Comptroller's Report Will Shorten Government's Shelf Life

Jerusalem, 1 March, 2017 (TPS) -- Politicians began spinning the State Comptroller’s report on Operation Protective Edge even before it had been officially released, as senior members of Israel’s political echelon began positioning themselves to exploit the report in service of their agendas and interests. Ministers received copies of the embargoed report several days before its release, as is standard procedure. Leaking information about it before publication was against the law, but this did not deter Housing Minister Yoav Galant and Education Minister and Jewish Home leader Naftali Bennet from weighing in on the document earlier in the week.

This is a clear sign that the conventional wisdom has decisively changed. Until six months ago, the general consensus among political pundits, journalists and the politicians themselves was that this government had a reasonable chance of being the one of the very few governments in Israel’s history to last out its entire term. This is no longer the case, and most informed (and not so informed) observers think the country will go to the polls either towards the end of 2017, or early 2018.

Bennet’s changing attitude reflects this. Until the report was released to the ministers, the Bayit Yehudi leader had been giving Netanyahu unqualified support, saying that even if he was indicted, he could and should remain in office, and not be forced to resign. This is no longer the case. He is still supporting the PM, but in a more nuanced and ambivalent tone. Clearly he is weighing his options, and if he decides the time is ripe to challenge Netanyahu for leader of the entire right wing  camp, he will do so, using the report and Netanyahu’s legal woes to bring down the government. Recent statements by Bezalel Smotrich and other Bayit Yehudi backbenchers reflect this change. “The bottom line is that the report will not bring the government down, but will contribute to bringing that day closer,” said a senior Likud source, reflecting views one is hearing across the political spectrum, at this stage only off the record.

Dr. Ron Shleifer, a senior lecturer at Ariel University’s School of Mass Communications and an expert in psychological and media warfare, agrees with that assessment, saying the spin and maneuvering have much more to do with preparing for the day the government falls than with the actual issues. He mentioned the two most conspicuous players in the game, Housing Minister Yoav Galant (Kulanu) and Bayit Yehudi leader Naftali Bennet.

“The motives for Galant’s blistering attack on Gantz, whom he called an incompetent and unworthy commander,  are primarily  personal, ego and revenge,” said Shleifer. “Galant, it should be remembered, has a big axe to grind. He regards Gantz as a usurper.” (Galant, himself a major general in the IDF, had already been designated by then-Defense Minister Ehud Barak to succeed Gabi Ashkenazi as head of the military , but was forced to relinquish the post after he became embroiled in a scandal involving illegally constructed additions to his house.)

“He [Galant] regards Gantz as an undeserving incompetent who assumed a position he had already been passed over for by PM Netanyahu and Defense Minister Barak, who considered Galant a worthier and better candidate.”.

Galant  has political aspirations far above his current post. Like many senior IDF generals, the day he was told he had been chosen as the next COS, he already began seeing himself as a future defense minister or prime minister. If Gantz and Ya’alon are removed from the scene, his chances of succeeding his Ehud Barak as the country’s “Mr. Defense and Security” increase.

According to Schleifer, Naftali Bennett is the potential big winner of the tangled and convoluted game now being played.

“Bennet, the only cabinet minister to emerge unscathed from the report, is playing a much deeper and more sophisticated game, with the ultimate goal of replacing Netanayhu in the PM’s office”.

In order to understand Bennet’s game, one has to appreciate his position. He has it all, he is an affluent, self-made man (prior to entering politics he was a successful hi-tech entrepreneur), charismatic, erudite and eloquent. He does not owe favors to anybody; in fact quite the opposite is true. People owe him. He has a good marriage to an accomplished, attractive woman and a solid and stable family life.

In other words, there are no skeletons in his closet, and no potential for rivals to fabricate any. He is also a political outsider. He did not rise through the party ranks, but rather took it over much as an entrepreneur would plan and implement a hostile takeover.

All this makes him dangerous to the political system, and especially to the “old boys club”. They are scared that if he is ever in a position to run the club, rather than merely to rearrange the furniture, he will drive a bulldozer over it.

