From that perspective, the problem is that no response that Israel may choose to pursue in relation to Hamas and the daily rocket bombardment will place any pressure on Iran. Until we can prove the Iranian hand behind this (and it is doubtful that we ever will in such a conclusive manner that will afford us to link), we have to focus on the domestic and the rockets. The rockets have to be stopped.

My observation is (and this can be corroborated by turning to any news channel right now), people (with the exception of Israeli’s) only remember the ‘last rocket’ and measure Israel’s response in relation to that. So when Israel responds only on every n thousand rockets, the response is evaluated as harsh and disproportionate (it is ironic that the media in particular have no idea how callous the calculation of proportion is – they’d be less inclined to draw on this argument if they did).

Yet Israel has to respond – this has to be a direct response, directed at the perpetrators. It has to be an immediate (perhaps even automatic) response. And it has to be a response in kind. You fired one rocket – I fire one back immediately at that very launch spot.

I have no doubt that Hamas will soon learn and adjust their operations accordingly – but for the time being, the problem is the rockets.

Doesn’t that somewhat ignore Israel’s geopolitical situation (and Iran’s) in what is largely a proxy conflict?

Whilst acknowledging Israeli domestic demands, a very measured response would surely play to international opinion and keep the pressure on an embattled Iran? To do otherwise would gain no favours internationally and damage support for any near term options in dealing with Iranian issues.

I have stated many times here that Israel not only has the right to provide security for her citizens, but also that it is the imperative of the Israeli government to do so. That said, (and this is an observation), Israel tends to wait too long – Israel soaks up too many rockets – before responding and the response is therefore always perceived as heavy-handed by the branch-clingers. The key lies in balance: a balance of means that will afford Israel more options in relation to Hamas. As you have pointed out – active defence in the form of Iron Dome is a step in that direction. The rockets should be stopped, and intercepting them mid-air is one way of doing so.

Of course, we all know the script by now – at some point the Israeli government feels that these rockets should be stopped before even being launched: either by removing the rocket or removing the fundamentalist who is prepared to fire the rocket, or by removing the fundamentalist who ordered the firing of the rocket. In dealing with this political need, Israel has its conventional forces, and this is now when the F-16’s take off, the tanks amass on the frontier and the international media goes all blood-crazy on Israel. A lot of grass-root perceptions are being shaped right now and this does not have a fairy-tale outcome for Israel.

Yet Israel has to respond – they just cannot respond once every n rockets. The answer lies in balance. My suggestion is to slave an MRLS battery to every Iron Dome battery. The moment that Iron Dome detects a launch, use the means of Iron Dome to calculate the coordinates of the launch point and immediately fire an MRLS rocket at those coordinates – down the throat, as the submarine commanders do. The MRLS rocket should arrive there as Iron Dome intercepts. As a next step – Israel should develop a simple guidance package for the MRLS rocket in the form of a cheap GPS and some control vanes – turn the MRLS into a MGMLS. Precision to the boot.

And since this will be a limited response – in kind so to speak in relation to the Hamas action, nobody will be able to criticise. Of course – they will still find something, but that is a problem for next week.