Responsibility versus superficiality
On Wednesday, I watched the trio that led Operation Protective Edge and I wondered why Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon and IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz chose to appear for the second time in nine days claiming Israel's victory. Truly, suffice it to say that, as things stand, Hamas was defeated twice: It was hit hard by the Israeli Air Force, at sea, and underground (with the exception of mortar fire), and not a single one of its political demands was met.
Israel has made intelligent decisions throughout the operation: it expressed willingness to accept cease-fires in exchange for international support; and its escalating aerial campaign resulted in Hamas begging for a cease-fire without having made a single achievement. But the wisest decision was made during unique circumstances, at a fateful juncture.
Israel was aware of the existence of Hamas' tunnels, and was in the process of formulating a counter-tunnel operation, planned for the latter half of 2014. Operation Protective Edge pushed up the military's plan because it had learned that Hamas intended to use the tunnels to storm Israeli communities on Rosh Hashanah. However, the government and the Israel Defense Forces erred in not making the elimination of the tunnel threat their top priority.
Once the magnitude of the threat was realized, the operational outline was redrawn, and a ground incursion of the Gaza Strip took place -- contrary to the original plan. The military operated soundly and the tunnels were unearthed and destroyed. As that happened, the temptation arose to seize control of the entire Gaza Strip, but the Netanyahu-Ya'alon-Gantz trio nipped it in the bud, and even rushed to order the ground troops to leave the Strip. "Who is strong? He who overcomes his inclinations" (Avot 4:1).
This was a pivotal event, and it explains the political developments since Operation Protective Edge drew to a close, specifically, the battle over public opinion regarding the outcome, which has been waged between those who bear a message of strength and responsibility versus those conveying populism and superficiality.
In its initial phase, the "trio" was rapidly losing favor with the public. Indeed, there isn't a single Israeli who wouldn't have loved to see Hamas' rule in Gaza toppled, to have chopped off the snake's head, or any other such heated expression that offers a solution in one fell swoop. On Wednesday, Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman declared that there is no room for a cease-fire as long as Hamas remains in power in Gaza. This is shortsighted politics that must be taken with a grain of salt.
Before too long, one of two scenarios will play out: either a desperate Hamas will start firing rockets again -- though Netanyahu and Ya'alon warned on Wednesday that the IDF would step up its attacks to the same extent that it did between the cease-fires in the latest round of fighting that ended this week -- or Hamas, getting nothing at all, will keep the peace thanks to the deterrence that was reinstated by the Gaza campaign. If this happens -- nobody will hear about Lieberman's alternative plan to destroy Hamas here and now, "with one blow."
It is just too bad that he has managed to exploit Netanyahu's mistake, namely, not bringing the cease-fire to the cabinet for approval. As a result of the decision to bypass a vote, the foreign minister can proclaim his opposition to the cease-fire. In the absence of a vote, he is exempt from coalition rules. These circumstances necessitate the kind of press conference we saw broadcast on Wednesday.
טעינו? נתקן! אם מצאתם טעות בכתבה, נשמח שתשתפו אותנו