be contributing to Israels losing the public relations war; a casualty
discrepancy of 67 to 1881 comes across as significantly worse than 300 to 1881,
especially when very few of those 67 are civilians, and almost all of the 1881 are.
Dr. Boaz Atzili is a professor at American University, researching territorial
conflicts and specializing in the Israeli-Palestinian issue. If you look at the last wars or
rounds of violence who wins and who loses at the end [is not always] determined by
the military capacity, its not determined by who got more casualties, etc.. Its determined
by political reasons, it sometimes doesnt help if you are overwhelmingly superior in
terms of military power. In such a setting, it is unsurprising that the winner of the PR
battle loses the one on the ground; as the above United Nations resolution indicates,
Israel is very much losing the conflict, politically.

7
Such a political war is perhaps Hamass only hope. Against a traditional
belligerent, Iron Dome could serve as a powerful deterrent; there is no reason to waste
resources that are simply going to be destroyed in the air. But Hamas is an atypical
enemy. Among many interesting tidbits in the charter of the Islamic Resistance
Movement, as the terrorist organization calls itself, one can find the following:
Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it
obliterated others before it.
The Islamic Resistance Movement strives to raise the banner of Allah over
every inch of Palestine.
There is no solution for the Palestinian problem except by Jihad.

An organization that does not recognize its enemies does not easily surrender,
especially long term and respite is temporary. More than anything, it is important for
Hamas to retain the appearance of resistance, to show its people that it is fighting and is
thus worthy of support. As soon as Gazas citizens move to back a different group, Hamas
ceases to be significant they will do all they can to prevent that from happening. Their
rockets are not just meant to kill Israelis; they are meant to show Palestinians and the
world that the resistance is as strong as ever.
As such, Iron Dome doesnt really deter them They need the missiles to be in
the air rather than necessarily for it to hit, to quote Dr. Atzili. In fact, Hamas benefits in a
roundabout manner when Israeli civilians are not killed; for one, the casualty discrepancy
remains high. As Israel touts, Hamas is very callous about the lives of its civilians;
keeping Israeli deaths low while allowing their own people to be killed gives them a leg

8
up in the all-important public relations battle as the worlds sympathy accumulates.
Hamas also benefits from decidedly more conservative Israeli forays into their territory
Israel would be pressed to deliver more crushing blows to the deeply concealed terrorists
if more of their people were killed.
Thus, ironically, Iron Dome might also be a boon to those shooting the very
rockets the system disables. And against enemies who truly believe they have the military
might to eradicate Israel namely, Iran the system is likely inadequate for dealing with
more sophisticated projectiles. This sentiment was shared by both professors; Dr. Dresner
did not see Iron Dome as sufficient to make a difference in how [he] view[s] the threat
from Iran. Dr. Atzili concurred, but added that Israel is working together with the US to
develop anti-missile systems that will be able to intercept missiles that come from long
distance, high trajectory missiles that would come, potentially, from Iran. These systems
Arrow II, Arrow III, and Davids Sling, which will not be detailed here are indeed
capable of countering greater threats. In the case of Arrow III, there exists the ability to
intercept intercontinental ballistic missiles outside of the Earths atmosphere; this holds
significance if there is ever a need to deal with nuclear fallout.
Whether Iron Dome is truly as successful as is heralded, one thing is certain: the
system is vastly consequential to the game of thrones that is Middle Eastern politics.
Although it is seen as an inherently defensive tool by Israelis and Americans, the same
cannot be said for most everyone else across the globe Israel is viewed in a decidedly
poor light, and a casualty discrepancy due in part to Iron Dome is certainly a factor.
Nonetheless, the technology holds broad implications for warfare both about the
Mediterranean and worldwide; a military convoy that does not have to worry about being

9
bombed is a convoy that is that much more efficient. A civilian population that is not
disrupted by constant rockets even as the rockets are launched is that much more
secure, effective, loyal. While Iron Dome may not be significant for sophisticated
rocketry, for the everyday, it is a revolutionary piece of technology.
The jury is still out on whether Iron Dome saves lives.
The jury is still out on whether Iron Dome is a significant blow to Hamas.
But one verdict is clear: Iron Dome provides psychological relief to the people it
protects. And that, may be more significant than one can begin to comprehend.