In his attack on the Israeli army, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said, “Israel is a state with an army, not an army with a state.” This statement came about a month after Defense Minister Yoav Galant’s statements in which he announced his opposition to Netanyahu’s directives regarding the post-war Gaza Strip, saying that he would oppose any Israeli military rule of the Strip, because it would be bloody, costly, and would last for years.
A few days later, Israeli army spokesman Daniel Hagari came and undermined the Israeli narrative about the aggression against the Gaza Strip in an interview with the Israeli Channel 13 (Netanyahu considers that the channel is affiliated with the Israeli left that opposes him) when he considered that “Hamas is a party and an idea implanted among the people, and who thinks that we can Eradicating it is wrong.”
Netanyahu’s office responded by saying, “The political security cabinet headed by Prime Minister Netanyahu determined that one of the goals of the war is to destroy Hamas’ military and governmental capabilities,” and “the army is committed to that.”
These contradictory statements, which came at a time when the occupation was waging the longest war in its history, revealed the escalation of the conflict between the political establishment and the military and security establishment.
Increasing disagreements
Although the army was quick to clarify Hagari’s statements and his emphasis on commitment to the war goals set by the mini-ministerial council, they gave indications that the dispute between the political and security institutions has become broader, as observers see.
Strategic and military expert Hatem Karim Al-Falahi believes that “Haghari did not speak personally, but rather with the language of the army and its approach in Gaza… as the army refuses to throw it into a holocaust and attrition, especially since the challenges are great on the northern front and the West Bank front, and it is not possible to confront all of these challenges at the same time.” One”.
While the Israeli newspaper Haaretz saw that the army now has clear reasons to blame Netanyahu, who did not miss an opportunity during the past months to blame senior army and intelligence commanders for what happened on the seventh of last October, when the Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades, the military wing of the movement, launched Hamas, the Battle of Al-Aqsa Flood.
Army commanders have long sought to persuade Netanyahu and the War Council to provide them with a strategic framework since the beginning of the fighting, but he has rejected their request every time, prompting the General Staff to form its own team to try to formulate strategic ideas of its own.
While the expert in Israeli affairs, Dr. Ashraf Badr, considered that Hagari’s speech indicates that the army wants to settle scores with Netanyahu that extend back to more than 20 years, during which Netanyahu ruled the country and marginalized the army institution, which controlled the decision-making joints in the state, and began to appoint whomever he wanted and dismiss. Whoever he wants from his position.
The Gaza war erupts into conflict
Concern for the occupation army, its future, and fear of its disintegration were not the result of the war on Gaza; Last July, Israeli Channel 12 reported that Chief of Staff Herzi Halevy handed Netanyahu and Gallant a document that focused on the context of army cohesion and the loss of confidence of Israelis and those working in the army, due to the government’s attempt to vote on the reasonableness law and reduce the powers of the Supreme Court.
The Gaza War came months later, increasing army commanders’ fears of what they might be exposed to due to the losses they suffered at the hands of the resistance in the Strip.
On June 11, Israeli Channel 12 said that Halevy informed the political leadership of the army’s need for 15 new battalions, the size of a military division of 4,500 soldiers, so that it can carry out its tasks on several fronts. He warned of what he called a severe shortage of manpower within the Israeli army to achieve the required goals.
In his analysis of the military scene in Gaza, the strategic expert Al-Falahi stated in statements to Tel Aviv Tribune that the Israeli army sets goals different from the goals of the Netanyahu government, which demands the removal of Hamas’ military and governmental capabilities, and the killing of its leaders, in addition to the recovery of Israeli prisoners in Gaza through military pressure.
The course of the war in Gaza and its results were warned by Israeli Army Reserve Major General Yitzhak Brik last May when he stated that the army does not have the ability to overthrow the Hamas movement even if the war lasts for a long time, indicating that if Israel continues the war, it will suffer serious losses represented by the collapse of the army. Israeli reserve within a short period.
As Amos Harel, an analyst for Haaretz newspaper, says, “A series of discussions held in the past few weeks with high-ranking figures in the defense establishment increasingly indicate that Israel is heading towards a catastrophic, multi-dimensional failure.”
Netanyahu and the right
The dispute between the army, on the one hand, and Netanyahu and the right-wing parties allied with him, on the other hand, was not the result of the current stage, but rather is a deep-rooted dispute.
Netanyahu considers the army commanders to be his competitors for the position of prime minister, as there is a tradition in Israel that army commanders enter politics after their retirement.
This is a tradition that makes current and retired leaders potential opponents to other non-military politicians, such as Netanyahu.
Netanyahu considered that he lost the 1999 elections under the influence of harsh criticism from the Center Party, which was co-led by former Israeli army chief of staff Amnon Lipkin-Shahak, in addition to attacks launched by the leader of the Labor Party at the time, Ehud Barak, himself a former head of the Israeli army. .
His competitor now is former Chief of Staff Benny Gantz, who resigned from the government and the mini-security council in protest against the course of the war and strongly criticized Netanyahu after the resignation.
As for the right-wing parties, according to Ofer Sholah of the Institute for National Security Research, the leaders of the religious right believe that the increasing proportion of members of their constituency and supporters among combat field soldiers and young officers in the army must also be reflected in a greater dominance of their value as they see it, which requires that the security leadership be Close to them and their orientations.
Israeli Radio’s military analyst, Ayal Alema, believes that the ruling right has expressed opposition to granting Gallant and Halevy the powers to appoint new military officers and commanders, under the pretext that they bear responsibility for the failure on October 7.
This proposal by the right – in Alimah’s opinion – reflects the aspirations of some ministers to supervise the appointments of officers and military leadership in the army, which means moving towards appointing officers affiliated with the right-wing camp “in order for this to lead to a fundamental change in the identity of the army.”
He pointed out that many circles in the government coalition, including Netanyahu, are seeking to exploit the state of vacuum and the expected resignations in the intelligence service, in order to select and appoint figures who carry the ideas and agenda of the right, and who are loyal to the parties partnering with the government, and thus to dominate and control all institutions and joints of government.
“A total failure”
Whatever the outcome of the confrontation between Netanyahu and the army commanders, this level of disagreement and conflict, if added to the differences within the government and parties over the controversial laws (Haredi conscription and the rabbinic law), reflects “the abject failure to achieve the goals of the war and the continued losses in Gaza,” according to what Says analyst Yasser Al-Zaatara.
Firas Yaghi, an expert on Israeli affairs, believes that the leadership of the occupation army and the heads of the security services are at their “weakest state and cannot impose their requirements at the political level.” On the contrary, they are trying to prove their ability to bring security to the Israelis. Therefore, “we see the scale of massacres, genocide, and ethnic cleansing, and this is within the concept of the undeclared national security policy.”
According to Yaghi, the war on Gaza is heading “to further escalation and more resistance.”
If someone dares to open the Lebanon front, it will be tantamount to “a collective suicide led by three people: Netanyahu, Galant, and Halevy, who no longer have anything to lose, so they are betting on the fate of the country and taking the entire country with them into the abyss,” according to Israeli Army Reserve Major General Yitzhak Brick.