Netanyahu’s political predicament is already straining the Biden administration’s patience, with a growing sense that they are providing considerable support without receiving anything from him in return.
While the Americans are compelled to take Netanyahu’s political affairs under consideration, he, in turn, is unwilling to extend the same goodwill gesture toward the Democratic candidate currently residing in the White House, who is facing a challenging and tumultuous reelection campaign.
There is a reason why John Kirby, the US’s National Security Council spokesperson, stated this week that Israel has already shifted to a low-intensity conflict in the North and is expected to undergo a similar transformation in regard to the South.
This completely contradicts Netanyahu’s assertion the previous day, in which he claimed that warfare has intensified in the southern region of the Gaza Strip.
The Americans are exposing Netanyahu’s bluff, despite his attempts to keep the Israeli public in partial darkness concerning the way this war is being conducted.
The butterfly effect of the intensifying voices of unease emanating from Washington is creating ripples that are impacting Jerusalem’s political landscape.
Even at this stage of the war, marked by slow progress and by military achievements that are not apparent to an untrained eye, there is room for freedom of thought in terms of the political possibilities that could follow.
Gantz knew what he was getting into. He was called naïve at first, but this is a man who was already stung once before by the political scorpion that is Benjamin Netanyahu, when Gantz joined the Covid unity government.
He came into this current government with eyes wide open, hopeful that after October 07, 2023 something might have changed in Israel’s most seasoned politician.
It had, but that did not last long. Presently, many in the political sphere believe that Gantz is devising his exit strategy. When will he leave?
To answer that question, one must understand the power dynamics within the government, specifically within the war cabinet.
Gantz and Gadi Eisenkot, a minister without a portfolio, joined the emergency government to embody the well-worn political slogan of ‘pulling their weight,’ contributing their share, and actively participating in the war effort.
Both entered the military arena, securing two of the five seats in the national emergency unity government’s war cabinet, and have emerged as two of the most pivotal players in the war’s management.
However, having 100 day lapsed since they joined, it seems that their influence on the war’s management is diminishing.
There are several examples of this, the most prominent of which revolves around the hostages’ release. It has been more than 50 days since the last hostage was set free, and it seems like Israel is limping along, with little sparks of hope for the 136 hostages who are still being held captive in Gaza in tunnels and secret locations, rising, then falling.
Every few weeks, Hamas releases additional sadistic videos which often disclose the tragic news that a few more hostages have been murdered.
Eisenkot believes that it is time to stop and consider where the war machine needs to be led next, and whether the victories Israel has achieved so far have reached a point that justifies considering a ceasefire in exchange for the release of the hostages.
He has argued that at the very least, this option should be explored.
“We need to stop lying to ourselves,” Eisenkot states. “We must be courageous and aim for an acceptable deal that will bring all of the hostages’ home. Time is running out, and each passing day is putting their lives in further jeopardy. We cannot stick blindly to the same strategy while the hostages are still in captivity. Now is the critical stage in which bold decisions must be made. Otherwise, we may as well throw in the towel.”
Up until now, Eisenkot has been perceived as a somewhat unremarkable politician, not drawing much attention due to his perceived neutrality and lack of charisma.
In recent weeks, he has been gaining prominence, as he articulates opinions that resonate with public sentiment.
If a popularity poll were to be conducted now, Eisenkot, who recently buried his son who was killed in Gaza, would garner high approval ratings.
Eisenkot and Gantz are up against Defense Minister Yoav Gallant and Netanyahu, who believe that exerting military force is the key to overcoming Hamas and securing the release of hostages, echoing the strategy that preceded the previous hostage release.
Yet, 50 days have passed without significant progress. This issue could turn into an Archimedean point that could force Gantz and Eisenkot to withdraw from the government.
Meanwhile, both feel that they still hold sway over decisions, and as long as IDF soldiers are still fighting in Gaza, the war must go on.
Furthermore, stepping down at this juncture carries significant political risks, since such a decision could be interpreted as Gantz and Eisenkot escaping responsibility, which could critically damage the number of seats the currently popular National Unity party could secure in the future.
Netanyahu is acutely aware of these considerations, and has been actively working to exert control. As has been depicted in the past, Netanyahu is the type of politician who never stops planning for the day after. That is, their day after.
To achieve this, he has been focusing on strengthening his coalition, as what is acceptable during normal times, is not so during wartime, since the prime minister has found little room to make a move in the cabinet.
While war cabinet meetings have been scheduled to address what the day after the war will look like for Israel, a comprehensive discussion on this matter has yet to take place.
In fact, senior IDF officials have remarked that if the government does not take a stance soon, the IDF will be forced to return to areas that it had already conquered, then relinquished.
No comments:
Post a Comment