Israel’s contradictions and lack of a clear strategy

What is Israel’s position on the current crisis in Gaza? For a long time, one of the things that has stood out is the way politicians and journalists ask this question based on the assumption that there is a fixed, clearly identifiable Israeli government position on anything, let alone how to deal with the Palestinians.

How often does one hear an interviewer ask a question along the lines of “Israel says” such and such. Yet the standout feature of Israeli politics is just how many Israels there are. The frictions and factions that constitute the Israeli body politic are extraordinary.

All of this was highlighted in spectacular style last week, when Defense Minister Yoav Gallant and then fellow war Cabinet member Benny Gantz both challenged Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to rule out any future civilian presence in Gaza.

Gallant is pushing for Israel officially to rule out any reestablishment of the illegal settlements it pulled out of in 2005. He demanded Netanyahu “make a decision and declare that Israel will not establish civilian control over the Gaza Strip, that Israel will not establish military governance in the Gaza Strip, and that a governing alternative to Hamas in the Gaza Strip will be raised immediately.” Gallant is fomenting the so-called day after debate, pushing for a different Palestinian leadership to take over Gaza, whereas Netanyahu wants to retain the Israeli occupation, with a quisling Palestinian administration that bows to Israeli dictates.

Gallant is pushing for a different Palestinian leadership to take over Gaza, whereas Netanyahu wants to retain the Israeli occupation

Chris Doyle

Gallant and much of the military and security establishment favor the Palestinian Authority once again having a role in Gaza. The defense minister’s views also chime with much of the US military establishment, which is frustrated at the lack of Israeli planning and strategic thinking.

Gallant is very much in the Gantz camp in the Cabinet, with the latter heading the polls in terms of candidates Israeli voters want to replace Netanyahu. So, it was no surprise that Gantz followed up Gallant’s onslaught with his own. He issued an ultimatum that, without a postwar plan, his party would collapse the emergency unity government by leaving it on June 8: a three-week warning.

Without missing a beat, Netanyahu hit straight back at Gallant and Gantz, both of whom he believes are in cahoots with US President Joe Biden. He has always flourished in a political dust-up. This is not his first rodeo with Gallant as, a year ago, the defense minister publicly opposed Netanyahu’s plans for a judicial overhaul. Netanyahu as good as fired him then but was compelled to pull back by public pressure.

Netanyahu and the Israeli right claim that they object to the PA as it supports “terrorism.” The PM proclaimed that “I will not allow us to replace Hamastan with Fatahstan,” referring to PA leader Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah party. However, the real reason is that the Israeli far right detests to its core the very notion of a single, united Palestinian national leadership and it does not want to give up the gains of the last 17 years, when divide and rule over the Palestinians worked so well for its interests.

Then, to the extreme-right of the governing coalition, Itamar Ben-Gvir addressed a settler rally with calls to encourage the “voluntary emigration” of Palestinians from Gaza. He is pushing for ethnic cleansing as a prelude to the full colonization of the Strip.

This also raises questions for Israeli supporters. What sort of Israel do these supporters and groups support?

Chris Doyle

Israeli protesters have congregated week in, week out ever since the coalition was formed in December 2022, either to protest Netanyahu’s smashing of Israel’s judiciary or to press for action to secure the release of Israeli hostages in Gaza.

So, who knows what Israel wants or who determines what is in Israel’s interest? This explains the stunning lack of a clear strategy and the huge contradictions in its policies.

It also raises questions for Israeli supporters. What sort of Israel do these supporters and groups support? Is it the Israel that they perceive as being part of the West? Is it an Israel that they see as an integral part of the Middle East? Is it secular or theocratic? Should it be Jewish or democratic (the two are directly contradictory)? Is it the romanticized Israel, the notion of an egalitarian, democratic state, one that was never realized? Is it the settler state of Judea and Samaria that has taken over the country? Is it the Israel of Peace Now and the ever-declining numbers of Israeli Jews who cherish and hope for a two-state solution but often have less to say about the third-class status of Palestinian citizens of Israel? Is it the apartheid Israel that enforces systematic discrimination on non-Jews? Is it the theocratic state that the ultra-Orthodox seek — the same ultra-Orthodox Jews that antagonize their fellow nationals by refusing to serve in the armed forces?

However, given the genocide in Gaza, one has to ask: Why are these states, groups and supporters backing the genocidal elements within Israel — those who incite and indeed execute a policy of genocide and ethnic cleansing? Why is this view so popular? This last question is the one no one should be allowed to avoid or dodge. It is one the likes of the US president, German chancellor and British prime minister never dare to address.

• Chris Doyle is director of the Council for Arab-British Understanding in London. X: @Doylech