INSTR RESTRICTED

INTRODUCTION

1. Yom Kippur, also known as the Ramadan/ October War, was a conflict that took place
between Israel on one side and Egypt and Syria, with backing from Iraq, Jordan, and economic
support from Saudi Arabia, on the other. This war lasted for three weeks, commencing on 6 Oct
1973, and concluding on 22 Oct 73 on the Syrian front and on 26 Oct 73 on the Egyptian front.
This conflict and its aftermath marked a significant turning point in the history of the Middle
East. It led to the immediate involvement of the United States, which had provided military
assistance to Israel during the conflict, and the Soviet Union, which had supplied the Arab
forces. Notably, it exposed vulnerabilities on the Israeli side for the first time, while both Syria
and Egypt demonstrated their newfound military and organizational strength. Additionally, this
war resulted in Israel losing territory, even though that land was originally acquired during the
Six-Day War.

2. The conflict derived its name from the significant Jewish celebration of Yom Kippur and
the Muslim month of Ramadan, during which the annual fast of Swam is observed. Due to an
unusual lapse in Israeli intelligence and government oversight, Israel was unprepared for any
hostilities from its neighboring countries at this particular juncture. This can be attributed to the
rare convergence of two major religious festivals in Islam and Judaism, both of which prohibited
warfare. Exploiting this momentary relaxation, Egypt and Syria launched an unexpected assault
on Israel. The objective of the conflict was to reclaim Arab lands that had been lost in previous
wars, notably in 1947-49, 1956, and most significantly in the Sixth Day War of 1967. After these
conflicts, there had been no meaningful political progress towards resolving the issue of lost
territory and the presence of large numbers of Palestinian refugees. This had led to a profound
sense of frustration throughout the Arab world, giving rise to strong emotions and new political
directions among the populations.

AIM

3 The Aim of this paper is to analyses the strategies employed by both Israel and Arab
forces during the Yom Kippur War and extract valuable lessons from this historical event.

Rabinovich, I. (2005). The Yom Kippur War: The Epic Encounter That Transformed the Middle East. Schocken

1
INSTR RESTRICTED
 INSTR RESTRICTED

BACKGROUND

4. The lead-up to the Yom Kippur War was influenced by two significant factors. Firstly,
there was a failure to resolve territorial disputes stemming from the 1967 Arab-Israeli War.
These disputes revolved around the return of the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt and the Golan Heights
to Syria. Despite efforts such as UN Resolution 242 and Egyptian President Sadat's peace
initiative, a lasting peace remained elusive. Sadat expressed a willingness to sign an agreement
with Israel on the condition that Israel withdrew from all occupied territories, but Israel declined
to return to the pre-1967 armistice lines. With no progress towards peace, Sadat came to the
conclusion that initiating a war with limited objectives was necessary to bring about change and
gain legitimacy within his country.

5. The second contributing factor to the war was the Israeli General Staff's confidence that
Israel was immune to an Arab assault in the foreseeable future. Consequently, Israel saw no
incentive to exchange territory for peace. This sense of security was based on the strength of the
Israel Defense Force (IDF), the turmoil within the Arab world, and the strategic importance of
the Golan Heights. Consequently, despite President Sadat's continued threats of war throughout
1972 and much of 1973, Israeli commanders were ill-prepared for the October attack by Egypt
and Syria. They wrongly interpreted the build-up of armed forces along the canal as a military
exercise rather than an impending assault.

_____________________________

2
INSTR RESTRICTED
 INSTR RESTRICTED

Dupuy, T. N. (1978). Exclusive Victory, The Arab Israel Wars (1949-1974). New York, Harper & Row.

BELLIGERENT INVOLVED.

6. The Yom Kippur War, also known as the October War, involved several countries in the
region. The primary belligerents were Israel, Egypt, and Syria. Israel, a Jewish state established
in 1948, had been involved in several conflicts with its neighboring Arab nations since its
inception. In the Yom Kippur War, Egypt, led by President Anwar Sadat, and Syria, led by
President Hafez al-Assad, launched a surprise attack on Israel on October 6, 1973, which
coincided with the Jewish holiday of Yom Kippur. Other Arab nations, such as Jordan, Iraq, and
Libya, also provided varying degrees of support to Egypt and Syria, either through direct military
involvement or by providing resources and political backing. On the other side, Israel received
support from the United States, which supplied military aid during the conflict. The Yom Kippur
War was a major conflict that had significant implications for the region and international
relations.

