Politics

Hodeida attack prompts a revisiting of Israel’s Octopus Doctrine

Likening Iran to the head of an octopus and its armed proxies to the tentacles is used as an analogy for military strategy in the conflict between Tel Aviv and Tehran. Has Israel's strategy changed?

AFP

A giant fire erupts at an oil storage facility following Israeli strikes in Yemen's Houthi-held port city of Hodeida on July 20, 2024.

Hodeida attack prompts a revisiting of Israel’s Octopus Doctrine

Lina Khatib

last update on 22 Jul 2024

Israel’s attack on the port of Hodeida in Yemen following the deadly Houthi drone strike on Tel Aviv was meant to be a message to Iran.

Israeli Defence Minister Yoav Gallant put it succinctly. “The fire that is currently burning in Hodeida is seen across the Middle East and the significance is clear.”

The Israeli response, striking a power plan and an oil storage depot which killed three and injured 80, represents a tweak to the so-called Octopus Doctrine regarding its relations to Iran and its proxies.

The Octopus Doctrine was first presented in 2018 by Naftali Bennett, a religious-nationalist and former settler leader. At the time, he was a minister and sat on Israel’s Security Cabinet.

Head vs legs

Bennett argued that Israel should see Iran as the head of an octopus and that its proxies—like Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis, and groups in Syria—were the octopus’s arms. Fighting the individual tentacles was insufficient, he said.

Shortly after the Houthi drone attack on Tel Aviv, the Israeli Armed Forces’ Chief of General Staff Herzi Halevi invoked Bennett’s Octopus Doctrine.

Ricardo Moraes / Reuters — People mourn Yevgeny Ferder, who was killed by a long-range Iranian-made drone that hit the centre of Tel Aviv, in an attack claimed by the Yemen-based Houthi militia.

“It’s all Iran,” he said. “This UAV (unmanned aerial vehicle, or drone) is Iranian, right?... The funds for the tunnels here are from Iran... In the end, it’s an octopus. It has many arms.”

Halevi did not however call to strike the head of the octopus (Iran). Instead, he called for excellence and effectiveness in fighting the different arms of the octopus.

Tentacles for now

In April, when Israel and Iran traded missiles directly for the first time, former special forces soldier Bennet invoked his famous sea creature again.

“We always fought the Octopus’s arms,” he said, “but hardly exacted a price from its Iranian head. This should change now.”

Shortly after the Houthi drone attack on Tel Aviv, the Israeli Armed Forces' Chief of General Staff Herzi Halevi invoked the Octopus Doctrine.

Israel's measured and somewhat limited response to Iran's ineffectual missile attack in April confirmed that there is no appetite in the Israeli government to apply Bennett's Octopus Doctrine and go to war with Iran.

Reading this, Iran has upped the pressure on Israel through its proxies, notably the Houthis, who have been firing missiles and drones at Israel for weeks. Israeli retaliation usually means the proxy pay a heavy price, but Iran does not.

Bennett's Octopus Doctrine speech of 2018 contained another important component on how Israel should fight Iran in a multi-fronted war.

Messengers and hosts

He described Iran as the sender, the Quds Force as the distributor, proxies like Hezbollah as the messenger, and states where the proxies operate as the host.

He then argued that Israel must stop distinguishing between messenger and host.

This justifies Israel's attacks on wider targets in host states. Its strike on Hodeida Port in Yemen fits within this framework. Following the strike, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that the port was being used by Iran to supply the Houthis with weapons.

AFP — A raging fire at oil storage tanks a day after Israeli strikes on the port of Yemen's Houthi-held city of Hodeida on July 21, 2024.

Likewise, in 2019, Israel's Ambassador Danny Danon told the UN Security Council that Israel's intelligence services could show that Iran's elite Quds Force was using the port of Beirut to ship dual-use components to Hezbollah to advance its rocket and missile capabilities.

In 2020, an explosion in the port killed 218 people, injured 7,000, made 300,000 homeless, and caused $15bn of damage when 2,750 tonnes of ammonium nitrate under insecure storage there exploded. It was one of the most powerful non-nuclear explosions ever recorded.

Different circumstances

The contexts of Lebanon and Yemen are very different, meaning that Israel has boasted of striking the Hodeida, while refraining from similar action in retaliation to Hezbollah's persistent attacks on Israel since October 2023.

Despite their upgraded capabilities, the Houthis' military arsenal is nowhere near that of Hezbollah, which is the world's strongest armed militia. This makes the Houthis a weaker actor, limited in the damage it can cause Israel.

Despite their upgraded capabilities, the Houthis' military arsenal is nowhere near that of Hezbollah, which is the world's strongest armed militia.

Added to which, Yemen is geographically much further away from Israel while Lebanon, with which Israel shares a border.

Significant escalation from Lebanon could mean Israel pays a heavy price, hence why Israel has avoided all-out war.

Reuters — An Israeli F15 Fighter Jet on its way to conduct air strikes in Yemen is seen at an unidentified location in this handout photo released on July 20, 2024. Israeli Army handout.

The Houthi drone on Tel Aviv was a message from Iran to Israel, to demonstrate Iran's far-reaching military capabilities. Likewise, Israel's attack on Hodeida was a message to Iran, that it can and will respond.

The Hodeida attack shows that the Octopus Doctrine is not alive and well, but being revised.

+ / -