T. Belman. It also makes him a candidate for Prime Minister. Wasn’t it Bennett who also pressed to destroy the tunnels once their existence came to light?
The compromise reached by Netanyahu and Bennett will save the coalition and strengthen the security cabinet, but the risk of war – which has to do more with top officials’ judgement – still remains.
By Amos Harel, HAARETZ May 30, 2016
The somewhat forced compromise between Habayit Hayehudi and the Likud party, reached Sunday night in the last minute, should not void the weight of demands made by Minister Naftali Bennett to strengthen the security cabinet.
The events of the past week, up until Sunday night’s agreement allowing the confirmation of Avigdor Lieberman’s appointment as defense minister, may also give an indication of what’s coming – the difficulties expected in the work of the new right-wing coalition.
The basis for Naftali Bennett’s demand to increase the security cabinet’s profile is his deep distrust for the way security decisions are made. This lack of trust is aimed at Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and even more at the incoming defense minister, Lieberman.
But it’s also aimed at the long-standing tradition of prime ministers and defense ministers in cahoots with the heads of the security agencies, who often seek to limit the information the security cabinet receives. Bennett is also disappointed with the performance of the National Security Council.
One of Bennett’s arguments is that there is no military secretary advising the security cabinet. Overall, his criticism of the security cabinet’s weakness, its lack of information and its inability to digest the information it does receive are supported, even if off the record, by other members of the panel.
At the end of last week, a forum of former ministers, comprised of politicians from various political camps who convene periodically at the Israel Democracy Institute, issued a letter of support for Bennett’s demands. And the reports by investigative committees and the state comptroller over the past decade bolster Bennett’s arguments about the decision-making process and the security cabinet’s weakness.
The Winograd Report on the 2006 Second Lebanon War was scathingly critical of how the decision was made to launch that conflict. That report stressed the NSC’s inefficacy but noted that the security cabinet was also emasculated because decisions were made by small, unofficial forums that met in Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s office.
Then there was the state comptroller’s report on the seizing of the Gaza-bound aid ship the Mavi Marmara in 2010. It stated that the decision-making process under Netanyahu took place “with no orderly staff work that was summarized, documented and coordinated.” It said Netanyahu only convened a debate among his confidants “on the spot” with no preparation and without involving the agencies girding for the flotilla’s arrival.
In the case of the 2014 Gaza war, as was reported in Haaretz, the state comptroller’s draft report states that the security cabinet was denied crucial information before the conflict erupted and was given only a partial picture throughout the fighting.
The most blatant information gap related to the attack tunnels dug by Hamas under the Gaza border into Israel. Netanyahu and Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon were aware of the gravity of the threat, and of Israel’s limited intelligence on Hamas’ plans. They knew that the military only had sketchy plans for dealing with the danger. But most of the security cabinet knew nothing.
Only during the week of the escalation in early July 2014 did the security cabinet begin addressing the tunnels seriously. On Sunday Army Radio has reported that during internal military discussions after the war there was serious criticism of the army’s preparedness to deal with the tunnels. Officers also mentioned the gap between progress in destroying the tunnels and what was told to the public. Once again, members of the security cabinet have only learned of this debate now.
It is doubtful that the compromise reached overnight will actually strengthen the work of the security cabinet, as Bennett suggests. The bolstering of the security cabinet could only bring some balance to decisions taken mainly by the prime minister, defense minister and the IDF chief of staff. And in any case, it’s the replacement of Ya’alon with Lieberman, not the weakness of the security cabinet, that is most worrisome.
The risk of war, which could break out without any planned Israeli initiative as has happened a few times in the past 10 years, is linked more to the quality of top officials’ judgment than to the decision-making structure. Even though the Winograd Report seems to state otherwise, the main problem with the Olmert government’s running of the 2006 war wasn’t procedural. It was leaders who turned out to be inexperienced, careless and didn’t think things through.
Despite Bennett’s principled demands, we can’t ignore the political context. The considerable support he’s getting from those who agree with his requests, as well as from those who want to bring down the government, is strengthening his position as a potential defense minister in the next round. Together with his vow to defend the lives of the soldiers and his declaration that he seeks nothing for himself or his party, Bennett tried to score points by choosing to confront Netanyahu on a fundamental security question.