COMMANDERS PROFFESIONAL AND LEADERSHIP STYLE.

7. Golda Meir, the Prime Minister of Israel during the Yom Kippur War, displayed several
leadership styles during the conflict:

(i) Authoritative Leadership: Golda Meir was known for her strong and authoritative
leadership style. She made quick and decisive decisions, providing clear instructions and
expectations to her subordinates. This authoritative approach helped establish a sense of
direction and decisiveness during a critical time.

(ii) . Strategic Leadership: Meir demonstrated strategic leadership by closely working

with her military commanders and advisors to develop and implement a comprehensive
defense strategy. She focused on leveraging Israel's military strengths and ensuring the
country's long-term security.

(iii). Inspirational Leadership: In the face of a surprise attack and initial setbacks, Golda
Meir displayed inspirational leadership. She rallied the nation and the Israeli Defense
Forces (IDF) behind the cause, emphasizing resilience, strength, and determination. Her
speeches and pulic statements boosted morale and unified the country.

3
INSTR RESTRICTED
 INSTR RESTRICTED

Mohammed. H. (1975). The Road to Ramadhan, William Collins Son & Co, London,

(iv). Collaborative Leadership: Meir appreciated the importance of collaboration within

her cabinet and with military leaders. She encouraged open discussion and debate,
allowing different viewpoints to be heard and considered. This collaborative approach
helped in developing effective strategies and fostering a sense of teamwork among key
decision-makers.

(v). Crisis Management Leadership: During the Yom Kippur War, Golda Meir effectively
managed the crisis by shaping her leadership style to meet the situation's demands. She
swiftly

8. Ahmad Ismail Ali was an Egyptian military officer who played a significant role as the
Chief of Staff of the Egyptian Armed Forces during the Yom Kippur War. His leadership style
during the war can be described as follows:

(i). Strategic Planning: Ahmad Ismail Ali was involved in meticulous planning and
preparation for the war. He played a crucial role in developing a strategic plan that aimed
to surprise Israeli forces and regain Egyptian territories, primarily the Sinai Peninsula.

(ii). Decisiveness and Initiative: Ismail Ali was known for his decisive decision-making
and readiness to take quick action. He approved the surprise attack on Israel on the
holiest day of the Jewish calendar, demonstrating his willingness to seize the initiative.

(iii). Persistence and Resilience: Despite initial setbacks and the inability to achieve some
of the campaign's objectives, Ismail Ali displayed resilience. He adapted his strategies
and maintained morale within his forces, ultimately leading Egypt to regain a foothold in
Sinai.

(vi). Delegation and Trust in Subordinates: Ismail Ali delegated responsibilities to

competent commanders and trusted them to execute their assigned tasks effectively. This
approach allowed for decentralized decision-making and empowered frontline
commanders to adapt swiftly to changing circumstances.

4
INSTR RESTRICTED
 INSTR RESTRICTED

___________________________

Dunstan, S. (2003). The Yom Kippur War 1973 (2): The Sinai. Osprey.

(v) Effective Use of Resources: Ismail Ali effectively utilized Egypt's limited military
resources, including artillery, anti-aircraft systems, and surface-to-air missiles. He
focused on leveraging these assets to counter Israeli air superiority and disrupt their
advances

9. Shmuel Gonen, also known as "Gorodish," was an Israeli commander during the Yom
Kippur War. Although he initially had a successful military career, his leadership during this
specific war was met with criticism and controversy. Here are some aspects of his leadership
style during the Yom Kippur War:

(i). Bold and Risk-Taking: Gonen was known for his bold and aggressive approach to
warfare. He pushed his forces to conduct daring offensive operations, such as the
crossing of the Suez Canal, which initially led to significant gains for Israel. His risk-
taking mindset aimed to achieve decisive victories.

