These Patriot Missiles Are Israel's Trash And Ukraine's Treasure
A Patriot missile launcher is pictured during the "Blue Flag" multinational air defense exercise at ... More the Ovda air force base, north of the Israeli city of Eilat, on November 8, 2017. (JACK GUEZ/AFP via Getty Images)
MIM-104 Patriot missile air defense missiles previously in Israel's inventory may have reached Ukraine. Kyiv doubtlessly welcomes with open arms any help it can get bolstering its beleaguered air defenses, especially as it faces its heaviest missile and drone bombardments of the war. In Israel's case, its history with the Patriots suggests it's probably more than happy to dispense with them.
In an interview published on June 8, Israel's ambassador to Ukraine, Michael Brodsky, said that ex-Israeli Patriot systems are now in Ukrainian service.
'These are Israeli Patriots that were in service in the early 1990s. We agreed to transfer them to Ukraine,' Brodsky said. 'Unfortunately, not much was said about this… when people claim that Israel didn't provide military aid, that's simply not true.'
The Israeli Foreign Ministry swiftly denied Brodsky's comment, stating, 'It is not correct. Israel did not transfer Patriot systems to Ukraine.'
From the moment Israel decided to retire its Patriots in 2024, it was clear that Ukraine hoped it would receive at least some of them. By then, Kyiv had received some Patriot systems and already succeeded in shooting down some of Russia's most advanced missiles and aircraft.
The Israeli denial was noteworthy in light of a year's worth of reports indicating the contrary. The Wall Street Journal reported in June 2024 that the U.S. and Israel were nearing an agreement to transfer up to eight Patriot systems from Israel's inventory to Ukraine, a move it correctly noted would 'dramatically increase' Ukrainian air defenses.
Axios reported in January that the U.S. military had transferred approximately 90 Patriot interceptor missiles from Israel to Poland en route to Ukraine. Furthermore, the New York Times reported in May that an Israel-based Patriot system would be sent to Ukraine following refurbishment.
Israel may not want to acknowledge a transfer. The wording of the denial specifies it did not send systems but doesn't mention the interceptor missiles, which Ukraine could fire from its existing Patriot batteries. Consequently, Israel could truthfully say that it gave Ukraine the bullets but not the gun.
According to that Axios report, Israel reassured Russia it was 'only returning' a Patriot system to the U.S., not transferring it to Ukraine. A spokesperson for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said an Israeli Patriot was returned to the U.S. but also clarified that 'it is not known to us whether it was delivered to Ukraine.'
Israel's official denial may indicate it doesn't want any credit for helping beef up Ukrainian air defenses to avoid antagonizing Russia, which recently wanted to stay in Syria to counterbalance Turkey. When Russia's ally Bashar al-Assad was still in power, the Russian military was in a much more powerful strategic position in Syria than today. During those years, Israel invariably said it did not want to risk antagonizing Moscow, with which it had a deconfliction mechanism in Syria permitting it to bomb Iran-linked targets throughout the country, by supplying Ukraine with lethal weapons. It even refused an American request for vintage Hawk missiles it had retired long ago.
Now, Israel may be happy to dispense with its Patriots without acknowledgment. Israel noticeably did not use any Patriots during Iran's April and October 2024 missile attacks and the more recent Iranian bombardments that began on June 13, after Israel's Operation Rising Lion against Iran.
That's not surprising, considering Israel's Arrow and David's Sling systems are more suitable for intercepting ballistic missiles compared to its older Patriot PAC-2s. Furthermore, Israel's experience during its first major missile attack—during the Persian Gulf War all the way back in 1991—fostered a long-running distaste for the system.
America rushed Patriot systems to Israel ahead of that war to help defend against Saddam Hussein's Scud missiles. Washington feared an Israeli retaliation would splinter the coalition, which included many Arab states it had carefully united around the goal of ejecting Iraq from Kuwait. While over 40 Scud missiles hit Tel Aviv and Haifa during the war, an agitated Israel sat tight. Adding insult to injury was the inability of the Patriot interceptors to counter the overwhelming majority of the Scuds, despite widespread reports of its efficiency at the time.
The Israeli Air Force concluded after the war that there was 'no evidence of a single successful intercept' with 'circumstantial evidence for one possible intercept' at best. Defense Minister Moshe Arens recalled after the war that the number of Scuds intercepted was 'minuscule and is in fact meaningless.'
With some conspicuous exceptions, the Israeli Patriots spent the intervening decades, in the words of one Israeli news outlet, 'mostly gathering dust' and never scoring any intercepts until it shot down a Hamas drone during the 2014 Gaza war.
Israeli Patriots saw rare combat in the summer of 2014, just under a quarter century after entering service, when they shot down Hamas drones from Gaza and a Su-24 bomber over the Golan Heights. However, by then, Israel had the Iron Dome in service, and its David's Sling was just three years away from becoming operational. The older Patriots' days in Israeli service were numbered.