When he first ran at the head of Habayit Hayehudi in 2012-13, his military background played a central role in the campaign. His message to young secular voters was, if you rely on us kippa-wearing officers in battle, there’s no reason not to rely on us in the Knesset. It was a strategy that served him well, and now it took him further – presenting him as a future defense minister candidate – at least until he folded under the risk of being accused of bringing about the collapse of the right-wing coalition.
@ bernard ross:
Ya’alon is almost surely financed already from overseas as are most of the rest of his aggregate passing as IDF generals of sorts.
Since Oslo that flotsam has USED our children as cannon fodder and USED the rest of the population as targets.
Recently and again they intentionally created conditions for a “cease fire” and rearming of Hamas while causing just as intentionally casualties among the troops and civilians.
They INTENTIONALLY disarmed or prevented arming civilians while “arming” our kids in the IDF with “rubber and paint ball bullets”, at the same time pretending to offer air cover after warning in advance the enemy, and then bombing empty sheds or boulders.
Systematically the treasonous trash has blocked true military actions against their “partners”.
They institutionalized brutal torture, incarceration w/o trials, using of shock troops to destroy Jewish homes and villages… Abandoned Heritage key sites…
The item also committed the State to purchase a number of junk, garbage, aircraft ranging from a disastrous hybrid helicopter to the F-35.
Mr. Bennett repeatedly warned about the HAMAS tunnels while the criminals cadre in “command” did all possible to prevent destroying all of the tunnels.
Is the people coming to terms to what the Peresite renegades have wrought upon all of us since Oslo or even before? I cannot say that we have. It is of some comfort that at times there are hints to that effect though.
the extreme minority are those who declare falsely that jews burned a baby, the extreme minority are those willing to use the false declaration to rush through a law to incarcerate jews without evidence, the extreme minority are those who declare a soldier guilty before investigation begins, the extreme minority are those who abuse their position of authority to bully their subordinates to create false evidence, create false indictments, the extreme minority is those who have his subordinates give speeches in support of his fake “values” alibi.
says he who tried to separate dissenters, nationalists and zionists from the body of Israel with false flags and fascist laws, says he who incited the world to murder Jews by declaring to them that jews burned a baby with no evidence, says he who put jews in jail and had them tortured with no evidence…. who in Israel today can be more inciting or separating than Yaalon?
what sort of sick morality enables one to falsely incarcerate and torture without evidence, what sick morality tells the world that jews burned a baby without evidence, what sick morality abuses his leadership to bully his subordinates to corrupt their positions as investigators, prosecutors and judges?
thank you for that permission… I see him as a delusional megalomaniacal psychopath who has managed to escape the indictment he deserves because a political AG is busy chasing travel expenses and other sudden balloons.
Although I like Netanyahu, I like Naftali better. I realize that being the PM of Israel is likely the most thankless and difficult job in the world, I find that Netanyahu is way too much of a politician whereas Naftali isn’t and therefore he’d be a far better and appropriate leader. Despite being a secular Jew, I love that Naftali wears a kipa. Message to the world: Israel is a JEWISH homeland. Get used to it. I believe that Naftali will be far more effective at spreading that message!
author provided no support for this add on. I think its a distrust of Netanyahu and how he and Yaalon deceived the cabinet.
A repeated intentional pattern of serial deceit…. not mentioned in this is the Duma incident, the MOunt and the soldier.
why would that replacement be most worrying? We have serial deception of the cabinet, incitement againts settlers, endangerment of Jews by decalring they burned a baby, conspiring to create a legal pathway to incarcerate dissenters without evidence based on a fake false flag crime which caused the deaths of many Jews, the instruction of subordinates to illegally find a soldier guilty, the corruption of Golan by having him echo the fake morality issue, the betrayal of the soldier by his commander….. sound like a big mess avoided by someone who is using the military ladder to create a persona for himself and subordinates in order to become the PM.
I find Mr. Bennett’s refreshing posture quite appealing.
To be honest, I did not expect him to have matured to that extent. Yet, he appears to have done so.
He understood that it is not longer a question of one Ya’alon or another, they are all cloned. The “rubber bullet” and paint ball rifles aggregates must the set aside to the root. Cease fires as a strategy must be ended.
Mr. Bennett is well set right now.
The question is strategy and doctrine.