(ii). Lack of Strategic Vision: Gonen's leadership was criticized for a lack of
comprehensive strategic vision. Despite his tactical successes, he failed to adapt his
strategies to the changing dynamics of the war, leading to costly mistakes and missed
opportunities.

(iii). Overconfidence: Gonen's confidence in his own abilities and those of his forces led
to a sense of complacency. This overconfidence potentially contributed to the initial
surprise attack by Egyptian and Syrian forces on Israeli positions at the beginning of the
war.

(vi). Communication Issues: Gonen struggled with effective communication and

coordination with other commanders and higher-level officials. This hindered the overall
coordination and synchronization of Israeli military operations.

5
INSTR RESTRICTED
 INSTR RESTRICTED

(v). Limited Adaptability: Gonen was criticized for his slow adaptation to changing
battlefield conditions. He failed to respond effectively to the Egyptian and Syrian tactics
and underestimated their capabilities, contributing t

10. Moshe Dayan - As the Israeli Minister of Defense, Moshe Dayan, the Israeli military
leader, had a distinct leadership style during the Yom Kippur War in 1973. Here are some key
aspects of his style:

(i). Decisiveness: Dayan was known for making quick and bold decisions. During the
initial phase of the war, when the Israeli forces were caught off guard by the surprise
attack from Egypt and Syria, Dayan acted swiftly to mobilize troops and resources to
stabilize the situation.

(ii). Flexibility: Dayan recognized the need to adapt and adjust strategies as the situation
evolved. He was open to changing plans and tactics based on the emerging battlefield
dynamics. This flexibility allowed the Israeli forces to respond effectively to unexpected
challenges.

(iii). Tactical Innovation: Dayan encouraged his commanders to think creatively and
develop innovative tactics to gain an advantage. He promoted a culture of initiative and
resourcefulness among his officers, which proved crucial in turning the tide of the war in
Israel's favor.

(Iv). Lead from the Front: Dayan was known for leading from the frontlines. He
personally visited the battlefronts, provided guidance, and rallied the troops. This hands-
on approach inspired his soldiers and boosted morale during critical moments of the
conflict.

(v). Strong Sense of Nationalism: Dayan had a deep sense of national pride and
commitment to Israel's security. His leadership style was characterized by a strong belief
in the justness and importance of the Israeli cause, which motivated his troops and
created a shared sense of purpose.

(vi). Strategic Pragmatism: While Dayan valued bold and aggressive

6
INSTR RESTRICTED
 INSTR RESTRICTED

11. Ariel Sharon - Sharon, who later became the Prime Minister of Israel, displayed a strong
and charismatic leadership style during the war. He was known for his audacious military
maneuvers, taking initiative and leading from the front.Ariel Sharon, during the Yom Kippur
War, displayed a leadership style that was characterized by boldness, initiative, and
determination. As an Israeli military commander, Sharon was known for his aggressive and
proactive approach. He was a firm believer in offensive operations and took the initiative by
launching a daring counter-attack across the Suez Canal, known as the crossing of the
Canal.Sharon's leadership style

(i) emphasized taking calculated risks and exploiting opportunities. He was known to
think outside the box and devise innovative military strategies. Despite initial setbacks
during the early stages of the war, Sharon rallied his forces and orchestrated successful
attacks against Egyptian and Syrian forces.

(ii) decisive military actions, Sharon was also a strong advocate for effective
communication and coordination among his troops. He promoted a sense of unity and
teamwork, fostering a collaborative environment among his subordinates.

(iii)Overall, Ariel Sharon's leadership style during the Yom Kippur War can be
summarized as bold, proactive, and strategic, with a focus on offensive operations and
exploiting opportunities for victory.

12. Anwar Sadat - As the President of Egypt during the war, Sadat displayed a strategic and
diplomatic leadership style. He played a key role in planning the surprise attack on Israel and in
mobilizing regional support for Egypt's cause.Anwar Sadat, the President of Egypt during the
Yom Kippur War, exhibited a leadership style that can be described as strategic, diplomatic, and
assertive.

