by Noah Beck
Yisrael took the floor again, “Listen guys, we’re getting a little off topic. I happen to agree with almost everything you’ve said. The world powers definitely shirked their responsibilities. And their failure to solve the problem has already cost the world far more than a firm and united front would have. It looks like it cost the world the State of Israel and all of the future Nobel Prizes and inventions that it would have produced by people like Yoni. If we make the wrong decision on this submarine, then it could also cost the millions of lives that we snuff out in Iran with our nuclear missiles. There is no question about the scale of negligence committed by the world powers for letting things come to this. But none of that is really relevant to the decision we must make.”
Samir spoke out: “I couldn’t disagree more with Yisrael and those of you who have taken his position. As Bao said, Iran made the most evil possible choice, and there must be consequences.”
“So you think that by killing millions of people, we’re somehow correcting the moral imbalance in the universe, and re-establishing an international order?” Yisrael asked.
Michael answered: “Yes. We’re securing justice by delivering a proportionate punishment to the aggressor. And we’re also sending a strong message to the rest of the world that will create more global security, because rogue states with nuclear weapons will understand much more that there are truly terrible implications to dropping a nuclear bomb on another state.”
Yisrael countered: “Explain to me why it’s not wrong to kill millions of innocent civilians in a purely retributive counter-strike. With nothing left for our submarine to protect or deter, nuking Iran becomes just a random act of mass murder.”
“Explain to me why it’s not wrong for Iran to get away with murdering millions of our innocent civilians,” Samir called out from the back.
“I agree that it’s wrong, but the answer is not to kill millions of people who have nothing to do with the decisions of their evil regime. If we had missiles that could target only members of the Iranian regime, I would be the first to fire them. But I’m not prepared to murder millions of innocent people just so that I can give even a hundred thousand bad people what they deserve.”
Eitan spoke: “Yisrael has a point here. Back when we had just left the base, we were playing poker and talking about the Jewish principle of Pikuah Nefesh – choosing the sanctity of human life over other considerations. That applies to all life, including the lives of Iranians.”
Ambesah reinforced the point: “Yes. The Talmud teaches us that whoever saves a life, is considered to have saved an entire world. So what does it mean to kill millions of lives just because they have an evil government?”
Michael joined the discussion again: “I think we’re getting too philosophical here and there’s an important historical analysis that we’re not considering. Imagine if the Allies had said that they didn’t want to bomb Nazi Germany because it would mean that lots of innocent civilians would die. At some point, a state has to be held accountable, no matter how little its tyrannical actions reflect the will of the people. And this is even more true of states trying to dominate entire regions. If you don’t stop them, you’re ultimately going to end up with even more innocent deaths than if you do.”
Bao agreed: “Michael makes an excellent point. What if – because of your lofty moral objections – Iran essentially gets away with destroying Israel? Then what? It could feel emboldened to do the same thing to Bahrain or Qatar, just so that it can take over their natural resources. And it could continue wiping out or bullying any perceived rival in the region as it continues to try to grow stronger and more powerful at the expense of its neighbors and its own citizens.”
“Now that Saudi Arabia bought some nukes, Iran can’t bully them around,” Ambesah pointed out.
“Yes, but there are plenty of smaller, weaker countries in the Middle East to bully,” Michael continued. “So how many more millions of innocent civilians might die if we let Iran get away with destroying Israel? How many more military adventures will Iran pursue because no one – not even us – was courageous enough to stand up to this barbaric regime?”
Yisrael looked impressed with the point: “That’s the most persuasive argument I’ve heard so far from the other side. I’m not saying I’m convinced or ready to concede, but I want to think about that point a little more. It’s just not – ”
The debate was interrupted by Daniel’s voice over the intercom: “This is the captain. We’ve spotted an enemy sub. Bao, Ambesah, and Eitan go to your stations. Rig for silent running.”
The area suddenly turned quiet as Bao and Ambesah rushed across the deck to the combat center and sonar station, respectively.
Chapter 31: Hunting a Kilo and the Second Debate
Daniel was already at the combat center with the rest of the weapons team, analyzing the tactical situation monitors. When Bao arrived, he saw on the monitor that their current position was 24.51"N, 58.49"E. Daniel quickly debriefed him in a hushed voice. “It’s an Iranian Kilo class submarine about two kilometers behind us,” he said, pointing to the screen. “Apparently it hasn’t detected us yet.”
Daniel walked over to the navigation post and whispered his order. “Steer a course 90 degrees west and then gradually complete a course of 360 degrees so that we end up one kilometer directly behind the Kilo.”
“Yes, Sir,” Eitan replied in a hushed voice, as he began to calculate the exact course and speed they needed, taking into account the faster moving speed of the Kilo behind them.
Given the relative positions of the two submarines, the best strategy for the Israeli stealth ship was to veer west and gradually continue circling around to a full 360 degrees so that it ended up tailing the Russian-made Iranian vessel that it planned to target. If the Dolphin could avoid being detected while undertaking this maneuver, the enemy ship was likely to be an easy kill for it.