But its combat-proven efficiencies against drones and Russian-built aircraft in 2014 show, in retrospect, how suited it is for Ukraine at the moment. Since Kyiv launched its daring Spider's Web operation against Russia's strategic bombers on June 1, it has faced no fewer than 1,451 drones from Russia against its cities. Kyiv needs all the help it can get. And even some extra PAC-2s for its existing systems from Israel would go a long way in keeping its critical air defenses online.
Given Ukraine's present need and Israel's historical dislike of them, one could hardly find a more clear-cut example of the saying one man's trash is another man's treasure.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
36 minutes ago
- CNN
Israel and Iran vow to keep fighting at UN Security Council meeting
Both Iran and Israel's UN ambassadors say that their countries will continue to fight during a tense UN Security Council meeting.
Washington Post
37 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Trump says Gabbard was 'wrong' about Iran and Israeli strikes could be 'very hard to stop'
WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump said Friday that his director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard , was 'wrong' when she previously said that the U.S. believed Iran wasn't building a nuclear weapon, and he suggested that it would be 'very hard to stop' Israel's strikes on Iran in order to negotiate a possible ceasefire.
Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
‘We can't wait forever': GOP frustrated but unwilling to act on Trump's TikTok extension
President Donald Trump's latest move to keep TikTok alive is yet again frustrating congressional Republicans, many of whom object to China's continued involvement in the popular app but just want to be done with the whole drama. 'Not my favorite thing,' Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), along-time proponent of the ban, deadpanned, when asked about the president's plan to issue another extension. He spoke a day before the White House confirmed Trump signed a 90-day suspension of enforcement of the law requiring TikTok to divest from ByteDance, its China-based parent company, throwing another lifeline to the short-form video app. By Friday, some House lawmakers registered a note of resigned irritation. The extension — Trump's third since the law went into effect on Jan. 19 — is a unilateral decision not envisioned in the bipartisan law passed by Congress and upheld last year by the Supreme Court. Rep. Darin LaHood (R-Ill.), a member of the House Intelligence and China committees, told POLITICO. 'The national security concerns and vulnerabilities are still there, and they have not gone away. I would argue they've almost become more enhanced in many ways.' But Trump's extension of the TikTok law largely boxed out Republicans in both chambers who have shown little inclination — beyond stern words — to prevent him from making these postponements almost routine. Many GOP lawmakers saw themselves as granting the president space to cut a promised deal while the White House deals with urgent priorities, like trade negotiations and the Israel-Iran conflict. 'In light of everything going on, I think he did the right thing,' Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), a China hawk who voted for the ban, told POLITICO of Trump. 'I have concerns about all kinds of things — that [the extension] is on the list — but it's not at the top of the list.' Though Trump has promised his TikTok negotiations areclosely tied to trade talks with China, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent testified last week to a Senate panel that TikTok's sale was not currently a part of the negotiations with China, raising a further potential obstacle to Trump inking a deal in the near future. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), a close ally of the president and longtime national-security hawk said earlier in the week: 'The sooner we get that issue solved, the better,' without offering any ideas for further enforcement. 'I just want finality,' Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) told POLITICO. 'I want some certainty and just know that the Congress isn't being played when we make a decision [that the app] be sold.' Another member of the House China Committee, Rep. Zach Nunn (R-Iowa), told POLITICO, 'No more extensions. It's time to follow through.' Rep. Dan Newhouse (R-Wash.), also a member of the China panel, noted in a post on X Thursday the law only allows one extension of the compliance deadline, adding, 'I was proud to support the ban of TikTok and believe the law should be implemented as written.' With their comments, the lawmakers echoed House China Chair John Moolenaar (R-Mich.), who in early June called for the U.S. to 'let [TikTok] go dark' to bring China to the table to negotiate. He reiterated that stance on Friday. 'Delays only embolden the Chinese Communist Party,' Moolenaar said in a statement to POLITICO. 'I urge the administration to enforce the law as written and protect the American people from this growing national security threat.' Still, observers say Republicans are not exercising their leverage to demand the White House enforce the law they helped write, for example by withholding funding or congressional oversight hearings. 'I keep reading that Republicans are 'frustrated' and 'impatient' about their TikTok law being ignored, but they should stop complaining to reporters and take it up with Trump,' said Adam Kovacevich, founder and CEO of the pro-tech Chamber of Progress. Among the Republicans being undercut by the president is his own secretary of state. Marco Rubio — who as senator was one of the loudest critics of TikTok's ties to China, and a huge backer of the app's ban — has been conspicuously silent as Trump has repeatedly granted more time to strike a deal for its sale. 'You have to decide what's more important, our national security and the threat that it poses to our national security,' Rubio told POLITICO in March 2023, as Congress was considering a ban. 'You have to weigh that against what you might think the electoral consequences of it are. For me, it's an easy balancing act. I mean, there is no balance. I'm always going to be for our national security.' A spokesperson for Rubio at the State Department did not respond to a request for comment. Democrats — even those who support keeping TikTok online — say Trump's approach is the wrong one. 'These endless extensions are not only illegal, but they also put TikTok's fate in the hands of risk-averse corporate shareholders,' Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) told POLITICO in a statement. 'This is deeply unfair to TikTok's creators and users. I'm prepared to work towards a solution, but Trump isn't coming to the table.'