(i) Sadat's leadership during the Yom Kippur War was characterized by his bold decision
to launch a surprise attack on Israeli forces in 1973, demonstrating his strategic planning
and military acumen. His approach was focused on regaining lost territories and asserting
Egypt's position in the Arab world.

7
INSTR RESTRICTED
 INSTR RESTRICTED

(ii), Sadat displayed diplomatic leadership by seeking political and diplomatic solutions
to the conflict. After the initial military gains, he expressed a willingness to negotiate a
ceasefire and engage in peace talks, which eventually led to the Camp David Accords and
the signing of a peace treaty with Israel in 1979.

______________

Oren, M. B. (2003). Six Days of War: June 1967 and the Making of the Modern Middle East.
Ballantine Books

(iii)Overall, Sadat's leadership during the Yom Kippur War combined military action
with diplomatic initiatives, showcasing his determination, strategic thinking, and
commitment to achieving a lasting peace in the region.

13. Hafez al-Assad - As the President of Syria during the war, Assad displayed a cautious
and calculated leadership style. As follows

(i) He maintained a defensive strategy, ensuring that Syria's military actions were well-
planned and coordinated.Hafez al-Assad, the President of Syria during the Yom Kippur
War, exhibited a leadership style that was characterized by calculated strategic planning,
caution, and resilience.

(ii) Assad's leadership style during the Yom Kippur War can be described as methodical
and strategic. He meticulously planned the surprise attack on Israel, demonstrating his
ability to strategically analyze the military situation and identify Israel's vulnerabilities.

(iii) decision-making process, carefully assessing the risks and weighing the potential
outcomes. This approach helped him minimize the chances of failure and maximize the
effectiveness of his military operations.

(iv) Assad demonstrated resilience and determination in the face of challenges. Despite
initial setbacks, he managed to regroup his forces and maintain their motivation, leading
to significant gains for Syria during the war.

8
INSTR RESTRICTED
 INSTR RESTRICTED

(v) Overall, Assad's leadership style during the Yom Kippur War reflected a calculated
and strategic approach, combined with caution and the ability to adapt to changing
circumstances.

14. Mustafa Tlass, the Syrian Minister of Defense during the Yom Kippur War, exhibited a
leadership style that can be described as authoritative, nationalistic, and politically driven.

(i) Tlass played a critical role in planning and execution of the war. He was known for
his firm and authoritative leadership, making clear and decisive decisions, particularly in
terms of coordinating military operations and setting objectives.

(ii) Tlass's leadership style was also heavily influenced by his nationalist perspective and
dedication to protecting Syrian interests. He prioritized the defense of Syrian territory,
promoted the idea of Arab unity, and sought to reverse previous military defeats against
Israel.

(iii), Tlass's leadership style was also politically driven, as he aimed to strengthen the
position of the ruling Ba'ath Party and maintain his own political stature within the Syrian
government. He was known for his close relationship with President Hafez al-Assad, and
his leadership decisions often aligned with the political agenda of the ruling regime.

(iv) Overall, Tlass exhibited a leadership style that combined assertiveness, nationalism,
and political considerations to guide the Syrian military during the Yom Kippur War.

15. Haim Bar-Lev, the Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) during the Yom
Kippur War, exhibited a leadership style that can be described as cautious, methodical, and
focused on defensive preparations.

(i) Bar-Lev was known for his military planning and prioritized strengthening Israel's
defensive capabilities. He emphasized the importance of comprehensive intelligence,
strong fortifications, and solid logistical support. Bar-Lev was less inclined towards
aggressive offensives and preferred a defensive stance.

(ii) However, Bar-Lev's leadership during the Yom Kippur War was Suprised attack to
adequately prepare for the surprise attack by Egyptian and Syrian forces. His cautious

9
INSTR RESTRICTED
 INSTR RESTRICTED

and conservative approach came under scrutiny as the initial days of the war proved
challenging for Israel. Ultimately, he was relieved of his post following the war.

STRATEGY AND OPERATION LEVEL SETTING.

