Commentary Magazine


Topic: Benny Gantz

Is Hamas Coming Out Ahead?

There were two ominous developments on the 12th day since the kidnapping of three Israeli teenagers by Hamas terrorists. While the Israel Defense Forces continued to scour the West Bank, and in particular the Hebron area, in an attempt to find the boys and to take out the Hamas terror infrastructure, Israel’s leaders seem to be coming to terms with the failure of this operation.

Read More

There were two ominous developments on the 12th day since the kidnapping of three Israeli teenagers by Hamas terrorists. While the Israel Defense Forces continued to scour the West Bank, and in particular the Hebron area, in an attempt to find the boys and to take out the Hamas terror infrastructure, Israel’s leaders seem to be coming to terms with the failure of this operation.

IDF chief General Benny Gantz finally said what many Israelis have been worrying about: that the chances of finding the victims alive may be getting smaller. Contradicting a previous statement by Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon, who claimed it “was only a matter of time” before the case was cracked, Gantz struck a less hopeful tone when he said, “with the passing of time, fears grow.”

Just as important was the vote of the Israeli Cabinet to scale back the army’s search in the coming days. This is partly a reaction to the widespread protests the IDF’s actions have provoked among a Palestinian population that has treated the kidnapping as an act of national heroism. It may also signify that they recognize that the presence of so large a force in the West Bank may be a matter of diminishing returns. Moreover, with the start of the Ramadan holiday this Saturday night, the optics of Israeli troops rummaging through Palestinian villages searching for the boys and their kidnappers during the Muslim holy month will do more harm than good.

While Israelis, Jews, and civilized people everywhere have to pray that a breakthrough in the case happens soon, Gantz’s talk of fear is an acknowledgment that the longer this drags on without the kidnappers showing proof of life of their hostages, the less likely it will be that the boys will be rescued. If Israel is about to pull back its forces to avoid offending Muslim sensibilities, there’s no avoiding the possibility that Hamas may have successfully hidden its hostages or have already killed them.

All of which means that even though the kidnapping has cost Hamas dearly in terms of its ability to operate openly in the West Bank, it has nevertheless scored an impressive victory over both Israel and its Fatah rivals/partners in the Palestinian Authority.

The sense that Hamas feels itself the winner in this exchange was clearly on display in the interview given by Khaled Mashaal to the Al Jazeera network in which he praised the kidnapping. The political chief of the Islamist terror movement, who operates from the group’s Qatar base rather than Hamas’s Gaza stronghold, said that he could “neither confirm nor deny” the group’s involvement in the crime. But he praised the kidnappers and strained the credulity of even that network’s viewers by claiming the boys—teenage yeshiva students—were “soldiers.” He then produced a photocopy of a picture of an IDF solider that is an Israeli reality-show contestant and claimed that person was one of the victims.

But leaving that farcical presentation aside, Hamas has good reason to be boasting in this manner about what it has accomplished. Mashaal doesn’t really care about whether more Hamas members are jailed or even if some of its terrorists who were freed as part of the Gilad Shalit exchange are now back in prison. By operating in the West Bank ruled by Fatah, it has shown that it is capable of carrying out acts of terror and to have the perpetrators avoid capture in spite of the claims of PA leader Mahmoud Abbas that his security forces are cooperating and the large-scale rescue operation conducted by Israel. In doing so, it has not only won the applause of most Palestinians, who have mocked the boys’ plight with a three-fingered salute on social media, but also demonstrated that the Fatah-Hamas unity agreement didn’t stop Hamas from pursuing violence against Israel.

This means that this episode is not only a tragic instance in which a terror group has targeted children and seemingly evaded justice. It also proves that despite the progress that Abbas has made in condemning terror—which Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu rightly praised today—the reaction to the kidnapping shows the Palestinians are more of Hamas’s mindset on this question than their leader. So long as that is the case, talk about more pressure on Israel to make concessions for the sake of peace is not only pointless; it is actually counter-productive since it lets the Palestinians off the hook for their vocal support for violence rather than negotiations.

Read Less

Haaretz, NYTimes Play Telephone With IDF

Reading the New York Times account of an interview with Benny Gantz, the chief of staff of the Israeli Defense Force, that was first published in Haaretz is like a children’s game of “telephone.” What Gantz actually said wasn’t reflected in the misleading headline of the Israeli newspaper. That headline, rather than the actual content of the piece, was repeated in the Times article, so what comes out in America’s so-called newspaper of record had more to do with the editorial agenda of the press than the reality of Israel’s security dilemma.

The Haaretz headline was an attention-grabber: “IDF Chief to Haaretz: I do not believe Iran will decide to develop nuclear weapons.” Yet nowhere in the piece was there a quote that matched this startling assertion that was repeated in the Times headline that read: “Israeli Army Chief Says He Believes Iran Won’t Build a Bomb.” What Gantz tells Haaretz is that while the Iranians are actively working on a nuclear program, they have yet to activate the final stage of the project that would convert the material to a nuclear bomb. This is no revelation, as not even the most alarmist account of Iran’s efforts has stated that this final stage has been reached. Nor did Gantz express a belief that Iran wouldn’t build a bomb. Rather, he said the Iranians would do it only if they felt themselves “invulnerable.” He said he thought the ayatollahs were “rational,” but added that a weapon in their hands would be “dangerous.”

So while the tone of Gantz’s interview was not as sharp as the statements made by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu or Defense Minister Ehud Barak, the substance isn’t very different. Which makes the claims made by the Times and the misleading headline in Haaretz a transparent attempt to portray a stark division within the councils of Israel’s leaders where there may be none.

