Historically the army has been the one institution in Israel that was sacrosanct. The army and the conduct of its officers and commanders were rarely if ever questioned. As is the case in all democracies, the military brass answered the political leadership and followed the dictates of the elected Government’s leaders. Citizens questioned political judgments and diplomatic decisions, but not the actions of the military—except in very rare situations. Similarly, the military high command kept all their concerns or skepticism or strategic guidance strictly before the eyes of the decision-makers and not the public or the media. This is one of the reasons that there is so much national angst among the Israeli public about how the Gaza War has been and is being conducted. It is why after seven months of fighting between Israel and Hamas, members of the Netanyahu War Cabinet who have been intimately involved in the conduct of the war and who themselves are former high echelon members of the IDF appear to have begun to challenge the conduct of the war at the highest levels and, now, even in public.
The Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, who was fired once briefly by Netanyahu due to Gallant’s opposition to the judicial reform plan, and who is a critical member of the War Cabinet, has challenged the Prime Minister in public to disclose how he intends, politically, to end the war. It has been evident for some time that Gallant and a number of other Israeli national security leaders favor Israel encouraging the creation of a Palestinian political entity—even the Palestinian Authority—other than Hamas to manage Gaza. These officials oppose any strategy offered by Bibi’s more extreme supporters who seek Israeli reoccupation—and resettlement--of Gaza.
Given Netanyahu’s continuing tension with the Biden Administration and the political tension it has created both in Israel and in Washington, Netanyahu can ill afford a major disruption and cabinet crisis at home. His extremist coalition has Bibi pinned against a wall, since his political survival will depend on his coalition remaining intact. For Gallant and the other security chiefs resigning while the war with Hamas continues could create an extreme political crisis.
While this set of critical strategic questions are confronting the Netanyahu Government, it is facing the need to address a serious political demand of another wing of the Government, the Charedim, the ultra-Orthodox parties. There had been an agreement when the charedi factions joined the Government that Bibi would agree to make permanent the military deferment of all those Israeli men—largely from the charedi camp—studying in religious schools or yeshivot. Henceforth, they would statutorily receive an automatic exemption from conscription in the IDF. The ultra-Orthodox parties had demanded that this be made permanent under Israeli law.
There are parties within—as well as outside--Netanyahu’s coalition, who oppose this legislation. During the first few months of the War, the need for additional personnel became apparent. The absence of an entire segment of age-appropriate soldiers from military service became acutely obvious to many. The question for Netanyahu will be whether his coalition members who support this legislation will demand the vote and force coalition Members opposing the legislation to vote for it anyway or will they challenge the viability of the coalition. This could create a political crisis for Netanyahu—which he desperately is seeking to avoid---a vote of no-confidence and probable elections. Netanyahu’s political ability to stay in power and keep all the coalition members happy would probably necessitate a deferral of the vote on the conscription issue “until the conclusion of the War”; despite the fact that the High Court has ruled that the conscription status quo can no longer be tolerated.
Given the tragedy that Israel suffered on October 7th as well as the soldiers killed and wounded during the war, it would be an ignominious moment for Israel if the war were to conclude because of a government’s inability to address internal political crises. It would also bring to a pathetic end the career of Israel’s longest standing prime minister.
----------
Gallant Footnote
Gallant’s conduct reflects several key and prospective observations. First, Gallant undoubtedly will not be welcomed back to Likud whenever the next elections are held so he would need to seek a political future elsewhere. Second, he appreciates the role and place of the military in Israeli society and resents what he believes has been its abuse in Gaza. Third, like Ariel Sharon—also an illustrious general—he appears prepared to change his mind as Sharon did in withdrawing from Gaza in 2005. Finally, like Prime Minister Menachem Begin and President Ronald Reagan, Gallant recognizes the need to sustain and not take for granted the importance of a strong, supportive relationship for Israel from the United States.
Bình luận