Abstract
The civilian home front has always been a target but existing perceptions, as well as a lack of technical capabilities, prevented military forces from launching a war by, for example, attacking the enemy's civilian home front. The introduction of air forces and later on missile warfare, change the nature of the conflict and turned it into a total war – unrestricted in terms of the weapons used, the territory involved, the objectives pursued, the brutality inflicted, and especially the link it created between the front and rear lines, effectively making them into one and the same – a single entity made into fair game in both offensive and defensive warfare.
Israel is one example: In the 70 years since its inception, Israel has weathered nine bloody conflicts with its neighbours. In 1991, during the Gulf War, the Israeli home front was hit by 39 Iraqi Scud missiles, making the home front a prime target for its enemies. Israel saw three major wars in its first 20 years: The War of Independence (1948), the Sinai War (1956, aka the Suez Crisis), and the Six-Day War (1967). In all three, the home front was spared harm and Israel marked impressive victories. The 1967 conflict saw Israel destroy the air forces of Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Iraq within six days, and the initial assessment that the home front would come under attack proved false. Was this the moment when the assumption that, contrary to what is expected of a total war between Israel and its neighbours, the home front could be spared? Was that even a viable option?
This question is the basis of the theory I explore in this essay, while focusing on the pivotal concept of national security – defending the home front .The case study I based my argument is the famous six days war and the question is whether Israel and other countries are doing enough for the defines of their citizens?
Keywords: war, military, society, civilian defines, home front, shelters, resilience, conflict.