16. On the Israeli side, their strategy focused on maintaining a defensive posture along the
borders while also having the capability to launch a counteroffensive when the opportunity arose.
This involved the mobilization of reserve forces, organization of armored divisions, and
coordination with air and naval forces. At the operational level, the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF)
planned and executed various military operations to repel the Arab forces and regain lost
territories. These operations included the crossing of the Suez Canal and the subsequent
encirclement of Egyptian forces in the Sinai Peninsula, as well as the recapture of the Golan
Heights from the Syrians.

a. On the Arab side, the strategy was centered around the element of surprise and the
use of massive artillery barrages to weaken Israeli defenses. They aimed to launch
coordinated offensives to regain lost territories and potentially reach strategic
objectives.
b. At the operational level, the Egyptian and Syrian forces launched simultaneous
attacks on multiple fronts, seeking to exploit perceived weaknesses in Israeli
defenses. The Egyptians focused on crossing the Suez Canal and establishing a
foothold in the Sinai Peninsula, while the Syrians aimed to penetrate Israeli defenses
on the Golan Heights.
c. The end state of the Yom Kippur War was a ceasefire agreement that was brokered
by the United Nations. The war ended on October 25, 1973, after intense fighting and
heavy casualties on both sides. The ceasefire agreement established new ceasefire
lines, with Israel maintaining control over the Sinai Peninsula and the Golan Heights.
d. The war had significant political and military implications. It led to a reassessment of
Israel's military strategy and the development of new tactics and technologies. It also
had a lasting impact on the Arab-Israeli conflict and the broader geopolitical
dynamics of the Middle East

10
INSTR RESTRICTED
 INSTR RESTRICTED

e. In the Yom Kippur War, there were several lines of operation that were
manifested by both the Israeli and Egyptian forces. The Israeli lines of operation
included the defense of the Sinai Peninsula, the defense of the Golan Heights, and the
counteroffensive into Egypt. The Egyptian lines of operation included the crossing of
the Suez Canal and the capture of the Bar Lev Line. These lines of operation were the
main focus of the military strategies employed by both sides during the war.

THE END STATE OF YOM KIPPUR WAR

17. Military and Strategic Outcome: While the initial phase of the war saw significant Arab
gains and a surprise attack on Israeli positions, Israel managed to regroup and eventually turned
the tide of the conflict. Israeli forces pushed back Egyptian and Syrian advances, recaptured lost
territory, and advanced into enemy territory.

a. Ceasefire and Diplomatic Solutions: The war ended with a UN-brokered ceasefire on
October 25, 1973. Diplomatic efforts followed, and eventually, a series of
negotiations led to peace agreements between Israel and Egypt (Camp David Accords
in 1978) and Israel and Syria (Golan Heights Disengagement Agreement in 1974).
b. Political Shifts: The Yom Kippur War had significant political ramifications. It led to
changes in leadership and policies in several countries. For example, in Israel, it led
to the resignation of Prime Minister Golda Meir and marked the beginning of a new
era of political consciousness and awareness of military preparedness.
c. Long-Term Implications: The war shook the perception of invincibility surrounding
Israel's military and sparked a reassessment of security and defense strategies.
Additionally, it laid the groundwork for peace negotiations and a recognition of the
need for peaceful resolutions to conflicts in the region

MAJOR BATTLES INVOLVED.

18. The battle consisted of intense fighting between Israeli and Syrian forces, as both sides
sought control over this crucial territory. The Syrians initially achieved surprising success, using
a combination of artillery barrages and armor assaults to push deep into the Golan Heights,

11
INSTR RESTRICTED
 INSTR RESTRICTED

capturing several key strategic positions.However, the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) quickly
regrouped and launched a counteroffensive. Israeli forces, with the aid of superior air power and
effective use of artillery, managed to halt the Syrian advances and eventually push the Syrian
Army back.