As his submarine began to circle around, Daniel watched the sonar screen closely to see if anything in the Kilo’s movements might indicate that they had been detected. “Prepare decoys,” he ordered into the intercom in a whisper. The captain wanted to be ready in case they were suddenly spotted and attacked by the submarine they were tracking.
“Preparing decoys, Sir,” Bao replied quietly, as he watched his men execute the order.
The Israeli submarine was soon stalking the Iranian stealth boat from a distance of one kilometer. From that position, the Dolphin’s prey was most vulnerable: wherever it tried to move, it was in the path of its hunter’s torpedoes, and the hunter could continue firing them until it scored a direct hit. But multiple attacks would not be necessary because the Dolphin was equipped with a sophisticated, precision-guided torpedo that also releases a sonar-jamming acoustic wave as it approaches, to avoid being heard by its target.
Thus, when Bao entered the target coordinates for the enemy ship one kilometer ahead, he was able to specify exactly which part of the Kilo he wanted the torpedo to hit after the deadly projectile exited the Dolphin’s torpedo tube in a powerful and pinpointed jet stream. The most vulnerable impact point of any watercraft is at its center, so when Bao focused the torpedo’s warhead on the Kilo’s middle underbelly, the underwater detonation would be devastating.
“Target defined, Sir.”
“Begin torpedo launch sequence,” Daniel said, his eyes focused intently on the tactical monitors.
“Beginning torpedo launch sequence, Sir.”
Bao oversaw the entire launch sequence, and this time entered the launch clearance code so that the torpedo fired as soon as Daniel gave the order.
“Launch code entered. Tubes three and four ready, Sir.”
“Fire three,” Daniel ordered.
“Fire three,” Bao instructed his men. Moments later, Bao addressed the captain: “Three’s away, Sir.”
The Dolphin’s torpedo flew towards the enemy vessel. Within seconds of the massive explosion 100 meters below the surface of the water, the Iranian submarine was fall
ing towards the bottom of the sea.
Daniel spoke into the intercom: “This is the Captain. Scratch one Kilo. Well done, all hands. Secure from silent running.”
As the ship resumed its normal operation and continued on course towards the Strait of Hormuz, the captain asked his deputy over the intercom if he needed any more time to finish presenting and discussing his views. Yisrael indicated that the group had amply debated the matter, that he had heard one point in particular that he wanted to think about, and that Daniel was welcome to present his side.
A few minutes later, Yisrael arrived at the central command post and relieved Daniel of his duties. The captain and the three senior officers who had left the debate to deal with the Kilo walked back to the eating area where the 11 undecided seamen were waiting to hear Daniel’s side of the debate. As the four of them entered the crowded space, the conversations among the expectantly curious submariners died down and one of the junior sailors volunteered to stand just outside the door so that there would be enough room for all of the officers.
Daniel stepped over to the front of the room, in the center, and began: “First, I want to thank all of you again for your exemplary work and dedication on what has been an extremely difficult mission. Each of you on this one mission has already experienced the equivalent of many operations. And you have now been asked to decide something that probably no crew has ever had to decide in the history of submarine warfare. So I understand and appreciate all that you have done and been through over the last 26 days at sea, after I was ordered to cancel our shore leave. I think we now understand – all too well – why naval command had to cancel that break. The deputy captain told me that there was a lively exchange here and I welcome the same after my brief remarks. I just ask that we remain respectful at all times. I hesitate to speak in absolute terms because there is still much that we don’t know. It’s still theoretically possible that in the next day and a half we’ll get a godsend from our next satellite connection, indicating that there was some kind of error in the two updates that I read you. So everything I say now is subject to that extremely remote possibility. But on the whole, we must be sober-minded and realistic about all of the information that we do have.”
Daniel looked up for a moment before explaining his position. Everyone was looking intently at him for guidance, experience, wisdom. But for the issue at hand he had none of that because the situation was just as new to him; he had only his convictions.
The captain resumed his speech. “Let there be no mistake or confusion: what Iran did has no justification whatsoever and it is in the same category of evil as the Holocaust. And the moral duty to punish this unthinkable atrocity falls most naturally on us. We experienced the greatest loss here. And other world powers, fearing a devastating retaliation from a nuclear-armed Iran, will probably conclude that it’s not in their interest to attack Iran militarily – for punitive reasons or otherwise. We, on the other hand, have nothing to lose by doing what must be done. And we end Israeli history in dignity and with a moral lesson to the world about the dangers and consequences of nuclear proliferation and aggression, and by removing for the rest of the world a grave threat that they should have addressed before it escalated into this catastrophe. Those are my thoughts. You are welcome to discuss now.”
The room stayed silent for a moment, until Zvi spoke: “Ss…Sir, we discussed the cc-concept of PP-Pikuah Ne-Nefesh and…and we’re…we’re struggling with the idea of…of…of…tt-taking the lives of millions of people, agg…against the principles of…of…of…the TT-Torah.”
“These are legitimate concerns,” Daniel replied. “But did anyone feel any remorse about the fact that we just killed at least fifty people aboard that Iranian Kilo submarine that our torpedo just sank?”
