Israel Needs to Go on the Offensive, Boost Military Spending, Commission Urges

A commission created after the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attacks says the country can’t rely on deterrence for its security

By Carrie Keller-Lynn. WSJ.

TEL AVIV—Israel needs to boost military spending to strengthen its offensive capabilities, a government commission warned this week, as the country could continue fighting on several fronts for the foreseeable future.

The commission, headed by aformerIsraelinational-security adviser, on Monday recommended increasing military spending by an additional $30 billion over the next decade to prepare for Israel’s future security challenges.

The funding would help Israel’s military reorient itself toward an attack posture, which if enacted, would mark a shift away from Israel’s longtime reliance on deterrence in the years before Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, attacks shattered the country’s perception of security.

In its report, the commission criticized Israel’s prewar approach, which assumed the country could secure long periods of calm through deterrence, and instead said Israel must be ready to launch preemptive and preventive attacks, and even initiate war.

“Preventing enemy buildup, in all its forms, is more important than extended quiet,” the report said. “Israel’s response to attempts to harm it must be as disproportionate as possible and must be continuously maintained.”

The recommended addition of $2.5 billion to this year’s budget would raise the total defense budget in 2025 to $34 billion, nearly 7% of Israel’s gross domestic product, up from about 5% before the war. Even if war ends this year, military spending over the next decade would average $26 billion annually—about 40% higher than Israel’s prewar defense bill.

The report is part of Israel’s growing expectation that it likely will be on a war footing for years, after two decades of relative stability and deepening ties across the region.

Although Israel killed the top leadership of Hamas and Hezbollah, and degraded their militias in its year of fighting Iran-backed groups, it hasn’t uprooted these adversaries. Renewed Israeli focus on Iran as the sponsor of a network of regional militias allied against Israel and the West has raised calls for more direct Israeli action, threatening to inflame the region and draw in the U.S. And instability caused by the fall of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad at the hand of Islamist-led rebel groups creates uncertainty on Israel’s northern border.

While marking Iran and its nuclear program as Israel’s top threats, the report expresses concern that rebel-held Syria could become a national-security priority. Although the Islamist rebels remaking the country’s leadership haven’t taken a position on Israel, Israel is concerned about having agroupformerlylinkedtoal Qaeda on its border.

The report also raises concerns that the instability within Syria creates an opening for Turkey to deepen its influence with the rebels it supports and turn Syria into a Turkish proxy state, potentially creating a path for direct Israeli-Turkish confrontation.

Seventy percent of Israel’s defense resources going forward should be dedicated toward offensive capabilities, the report says, and only 30% toward defensive efforts.

As part of this plan, Israel also would increase domesticdefense production capabilities. On Tuesday, Israel’s Defense Ministry said it signed $275 million in deals with domestic arms manufacturer Elbit to produce heavy bombs and raw materials needed for defense. The Defense Ministry said reducing reliance on defense imports is “a central lesson from the war.”

The report was issued as Israel’s government is debating its 2025 budget and legislation that would affect the military’s growing need for combat manpower. While the Defense Ministry is pushing to increase mandatory and reserve-service requirements for conscripted Israelis, it is facing criticism for not doing more to conscript ultra-Orthodox Jewish youth, a hot-button political issue.

The report didn’t specify funding sources. Israel already faces tax increases to pay for the war and an expansionary fiscal policy that stabilized its economy after it contracted 6% in the war’s first quarter.