The incident in which an IDF Armored Corps soldier was left behind in the Palestinian village of Budrus last week fell right into the lap of Chief of General Staff Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz: He finally has a significant command incident that he can use to set clear guidelines. Very few positive things can be said about Battalion 74s operation last week west of Ramallah. Naturally, when a soldier is accidentally left behind it pushes all the other issues aside, but they still warrant serious review. For example: how (and under whose authority) the operation took place when there was a clear directive to refrain from activity in Palestinian areas during the visit of U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, for fear that an isolated event would fuel an embarrassing diplomatic incident? The pursuit of a top ranking terrorist or a ticking time bomb would perhaps have justified the act, but the operation was aimed at nabbing a car thief. Without going into why soldiers were deployed to chase common criminals, was it really crucial at that specific time? Luckily, the operation was carried out in a friendly village whose inhabitants avoid trouble in order to preserve their livelihoods, dependent on commerce with Israel. But what if the populace had been different- But those are the easy questions. The main issue is the aforementioned forgotten soldier. It was the Palestinians who notified the IDF that the soldier had been left behind. But when they spoke to the IDF, the District Coordination and Liaison denied that the operation was ever carried out. Later, the battalion changed their story and claimed that they had maintained eye contact with the missing soldier, when in fact he had been separated from the group for nearly ten minutes. It was only late that night that an accurate version of the event was related, but by then the chief of staff was already involved, and he was angry. The generals of the Central Command, who had jurisdiction over the region, and Northern Command, which the battalion belongs to, were quick to pick up on their commanders spirit and rushed to take action: the initial investigation was swift and the battalion commander was relieved of his command until the conclusion of the final investigation later this week. It is safe to assume that only a miracle will save the battalion commander now. When Division 80 failed last summer to prevent the terrorist attack on route 12 near Eilat, Gantz, going against his initial reaction, avoided taking punitive measures and said I can forgive professional errors, but ethical and careless mistakes - no. The incident at Budrus embodies both: the carelessness of leaving a soldier behind, the unethical failure to report it and later the changing of stories. This is a good opportunity for Gantz to shape his credo and set things straight on what is and is not permissible and where the tolerant Gantz ends and where the assertive chief of General Staff begins. After a year at the helm of the IDF, and considering the current challenges he faces (as do we), it is doubtful Gantz will pass up this opportunity.
