line. In a stroke of good fortune, the brigade commander was Dovik Tamari
Epstein Suite indexes the text; the original document lives at its official source. We don't host the original file — view it on the official release to read it in full.
View the original on the official releasePeople & organizations named in this document
Being named here is not an accusation of wrongdoing.
Document text
Text is machine OCR and may contain errors. Confirm against the original source above.
line. In a stroke of good fortune, the brigade commander was Dovik Tamari,
Avraham Arnan’s first successor as commander of the sayeret. While we waited
our forward deployment, due in September, he included me in his discussions
with his senior officers on tactics and planning. This inevitably included the
core of our existing strategy: a line of fixed fortifications which we had built on
our side of the canal after the war. They were known as the Bar-Lev Line,
because the chief of staff ultimately had to sign off on them. But the main
impetus had come from Avraham Adan. A former Palmachnik, known as Bren,
he was the overall head of the armored corps.
There were strong critics of the Bar-Lev line, but few more vocal than Arik
Sharon. The very qualities that had made him the perfect choice to lead Unit
101 and its successor commando units — a natural instinct to favor bold,
preemptive attacks, allied with an absolute confidence in his own judgment and
little time for those who challenged it — had stalled his rise up the military
ladder for a few years. But now he was head of Israel’s southern command. He
was convinced that in the event of another full-scale war with Egypt, the Bar-
Lev line would be worse than useless. We’d find ourselves forced to defend a
string of fortifications that could serve no real purpose in repelling a concerted
Egyptian attempt to retake the Sinai. Arik’s preferred strategy was to let the
Egyptian troops cross the canal and then confront them on terms where Israeli
forces had a proven advantage: a mobile battle in the open desert.
When the debate came up in our brigade strategy discussions, I said I
believed Arik was right. From our recent sayeret missions, I said there was no
way the Bar-Lev fortifications could protect us. I knew how easy it had been for
us to operate unseen between Egyptian positions across the canal, and they were
only a few hundred yards apart. On some parts of the Bar-Lev line, there were
Six or seven miles between outposts. A whole Egyptian brigade could pass
through.
Very few in the kirya, however, seemed ready to recalibrate our strategy
against the Egyptians. Only later, when the damage had already been done,
would it become clear that the navy was alone in acting on lessons learned from
the fighting since the 1967 war. Having lost its largest warship to a more mobile
Egyptian missile boat at the outset of the War of Attrition, it began focusing on
deploying mobile missile boats of its own. But the air force was showing no
sign of dealing with the implications of the Egyptians’ increased anti-aircraft
capability — even though we’d begun losing planes and pilots to the new
surface-to-air missile batteries Nasser had received from the Soviets. And I
108
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_027956
Have a question about what this document contains?
Ask the documents