Adapted from an article by Emanuel Shilo, editor of the Besheva weekly, translated by Hillel Fendel.
Instead of the demand for another divisive election campaign in the middle of a war, it would be best if those who claim to seek unity and reconciliation call for a genuine unity government right now.
After the horrific Hamas massacre that befell us, there were hopes for a great domestic change. We hoped we could put aside the argumentative political discourse of the preceding years, and mainly months, for at least as long as we needed to unite around common goals vital to our future and our very survival.
We hoped for a genuine unity government that would radiate reconciliation and stability, and would strengthen Israel from within against its enemies without. We wanted a different media discourse, one that would avoid wild accusations, push off the obsessive preoccupation with finding culprits, and discuss only what needs to be done now and in the near future.
So we hoped…
Despite all our battlefield successes so far, including the near-destruction of Hamas, demolition of tunnels and other terrorist infrastructures, finding critical intelligence materials and millions of shekels in terrorism-funding, and killing of terrorists, we are still in a very difficult war. We are still missing 134 hostages, up to 3/4 of whom are assumed to be alive, and the residents of many towns in the south and north are still not home and cannot safely return. At such a time, we want to engage in positive and constructive dialogue – not politics and mud-slinging.
But there are forces at play that won't let us. They believe, incredibly so, that the one thing Israel needs now is new elections. Their goal, of course, is to rid the country of Binyamin Netanyahu, no matter what the cost. They didn't wait long after the massacre to return to mud-slinging, mainly against him.
It's true that politically, we do have an emergency unity government, and Benny Ganz and his party deserve credit for making it happen when they joined the government four days after the war was forced upon us. However, it does not signal real unity. On the contrary; Ganz gives the constant impression that he is planning to quit the first moment he can.
The media situation is even worse. Significant parts of it returned much too quickly to the pre-Simchat Torah mode, with their central line of attack being a frontal offensive against Netanyahu. A public commission of inquiry has not yet been established, but for many in the media, Netanyahu's responsibility for everything having to do with the massacre is a given; it need not be explained, but rather repeated in different formulations as often as possible.
Though even the media largely takes the line that now is a time for reconciliation, showing respect, and judging each other favorably, there is one great exception: Binyamin Netanyahu. About him, the media permits itself to say whatever it wants: that he cares only about his own political survival, that he doesn't care if the hostages die, that he is lengthening the war for no good reason, and that everything happening now is his fault. They give him no credit at all for the quite successful war being waged in Gaza under his leadership, and deny him the same temporary immunity that they have given the IDF Chief of Staff, the Chief of Intelligence, the Southern Command General, the Defense Minister, and everyone else involved 24/7 in the war effort.
And so, in the midst of a grinding, costly war, we are witness to a campaign, financed with huge sums, that demands new elections soon. As if we can afford to engage now in a stormy election campaign rife with mutual accusations and worse. Most unfortunately, even some of the best people in our midst, who have great achievements for our society under their belts, have fallen into this trap. By agreeing that new elections are needed quickly, they grant this call legitimacy that enables extremists and destructive protest groups – whose role in bringing us to where today must also be investigated – to continue their aggressive and divisive campaign.
At this time, then, we cannot sit on the fence, but must rather express and present our position. The alternative is a one-sided monologue that is liable to lead to terrible mistakes, such as caving in to the most extreme Hamas conditions for the release of hostages, including even calamitously stopping the war.
Let us not be naïve. The demand for new elections in the middle of a war is based only on the poll findings that Netanyahu's Likud party will lose. This is their only goal: to depose Netanyahu – war or no war, hostages or no hostages.
On the other hand, there is no need to be a blind follower of Netanyahu as if he was a cult leader. Even nationalists can legitimately think that he made some big mistakes, even while believing that the primary blame for the Oct. 7th catastrophe lays at the doorstep of the security establishment leaders.
For instance: The black intelligence hole regarding everything that happened that day, and before it, must be carefully addressed. Also to be investigated is the basis of the "conception," so widely held throughout all top leadership levels, that Hamas is "deterred" and not interested in war. And what about the physical barrier – largely a tall fence with cameras, sensors, and other technological aids – that cost an estimated $3.5 billion to build and was easily broken through in dozens of places that tragic morning? And what of the late-night Zoom meeting called by the GSS head with the IDF Chief of Staff and others just hours before the Hamas invasion, in which it was decided to postpone discussion of the warnings of what might happen, without even informing the government echelons? All this is primarily the fault of the military and intelligence arms, not the government.
Again, there were many strategic errors in which Netanyahu's large share cannot be denied. The most blatant is the Gilad Shalit deal, which gave Hamas its leader Sinwar, other top terrorists, and a tremendous motivation to pull off other such kidnappings. There is also the "containment" strategy, which enabled Hamas to build itself militarily while we deluded ourselves into thinking that we can always deter it from using its increasing strength. Going further back, there were the Oslo Agreements to which Netanyahu objected with full force, but accepted them as a done deal – and of course Ariel Sharon's Disengagement of 2005, which Netanyahu did not really fight to thwart. But in all these, Netanyahu was not alone; nearly all his political critics and rivals were party to at least some of them, if not all.
So let’s assume that we have new elections and Netanyahu is defeated – who will take his place? Benny Ganz or Gadi Eisencott, who were full partners to the construction of the failed Gaza border obstacle and the containment strategy and the like?
The last thing we need now is another election campaign. Instead, if we truly want reconciliation at home and victory in war, let's establish here and now a genuine unity government in the current Knesset. This should be a government without automatic disqualifications of particular personages (such as Netanyahu). It must be one that will serve at least until peace returns to the land and the evacuated citizens are able to return home. And it must be one in which controversial issues are addressed and resolved via dialogue and a true will to reach a compromise.