Fateful days: the same Netanyahu, the same security system – they don’t think long term
Senior diplomatic correspondent Ariel Kahana gave me permission to translate into English an article I think everyone should read and contemplate. The original Hebrew is here.
We have experience dealing with deals from Shalit’s time • Although the lesson is clear, the same leadership that brought about the deal repeats the very same line • This is the same leadership that misread Hamas, that told itself that it was a small organization that was easy to defeat • Now it surrenders to almost all of its demands
There is no one in Israel who does not want to see the hostages back home. But in wars, first you win, and then you exchange prisoners. This is true even when the enemy is holding civilians, as happened in the War of Independence in 1948.
On the other hand, a nation that reverses the order of things and puts the good of the individual before the whole condemns itself to defeat for generations.
In Israel, we have experience in this matter from the Shalit deal. After all, the horrific attack by Hamas is a direct consequence of that wretched deal, in the framework of which we released the devil Yahya Sinwar, who is now playing with us however he wants.
Although the lesson should have been clear, the same leadership – Netanyahu and the security establishment – who brought about the same deal because “you can take the risk and deal with it” are repeating the exact same line – as if they learned nothing.
As if it was today, I remember Yoram Cohen, head of the Shin Bet in 2011, briefing us journalists at the Prime Minister’s Office and saying about the Shalit deal: “The level of risk we are taking is a security challenge we can handle. There are 20,000 fighters in the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam battalions in Gaza. Another 200 terrorists will not be catastrophic.” Well, it was catastrophic; and how it was catastrophic!
Cohen, of course, was not alone. Prime Minister Netanyahu is the one who led the decision on the deal. Avigdor Lieberman – yes, the same Lieberman who called for the collapse of Hamas all these years – was the only minister in the government to vote against it.
And here is the same Netanyahu and the same establishment repeating the same grave mistake. Unlike Hamas, they don’t think in the long term, but about the here and now.
This is the same leadership that misread Hamas all these years, that told itself and the Israeli People that Hamas was deterred and that it was a small and unintelligent organization that was easy to defeat. And now they are giving in to almost all of Hamas’ demands: The IDF has left Gaza. Hundreds of terrorists will be released and many residents of Gaza will return to the north of the Gaza Strip. We will receive 40 of our people and that is wonderful. But how will all this end? Everyone knows.
Did the state violate its contract with the hostages? Certainly. However, inflicting a historic defeat that has not been equalled since the beginnings of Zionism, on the people living in Zion, is a much more serious breach of contract regarding national security and the most fundamental interests of a nation that desires life.
And this is the meaning of the deal in the terms being forged. If we do not act in Rafah, which is what the Americans want, it will be a loss twice-over, in addition to that of Simchat Torah.
Beyond the damages for generations, there is no doubt that even in the short term the price will be terrible. In the six weeks of the truce, Hamas will, in a flash, rebuild its strength and re-establish its military and civilian rule.
Our dear soldiers will be forced to re-conquer areas already conquered – and the loss of lives will be high. The rocket fire, which has not stopped entirely, will resume at some point on a larger scale. The final accounting, as in Oslo, as in the disengagement, as in the Shalit deal, as in the long-standing policy of restraint (led by Netanyahu) towards both Hamas and Hezbollah – will be submitted with compound interest.
In conclusion, it goes without saying that everyone wants the return of the hostages. But the order of things is first V-I-C-T-O-R-Y and then a deal, the conditions of which are set by the winning side. Whoever does not act in this way fails dismally in his fundamental duties as a leader.
Thank you, Ariel Kahana.
Feature Image credit: Kobi Gideon / Government Press Office of Israel, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons
Absolutely tragic
I agree, and yet large sections of Israeli society are threatening to “burn the country” if Bibi doesn’t secure a deal, there’s the American plot to overthrow the Netanyahu government and American interference in the war in Gaza, especially regards Rafah! And, God forbid, if most of the hostages are already dead, who is going to be blamed? PM Netanyahu is damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t cut a deal to secure more hostages. And, in reality, all of Israel is held hostage by Hamas and interfering “friends.” Finish the job, win the war, destroy Hamas.
I agree. With we would really just do it and be done with it.
Correct.
Three points. Firstly, destroying Hamas in Gaza, while necessary is not sufficient to kill Hamas when it is headquartered in Qatar and is reputed to have 12000 fighters in Jordan. Secondly, to state the obvious, replacing Bibi with Benny Gantz does not replace the America oriented political Establishment. And thirdly, going forward, I would hope that Israel would at the very least tear up its memorandum of understanding with the US that it will not produce any weapons it can buy from the US. The US is not a reliable weapons supplier as Ukraine has found out. It no longer has the industrial base to produce weapons in the quantity needed for high intensity warfare. American weapons are overpriced, of limited quantity and apparently do not perform as advertised. Israel needs to produce its own weapons cheaply. A high volume of drones and missiles is more relevant to Israels needs than F35s. The problem with the US ( and until October 7, Israel ) is thatthe US is geared to fight low intensity warfare that amounts to police action. The US hasn’t fought a high intensity war since the Korean Conflictand has believed that high intensity warfare is obseleted by nuclear weapons and financialization. Economic sanctions are the first American weapon of choice. So what Israel needs to do is to become as self sufficient as possible and as much as possible, sanction proof its economy.