In the initial week following the latest surge in hostilities between Israel and Iran, Israel has launched a highly intensified air campaign that has unleashed a significant volume of military force. This escalation has sparked considerable debate about the economic viability and strategic prudence of Israel’s current approach, as highlighted by an in-depth analysis in an Israeli newspaper. The scale and intensity of the offensive have raised concerns over whether the benefits outweigh the mounting costs.
Despite Iran’s missile attacks remaining relatively limited in scope, the financial and infrastructural toll on Israel is already comparable to, and possibly exceeding, the damage sustained during the June 2025 Operation Rising Lion. This earlier conflict was marked by intense exchanges, yet the current campaign’s impact on Israel’s economy and defense resources appears even more severe, underscoring the high stakes involved in the ongoing confrontation.
The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) have reported that the air campaign, named Operation Roaring Lion, has seen the deployment of approximately 4,000 munitions in just one week. This figure nearly matches the total number of munitions used throughout the entire 12-day conflict in 2025. Moreover, the frequency of Israeli air sorties has tripled compared to last year’s war, signaling a dramatic escalation in offensive operations. This surge in military activity comes despite Iranian retaliation remaining relatively measured, suggesting a strategic choice by Israel to maintain pressure through overwhelming aerial dominance.
In response to the heightened operational tempo, officials from Israel’s Defense Ministry convened with top executives from key defense contractors, including Israel Aerospace Industries, Elbit Systems, Rafael Advanced Defense Systems, and Tomer. The discussions focused on accelerating the production of munitions, reflecting a clear recognition that the economic consequences of Israel’s military ambitions must be carefully managed. This collaboration highlights the intertwining of national security priorities with the interests of Israel’s defense industry, which stands to benefit financially from the increased demand for weaponry and technology.
The financial implications of this campaign are staggering. Each Israeli airstrike carries a cost running into tens of thousands of shekels, but the expenses multiply significantly when factoring in missile defense. Since the weekend, over 200 ballistic missiles have been launched at Israel, with each interception by Arrow 2 or Arrow 3 missile defense systems costing roughly $2.5 million. This places the estimated expenditure on missile defense alone between 1 billion and 2 billion shekels. On top of this, hundreds of millions more are being spent on bombs and counter-drone operations. Analysts point out that while these purchases bolster Israel’s defense sector economically, they also blur the lines between safeguarding national security and fueling commercial interests.
The operational demands on the Israeli Air Force are equally intense. In the past four days, the air force has flown around 1,600 sorties, nearly matching the total number flown during the entire June 2025 conflict. This surge in activity is facilitated by aerial refueling support from the United States, allowing Israeli jets to remain airborne for extended periods. While this capability expands Israel’s operational reach, it also accelerates wear and tear on aircraft and contributes to pilot fatigue—factors that often receive little attention in official government statements but carry long-term consequences for military readiness.
On the Iranian side, missile attacks have remained relatively restrained. The largest salvo launched by Iran involved just 15 rockets, a stark contrast to the massive barrages of up to 100 missiles witnessed in 2025. Nevertheless, even this limited missile fire has triggered nationwide alerts across Israel, leading to significant restrictions on civilian movement and disrupting everyday commerce. The increasing frequency of drone attacks has further heightened public anxiety, as warning systems struggle to provide timely alerts, amplifying the sense of vulnerability among the population.
Experts argue that Israel’s defensive posture in this conflict serves not only security objectives but also political and commercial agendas. Ran Kochav, a former commander of Israel’s missile defense systems, emphasizes that the supply of interceptors is finite. Meanwhile, American military support, which historically focused almost exclusively on Israel, is now being stretched across multiple global theaters. This shift adds both strategic and financial pressures on Israel, complicating its ability to sustain prolonged high-intensity defense operations.
Despite the relatively limited scale of Iranian strikes, Israel’s ongoing military campaign is exacting a heavy toll in terms of economic costs, public disruption, and military overextension. Government officials continue to highlight Israel’s technological edge and air superiority, but the unfolding situation reveals the substantial price of aggressive military escalation. This raises important questions about whether Israel’s current strategy is proportionate to the threat it faces and if it can be maintained over the long term without jeopardizing national stability.
