“Israel must be able to stand alone”: Amir Avivi’s war for strategic independence

“I had a very strong feeling,” he says, “that the country, and the entire defense establishment, including retired officers who influence public debate, was stuck in a harmful way of thinking.” He explains that doctrines once keeping Israel agile and self-reliant had gradually absorbed the narratives of its enemies. “They pushed us toward dependency,” he says, “rather than the ability to defend ourselves.”

What stood out most was that this way of thinking did not match the views of the people he knew. “Most officers and commanders do not think this way,” he insists. “They’re determined, serious people, they just had no voice.” The IDSF, the movement he founded in 2020, aimed to be that voice.

At the heart of Avivi’s argument is a single word he repeats like an alarm: Dependency. Especially that one the Israel had become accustomed to with the United States.

“In the security doctrines of recent decades,” he says, “we’ve seen increasing, deepening dependency on the United States, specifically regarding munitions and stockpiles that were moved to the U.S. To the point that Israel is unable to conduct a war unless the Americans supply the munitions and equipment we need.” October 7, in his view, exposed this with painful clarity.

“Right as we were facing the nightmare scenario of an existential war, we were suddenly facing the danger of an American arms embargo” he says. “And we saw the magnitude of the risk that creates.” This wasn’t a murky conflict, he adds, but a clearly moral one – “1,200 people slaughtered, heads cut off, women raped” – and yet embargoes became not only an optional risk from Washington but as a terrifying reality in the case of Europe. “If in such a situation countries still impose an embargo,” he says, “it’s obvious that we must achieve the maximum possible self-reliance.”

Avivi doesn’t throw words around aimlessly, rather, he carefully emphasizes that independence isn’t a rebuke to Israel’s closest ally. “Ending dependency is not a way to harm relations,” he says. “It’s the opposite: it’s a way to deepen them.” There is a growing American refrain, one we can see in every point on the American political spectrum – Israel exploits us, but according to Avivi, it can be defused, and only by reducing reliance. “Ending dependency actually strengthens the relationship.” But military autonomy, to him, is just one layer. The deeper vulnerabilities are in areas most Israelis never think to examine.

For Avivi, the time when national security solely depended on planes, tanks, and munitions is gone. Today’s battlefield includes food warehouses, refineries, shipping lanes – anything a hostile power might target.

“People in the defense sector are now much more aware of munitions and combat platforms,” he says. “What the public doesn’t realize is that Israel needs two more types of independence: energy independence and food security.”

The war in Ukraine was a wake-up call. “Suddenly, the ability to import grain was questioned,” he explains. “We were close to a situation where there would be no bread in Israel.” Basic food production – dairy, meat, vegetables – is, in his view, just as strategic as Iron Dome. “Regarding basic food components, Israel must have the clear ability to produce them domestically.” But the greatest vulnerabilities became clear in the first days of this war.

“This war proved beyond any doubt that without energy independence, Israel could lose wars,” he states. Fighter jets need fuel. If Israel cannot produce jet fuel at home and the world refuses to export it, “that’s it. There is no Air Force.”

When Israel shut down its offshore gas platforms out of fear of attack, tankers kept their distance. “We had to immediately, within hours, produce large amounts of diesel to keep electricity flowing.” The BAZAN refinery in Haifa, he says, became an essential strategic resource. “If BAZAN had not supplied that diesel, Israel would have lost power within days.” And then there are the drones.

“Israel is a UAV superpower. These drones need a very unique type of fuel that only BAZAN produces. Without it, they cannot fly.” He states that, for a year and a half of fighting, “not one shipment of foreign jet fuel arrived.”

Iran, he adds, understood the importance all too well. “During the war, Iran launched massive fire at BAZAN, causing damage. What Iran understands, we had better understand.” From these experiences, he draws a clear conclusion: energy independence must be a long-term strategic goal. He believes that this long-term vision is increasingly connected to Israel’s neighbors.

The gulf states, especially Saudi Arabia, sit at the heart of Avivi’s strategic outlook. Beyond shared concerns over Iran, he argues that energy logistics could reshape the region.

“The thing that interests Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states the most – after security vis-à-vis Iran – is energy,” he says. “Their ability to transfer it safely through Israel rather than the Persian Gulf or Bab el-Mandab.”

He describes a plan once unimaginable: a secure east-west corridor carrying Saudi oil from Eilat to Ashkelon. “For them, this is ultra-strategic. The world needs a secure energy corridor. And Israel becomes the critical hinge.” Under such agreements, he believes, Israel could become nothing less than “an energy Singapore.” However, these regional shifts depend on the outcome in Gaza.

“The war is not over,” Aviv asserts “simple due to the fact that its goals have not yet been met.” While, as this article is being written, Israel has received all but one of the remaining hostages, Hamas remains armed, Gaza is not demilitarized, and no alternative governance exists. A renewed ground operation, he believes, is not only likely but necessary, though it must be coordinated with Washington. “Only Israel can dismantle Hamas,” he states, “Hamas is at its weakest, and we have all the required conditions to achieve the mission.” “Combat is always hard,” Avivi ads, “but without hostages, Israel’s ability to do this is more promising than ever.”

Beyond that, the “day after” is already taking shape, as Avivi describes an emerging plan in which the United States would lead a civilian administration in Gaza, while Israel retains full security freedom. “Militarily, we will have full freedom of action, but as for civilian responsibility – we’re happy to transfer to someone else.” In his view, regional peace is close, contingent on Israeli strength. “The Arab world’s greatest fear is the Muslim Brotherhood and a Hamas victory. They detest Hamas.” Even Syria, he says, may seek stability out of economic desperation. “There is an Islamic concept called “taqiyya” (from Arabic, “prudence”) Avivi elaborates, “It hinges on the notion that when you are positioned in a weak spot, you may cooperate with your enemies, make agreements, reorganize, and meet again in a few years. So yes, they may seek partnership out of need, but we must always be prepared.”

He sums up his philosophy with a phrase he attributes to former U.S. president Donald Trump: “Peace through strength.” Avivi states it more bluntly: “Only when Israel is strong will there be peace. When we are weak, there is no peace.”

As the conversation concludes, he returns to the core principles underlying his entire worldview. “National security is first and foremost a national ethos, spirit, Zionism, love of the land, determination,” he says. “But some things in life are physics, and no spirit can bridge them.” Then he lists them with the precision of someone reciting unchangeable facts: “If there is no electricity, there is no electricity. If there is no food, there is no food. If there are no munitions, there are no munitions.”

“Spirit is essential,” he concludes. “But without the material foundations – energy, food, industry – no nation can survive. And when the material foundation connects with the spirit, nothing in the world can stand against us.” Avivi pauses before adding one final element to his equation: endurance. He states that Israel’s future depends not only on rebuilding its physical foundations but also on revitalizing the collective will that drives them. Wars, embargoes, and shifting alliances might test the nation's resilience, yet he insists that countries endure when they align purpose with capability. “Strength is not just what you hold in your hands,” he says, “but what you hold in your heart.” In his perspective, Israel’s next chapter will hinge on whether it can tightly unite those two forces to stand, unshaken, on its own.