Read More

Reading the New York Times account of an interview with Benny Gantz, the chief of staff of the Israeli Defense Force, that was first published in Haaretz is like a children’s game of “telephone.” What Gantz actually said wasn’t reflected in the misleading headline of the Israeli newspaper. That headline, rather than the actual content of the piece, was repeated in the Times article, so what comes out in America’s so-called newspaper of record had more to do with the editorial agenda of the press than the reality of Israel’s security dilemma.

The Haaretz headline was an attention-grabber: “IDF Chief to Haaretz: I do not believe Iran will decide to develop nuclear weapons.” Yet nowhere in the piece was there a quote that matched this startling assertion that was repeated in the Times headline that read: “Israeli Army Chief Says He Believes Iran Won’t Build a Bomb.” What Gantz tells Haaretz is that while the Iranians are actively working on a nuclear program, they have yet to activate the final stage of the project that would convert the material to a nuclear bomb. This is no revelation, as not even the most alarmist account of Iran’s efforts has stated that this final stage has been reached. Nor did Gantz express a belief that Iran wouldn’t build a bomb. Rather, he said the Iranians would do it only if they felt themselves “invulnerable.” He said he thought the ayatollahs were “rational,” but added that a weapon in their hands would be “dangerous.”

So while the tone of Gantz’s interview was not as sharp as the statements made by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu or Defense Minister Ehud Barak, the substance isn’t very different. Which makes the claims made by the Times and the misleading headline in Haaretz a transparent attempt to portray a stark division within the councils of Israel’s leaders where there may be none.

Here’s the text published by Haaretz:

Asked whether 2012 is also decisive for Iran, Gantz shies from the term. “Clearly, the more the Iranians progress the worse the situation is. This is a critical year, but not necessarily ‘go, no-go.’ The problem doesn’t necessarily stop on December 31, 2012. We’re in a period when something must happen: Either Iran takes its nuclear program to a civilian footing only or the world, perhaps we too, will have to do something. We’re closer to the end of the discussions than the middle.”

Iran, Gantz says, “is going step by step to the place where it will be able to decide whether to manufacture a nuclear bomb. It hasn’t yet decided whether to go the extra mile.”

As long as its facilities are not bomb-proof, “the program is too vulnerable, in Iran’s view. If the supreme religious leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei wants, he will advance it to the acquisition of a nuclear bomb, but the decision must first be taken. It will happen if Khamenei judges that he is invulnerable to a response. I believe he would be making an enormous mistake, and I don’t think he will want to go the extra mile. I think the Iranian leadership is composed of very rational people. But I agree that such a capability, in the hands of Islamic fundamentalists who at particular moments could make different calculations, is dangerous.”

While Gantz expressed some hope that international sanctions might work to influence Iran’s decisions, he said nothing that could be construed as a belief that Iran’s goal wasn’t a nuclear weapon or that Israel could live with the Islamist regime possessing such a capability. Indeed, he made it very clear that it was his job to prepare a “credible” military threat to Iran the purpose of which would be to convince Tehran to back down.

All that can be said of this interview is that Gantz did not mention the Holocaust and that his tone was calm and professional with more attention to the technical business of his specific military responsibility than an emotional call to action. But why would we expect a military leader to sound like a politician even if the substance of his approach left little daylight between his position and that of his boss?

It is true that this sounded a lot different from Netanyahu’s interview on CNN, where he made it clear that international sanctions on Iran had better work quickly lest the Iranians use the time they are gaining from protracted negotiations to get closer to their nuclear goal. But nothing Gantz said contradicted Netanyahu’s assertion that an Iranian nuke was an existential threat to Israel that must be stopped.

There is no basis to claim, as the Times does, that Gantz’s interview meant he agreed with Netanyahu’s critics and others who take a more relaxed view of the Iranian threat. Nor does the paper point out that even former Mossad chief Meyer Dagan, who is among the most vocal of those disagreeing with Netanyahu, believes Iran must be stopped from gaining a nuclear weapon.

The effort to hype Gantz’s interview is part of a campaign on the part of Israel’s critics to portray Netanyahu as being “hysterical” — the term used by the Times — about Iran. But as Gantz said, Israelis “aren’t two oceans away from the problem — we live here with our civilians, our women and our children, so we interpret the extent of the urgency differently.”

Read Less




Welcome to Commentary Magazine.
We hope you enjoy your visit.
As a visitor to our site, you are allowed 8 free articles this month.
This is your first of 8 free articles.

If you are already a digital subscriber, log in here »

Print subscriber? For free access to the website and iPad, register here »

To subscribe, click here to see our subscription offers »

Please note this is an advertisement skip this ad
Clearly, you have a passion for ideas.
Subscribe today for unlimited digital access to the publication that shapes the minds of the people who shape our world.
Get for just
YOU HAVE READ OF 8 FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
FOR JUST
YOU HAVE READ OF 8 FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
FOR JUST
Welcome to Commentary Magazine.
We hope you enjoy your visit.
As a visitor, you are allowed 8 free articles.
This is your first article.
You have read of 8 free articles this month.
YOU HAVE READ 8 OF 8
FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
for full access to
CommentaryMagazine.com
INCLUDES FULL ACCESS TO:
Digital subscriber?
Print subscriber? Get free access »
Call to subscribe: 1-800-829-6270
You can also subscribe
on your computer at
CommentaryMagazine.com.
LOG IN WITH YOUR
COMMENTARY MAGAZINE ID
Don't have a CommentaryMagazine.com log in?
CREATE A COMMENTARY
LOG IN ID
Enter you email address and password below. A confirmation email will be sent to the email address that you provide.