19. The Battle of Golan Heights witnessed intense tank battles, with both sides suffering
heavy losses. The IDF mobilized reserve units and implemented innovative tactics, such as using
small special forces units to strike behind Syrian lines. This eventually led to the reclaiming of
lost territories and the Israeli reestablishment of control over the Golan Heights. The Battle of
Golan Heights was one of the turning points in the Yom Kippur War, demonstrating the
resilience and adaptability of the Israeli military. It highlighted the significance of well-trained
reserves, innovative strategies, and effective use of air power in modern warfare.

POSSIBLE CENTRE OF GRAVITY ON BOTH SIDES.

20. Israel: Israeli Defense Forces (IDF): As the primary military force of Israel, the IDF
represented the center of gravity for the Israeli side. It encompassed the various branches of the
military, including army, air force, and navy. The IDF's strength and capabilities were essential
for Israel to repel the coordinated attacks by Egyptian and Syrian forces.

i. Technological Superiority: Israel's technological advantage, particularly in terms of air

superiority and advanced weaponry, served as a significant source of strength. Israeli
fighter jets, such as the American-made F-4 Phantoms and French-made Mirage aircraft,
played a crucial role in providing aerial support and neutralizing enemy threats.

ii. Reservist Forces: Israel's extensive system of mobilizing and integrating reserve forces
into the military was also considered a vital center of gravity. These citizen soldiers
provided Israel with additional manpower and skills, contributing to the country's defense
efforts.

________________________

12
INSTR RESTRICTED
 INSTR RESTRICTED

Herzog, C. (1982). The Arab-Israeli Wars: War and Peace in the Middle East from the 1948 War of
Independence to the Present. Vintage Books

21. Egypt and Syria: Egyptian Army: For Egypt, the Egyptian Army served as the primary
center of gravity. It consisted of well-trained and equipped forces that aimed to reclaim the Sinai
Peninsula, which Israel had captured during the Six-Day War in 1967. Egypt's ability to
successfully penetrate and hold territory was essential for achieving their objectives.

i. Soviet Support: Both Egypt and Syria relied heavily on military and economic support
from the Soviet Union. This support included the supply of weapons, equipment, and
advisors. The Soviet assistance enhanced the fighting capabilities of both countries and
played a significant role in their military operations.

ii. Strategic Depth and Terrain: In Syria, the Golan Heights represented a critical center of
gravity. The high ground offered a strategic advantage, allowing Syrian forces to observe
and engage Israeli targets. Establishing control over the Golan Heights was seen as vital
for Syria's objectives in the war.

MAJOR PRINCIPLES OF WARS MANIFESTED

22. The Yom Kippur War demonstrated several major principles of wars manifested.

i. Surprise Attack: The Egyptian and Syrian forces launched a surprise attack on Israel on
the holiest day of the Jewish calendar, catching the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) off
guard. This showcased the importance of tactical surprise in gaining an early advantage.

13
INSTR RESTRICTED
 INSTR RESTRICTED

ii. Combined Arms: Both the Israeli and Arab forces employed a combination of infantry,
armor, artillery, and air power. The successful integration of these different military
components was essential for achieving battlefield success.

iii. Offensive Action: Both sides recognized the importance of seizing and maintaining the
initiative through offensive action. The Israeli forces launched counterattacks to regain
lost territories, while the Arab forces attempted to expand their gains. This highlighted
the significance of offensive operations in warfare.

iv. Air Superiority: Throughout the conflict, the Israeli Air Force demonstrated its
superiority by effectively neutralizing enemy air defenses and providing close air support
to ground forces. This showcased the importance of air power in modern warfare.

v. Attrition: The war witnessed prolonged and intense battles, particularly in the Sinai
Peninsula and Golan Heights. Both sides suffered heavy casualties and endured the
challenges of attrition warfare, emphasizing the importance of endurance and resilience
in protracted conflicts.

vi. Politics and Diplomacy: The Yom Kippur War also highlighted the influence of politics
and diplomacy in shaping military outcomes. International pressure and interventions,
such as the United States' resupply efforts for Israel, impacted the course of the conflict
and helped shape ceasefires and eventual peace agreements.

OPERATION PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED.