“Bennet is exploiting the report and the fact that he was the only minister to appreciate the situation, and realize that the IDF had no answer to effectively counter the threat posed by the tunnels, and that Netanyahu had not appropriately briefed the cabinet,” Schleifer added.

Bennet clearly senses that Netanyahu is like an aging lion, still dangerous but well past his prime. Initially he gave the PM unqualified support over the latter’s mounting legal problems, but in recent days Bennett has changed his tune somewhat. He is now clearly sizing up the situation before deciding when the lion is weak enough for the relative newcomer to openly challenge now, or whether to wait for a better opportunity.

“Overall this is another sad example of politicians cynically exploiting security issues for their own political interests. Ultimately the biggest loser will be the IDF,” said Schleifer.

A similar sentiment was voiced by Prof. Udi Loebel, from Ariel University and Bar Ilan’s Begin-Sadat Centre for Strategic Studies, a leading authority in the relationships between military and civilian leaderships.

“What we are seeing is unfortunately not new,” he said. “Exploiting legitimate criticism of security related issues for political purposes has long ago become standard in Israel, much more than in other Western democracies. It’s not just that Israel has to deal with military and security issues far more frequently and intensively than other countries, it’s also certain aspects our problematic political culture, which rewards this kind of behavior.”

“In Israel every retiring general sees himself as a cabinet minister or even prime minister. In no other democracy do you see such a rapid crossover of senior commanders into political life. Another aspect is that the ethics of our political culture are wanting, which means it lacks any sense of ‘it’s not done, it’s not cricket’, which means our system lacks the checks and balances ethical inhibitions provide.”

Prof. Loebel also cited our coalition system as a significant contributing factor. “In every Israeli government, some of the coalition partners are also political rivals, who while serving in a government, are at the same time looking for an opportunity to bring it down if they think they will benefit from early elections.”

“Overall I think that if one ignores the hype and spins, there is nothing dramatic about this report,” he said.

He mentioned the changing attitudes regarding bereavement, and its impact on the public discourse and politics. “The days where the majority of bereaved parents were secular Ashkenazis, because most of the soldiers in the elite combat units , where there are more casualties, were secular Ashkenazis, are gone..” He said that today these units are much more reflective of Israeli society, with far more national religious and Mizrahi-Sephardi (Jews from Middle Eastern background) soldiers than one would find in those units a generation ago. “Whereas a generation ago the majority of bereaved parents had centre-left or left wing views, this is no longer the case, and as a result attitudes towards bereavement, and how and if to manifest it in public debates over security related issues have changed. In the past a report like this would have generated dissent and protest from an activist group like Four Mothers.”  This was a left wing group whose dissent over the casualties the IDF was incurring as a result of its prolonged occupation of southern Lebanon contributed to the decision to withdraw from there.

He ended by saying that the level of politicization of security issues in Israel was insane, and that the result was significant underinvestment in public health, public transport, welfare, housing and other civil society infrastructures.

Both men said that the ultimate losers of the report will be the IDF and the bereaved parents, who will end up as pawns in other people’s chess games.

Motis Matt, Staff Sergeant Lee Matt’s father,  who fell on active duty during Operation said that unfortunately the report’s findings did not surprise him. “Lee’s friends, who also took part in the fighting, and visited us during and after the shiva’a (Jewish seven day mourning period) told us that the way the operation was handled was a shambles. What is particularly disturbing to us is that the country’s political and military Israeli leadership has not stepped up and taken responsibility. To hear the former Chief of Staff (Benny Gantz-YA) say he does not accept the conclusions of the report is inappropriate, even insulting behavior. He should have unconditionally accepted the report, and said he would work  with his successor in rectifying whatever needed to be fixed”.

“We, who lost our son, demand the government appoint a National Judicial Investigation Committee, with a mandate to impose sanctions on those it deems responsible for the mistakes and negligence that resulted in unnecessary casualties. Lee will never come back, the important thing now is to ensure other parents do not have to go through what we have, losing a son because of leaders’ incompetence”.

Gili Eliyahu-Adler contributed to this report.