Cost and benefit: Israel’s expensive defence against aerial threats

ISRAEL HAS claimed that 99% of the more than 300 missiles and drones launched by Iran on April 13 were intercepted — a “significant strategic success”, as Israel Defense Forces (IDF) spokesperson Rear Adm Daniel Hagari said. However, this success came at a significant economic cost, which will recur in the event of more or bigger Iranian attacks.

Iran’s barrage, Israel’s defence

According to the IDF, Iran launched 120 ballistic missiles, 30 cruise missiles, and around 170 UAVS (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles), out of which only a few ballistic missiles got through Israel’s defences, which comprise multiple systems such as the Iron Dome, Arrow interceptors, Patriot missiles, and advanced fighter jets.

These systems, operated by the IDF and Israel’s allies such as the United States, the United Kingdom, and France, are designed for specific threats and are integrated to work in tandem.

Forinstance,theus-developedarrowisa family of anti-ballistic missile interceptors which can hit intermediate range ballistic missiles either within (Arrow 2) or beyond (Arrow 3) the Earth’s atmosphere. The Iron Dome,ontheotherhand,shootsdownshortrange rockets, UAVS, and other small aircraft.

The asymmetry in costs

Israel’s remarkably capable air defence system is also very expensive, especially when compared to the targets it seeks to shoot down.

Thus, while each of the Russian-made Katyusha rockets that Hamas and Hezbollah routinely fire into Israel are estimated to cost about $300, each of the Tamir missiles that the Iron Dome uses to intercept them costs between $20,000$100,000, according to a report by the Air& Space Forces Magazine.

Add to this the fact that multiple Tamirs may be fired at each incoming projectile to ensure success, and the cost of interception balloons.

Yehoshua Kalisky, a researcher at the Tel Aviv-based think tank Institute for National Security Studies, told The Wall Street Journal that Israel spent more than 2.1 billion Israeli shekels (more than $550 million) to repel the Iranian barrage over just a few hours. The Israel-based news website Ynet News estimated the cost at double that — more than $1 billion.

“If we’re talking about ballistic missiles that need to be brought down with an Arrow system, cruise missiles that need to be brought down with other missiles, and UAVS, which we actually bring down mainly with airplanes — then add up the costs — $3.5 million for an Arrow missile, $1 million for a David’s Sling, such and such costs for airplanes... [we get] an order of magnitude of 4-5 billion shekels (more than $1.3 billion),” Brig Gen Reem Aminoach, a former financial adviser to the IDF chief of staff, told Ynet News.

By contrast, an Iranian ballistic missile is estimated to cost around $100,000, and its Shahed drones $20,000-$50,000 each, according to reports by The Guardian. Experts have calculated the cost of the attack for Iran at $100-$200 million — perhaps five to 10 times less than what Israel spent to repel it.

Needed: cheap interceptors

The Washington Post reported that the US estimates Iran’s stockpile to contain at least 3,000 ballistic missiles and hundreds of launchers — which means that if not deterred, Tehran already has the capacity to carry out an attack like the one on Saturday at least 10 times over.

Repelling these potential attacks will entail a huge drain on Israel’s finances, and could stretch the missile production capabilities of the country and its allies. Experts have noted that industrial specialisation and the stress on quality of defence equipment has meant that it could take two years or more to deliver orders for some Western air-defence interceptors.

This problem has been in evidence in Ukraine. According to The Wall Street Journal, over the past two years, Russia has fired more than 2,000 missiles and 5,500 Iranian Shahed drones at Ukraine, cashing in on falling Ukrainian interception rates as the country runs out of Western supplied missiles.

Tom Karako, director of the Missile Defense Project at the Washington Dc-based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) told The Washington Post that “the number of munitions it took to repel the [recent Iranian] attack was enormous, costly and could be difficult to replicate”.

Chrise Brose, chief strategy officer at the American defence technology company Anduril Industries, told reporters: “You can’t kill cheap drones if you don’t have cheap interceptors.”

A potential future solution

To address the asymmetry in costs, countriesarenowtestingadifferentformofairdefence, based on microwave and laser beams, whichcould,intheory,fireindefinitelyaslong as their power source is intact. Once in mass production, they will also be much cheaper than currently available systems.

In January, the UK military tested a new laser weapon dubbed ‘Dragonfire’. This experimental system was developed for about $40 million, and consumes energy worth only $13 to down a drone, the UK government has said.

“This type of cutting-edge weaponry has the potential to revolutionise the battlespace by reducing the reliance on expensive ammunition, while also lowering the risk of collateral damage,” UK defence secretary Grant Shapps said in January.

Several other countries, including India, are said to be developing their own such weapons. However, this technology is not battle-tested, and questions have been raised regarding their effective range. They also require a steady source of energy on the battlefield.