23. During the Yom Kippur War, both sides encountered several operational problems. Some
of these problems includes

i. Intelligence failures: Both Israel and the Arab states faced intelligence failures in
accurately assessing their opponent's intentions and capabilities. Israel, in particular, was
caught off guard by the surprise attack launched by Egypt and Syria, highlighting the lack
of accurate intelligence.

ii. Mobilization and deployment delays: The quick mobilization and deployment of forces is
crucial in any war, but both sides experienced delays in this aspect. Israel faced

14
INSTR RESTRICTED
 INSTR RESTRICTED

challenges in quickly mobilizing its reserves, as they were scattered and not fully
prepared. Similarly, the Arab states encountered difficulties in effectively deploying their
forces across the battlefield.

iii. Logistical challenges: The Yom Kippur War presented significant logistical challenges
for both sides. Israel had to quickly supply its troops with ammunition, fuel, and
equipment, while also maintaining connectivity with its forces on the front lines.

iv. Communication breakdowns: Effective communication is essential for coordinating

military operations, but both Israel and the Arab states struggled with communication
breakdowns during the war.

v. Tactical shortcomings: Both sides displayed tactical shortcomings and operational errors
during the conflict. Israel initially faced difficulties in countering the Egyptian and Syrian
advances, partly due to their surprise attack. The Arab states, on the other hand, failed to
capitalize on their initial gains and sustain their momentum due to flawed strategic
planning and coordination.

CONCLUSION

24. In conclusion, the Yom Kippur War was a significant conflict that had a lasting impact on
the Middle East. It revealed operational problems and errors on both sides, highlighting the
importance of effective strategies and intelligence in warfare. The major principles of wars, such
as surprise attacks, asymmetric warfare, and the role of external powers, manifested during the
conflict. The center of gravity for both sides can be seen in their military capabilities and support
networks. For Israel, their superior military technology and training played a crucial role in
turning the tide of the war. On the Arab side, their reliance on Soviet support, particularly in
terms of weapons and advisors, was a significant center of gravity for their operations. Overall,
the Yom Kippur War was a complex and multifaceted conflict that demonstrated the importance

15
INSTR RESTRICTED
 INSTR RESTRICTED

of careful planning, intelligence, and the presence of external influences. It ultimately led to
political changes, peace negotiations, and a reevaluation of military strategies in the region.

LESSON LEARNT.

25. The Yom Kippur War, also known as the October War, was a conflict that took place in
1973 between Israel and a coalition of Arab states led by Egypt and Syria. Here are some of the
key lessons that were learned from the Yom Kippur War:

i. Importance of Intelligence: The war highlighted the crucial role of intelligence in

military operations. Israel's initial lack of awareness about the Arab coalition's attack
plans showcased the significance of accurate and timely intelligence gathering to
prevent surprise attacks.
ii. Preparedness and Readiness: The Yom Kippur War demonstrated the importance of
maintaining a high state of readiness and preparedness in the armed forces. Israel's
initial unpreparedness and complacency resulted in heavy initial losses, emphasizing
the need for constant vigilance.
iii. Flexibility and Adaptability: The conflict reinforced the need for military forces to be
flexible and adaptable in response to evolving situations. Israel, despite initial
setbacks, managed to regroup, adapt its strategies, and eventually turn the tide of the
war in its favor.
iv. Diplomacy and Peaceful Resolution: The Yom Kippur War highlighted the
importance of diplomacy and peaceful resolutions to prevent future conflicts. It led to
renewed peace negotiations between Israel and Egypt, eventually resulting in the
signing of the Camp David Accords in 1978.
v. Military Balance and Deterrence: The war demonstrated the significance of
maintaining a credible military deterrence to prevent aggression. Israel's ability to
rapidly mobilize and demonstrate its military strength ultimately led to a ceasefire and
prevented further escalation of the conflict.
vi. Lessons for Future Planning: The Yom Kippur War served as a valuable lesson for
military planning, leading to changes in tactics, equipment, and training to address the
vulnerabilities exposed during the conflict. This included improvements in

16
INSTR RESTRICTED
 INSTR RESTRICTED

intelligence gathering, early warning systems, and the development of new military
technologies.

17
INSTR RESTRICTED