Jacob replied: “Sir, that’s very different. In that situation, it was kill or be killed. We had an opportunity to eliminate an immediate threat that would have quickly targeted us in the same way, had we been detected first. So it was self-defense.”
Daniel replied with a hypothetical: “So if you saw the very same Kilo that attacked and killed everyone on board the Leviathan, and you knew that this enemy sub wouldn’t attack us because it had no more torpedoes left to fire, are you saying that you wouldn’t attack it because self-defense isn’t necessary against a foe with no more ammunition?”
“Sir, in that case you would be justified in attacking the Kilo because it is part of a system that can still threaten your country. But if your country was just destroyed, then attacking that Kilo achieves nothing.”
Eitan drew another distinction: “And the Kilo would be a military target with a limited number of casualties. Not millions of innocent civilians, Sir.”
Daniel tried another hypothetical: “These are all good points. It’s not the right example. Let me try again: Suppose that an evil arsonist who hated your parents conceived of a plan to burn them alive, and then proceeded to incinerate them in their home. Now imagine further that he’s brought to trial, and his defense lawyer convinces the judge that the perpetrator can be given a pacifying injection that will ensure that he never again engages in violent acts. The judge then sentences this arsonist to receive the injection but allows him to live freely in society. The injection actually works and the one-time arsonist never again harms anyone even though he burned your parents alive. Has justice been done?”
Boutrous replied, “Sir, that example also doesn’t work because the arsonist was actually responsible for burning your family members but the millions of civilians that we kill would not be in any way responsible for what happened to our country.”
“That’s true, Boutrous, but I was using the example only to illustrate that the concept of retribution is not crazy. There’s something fundamentally unjust about allowing the man who burned your parents alive to go unpunished just because he’ll never harm anyone else again. And in our case, we’re talking about a country that may have burned your entire country alive and could very well harm again.”
Jacob objected: “Sir, I agree with you that retribution can be a valid kind of justice. But it still must be carried out against the right people – the ones who are actually responsible for the crimes that need to be punished. And most of the Iranians who would die in our retributive strike are not the ones who burned our country.”
Daniel addressed this recurring argument in a way that surprised everyone: “Egypt enjoys tourism revenues that average about $10 billion a year from monuments and treasures created a few thousand years ago. The average Egyptian has about $6,000 a year of purchasing power. Now take Chad, just 400 kilometers southwest of Egypt. They have no monuments built thousands of years ago to attract any tourists. And the average person there has about one-sixth as much money as the average Egyptian. Is that fair?”
Bao spoke up: “Sir, I couldn’t agree with you more in this debate, but I have no clue what point you were trying to make just now.” There were a few chuckles in the group.
“Let me explain,” the captain said. “The concern that many have understandably expressed here is that it’s not fair to hold individuals responsible for the actions of their state. But that is how reality works, whether or not it’s fair. The individuals who live in Egypt have a life that is six times richer than their southwest neighbor in part because they live in a state where beautiful monuments were built thousands of years ago. And there are countless examples of this. Qatar has the world’s highest proven reserves of oil and natural gas, so it is one of the world’s richest countries. Is that fair? And if individual Qatari citizens were not responsible for putting the oil and natural gas in the land held by their state, is it fair that those individuals should live lives that are on average about a hundred times richer than the lives of the individuals in Chad?”
Michael responded: “Sir, that’s an interesting argument, but it’s from the realm of economics, which seems very different from the life and death issues involved in a military strike.”
“Well, economic
s present life and death issues every day. Just ask the starving, impoverished countries of Africa. But here’s an example that’s about as relevant as it’s going to get: I’m pretty sure my grandfather, who survived the first Holocaust, did not survive whatever second holocaust was just visited upon our country. Was that fair to him?”
Eitan replied: “No, Sir. But why would that make it right for us to do the same thing to the innocent people living in the state that killed your grandfather?”
“For the same reason that it’s wrong to let the arsonist who burned your family go unpunished. The crime must be answered, even if the answer is imprecise. And this is even more the case when it will produce other benefits.”
“What other benefits, Sir?”
“How about freeing over 70 million Iranians from a regime that censors and represses them? A regime that placed a Fatwa on writer Salman Rushdie that led to the murder of his Japanese translator and a hotel fire that killed many. A regime that violently crushed the democratic aspirations of its own people in 2009 and then helped the Syrian regime to butcher tens of thousands of ordinary Syrians seeking freedom.”
Michael objected: “But Sir, it’s not up to us to change Iran’s thug-ocracy. Otherwise we’d have to launch strikes against North Korea, Cuba and many other oppressive regimes.”
“I agree. But if the Iranian people are too terrorized by a powerful and entrenched regime to oust it on their own, then our attack might give them the external force they need to topple the government there. Helping them to do that would never be the reason for our attack, but it could be a side-benefit.”
“Sir, is that the main benefit you have in mind?”
“No, there is another, possibly more important benefit: we would be sacrificing a few to save many.”
