{"id":109843,"date":"2017-12-04T16:29:00","date_gmt":"2017-12-04T16:29:00","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2023-01-08T10:55:42","modified_gmt":"2023-01-08T10:55:42","slug":"israel-leadership-crisis","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/2017\/12\/04\/israel-leadership-crisis\/","title":{"rendered":"Israel&#39;s Leadership Crisis"},"content":{"rendered":"<div style=\"margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;\" class=\"sharethis-inline-share-buttons\" ><\/div><h3 class=\"post-title entry-title\" itemprop=\"name\"><\/h3>\n<div class=\"post-header\"> <\/div>\n<p><em>Writer&#8217;s note: this entry was created on 14 August, in the aftermath  of Israel&#8217;s acceptace of the cease-fire in Lebanon.  At the time, I was  traveling, and lacked internet access to post these remarks on Israel&#8217;s  lack of resolve\/leadership at a critical juncture in the nation&#8217;s  history.<\/em><br \/><em><\/em><br \/><em> <\/em> As Israeli troops begin their  withdrawal from southern Lebanon, the second-guessing and  finger-pointing are well underway.  Speaking before the Knesset on the  eve of the cease-fire, former PM Benjamin Netanyahu delivered a stinging  rebuke of the Israeli war effort, and the leadership of the current  Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert.  Israel\u2019s former UN Ambassador, Dore Gold,  told a U.S. radio audience on Monday that an official Commission of  Inquiry will be appointed to review war planning and execution.<\/p>\n<p>Clearly,  such criticism and investigations are warranted.  As we noted  yesterday, Mr. Olmert literally snatched defeat from the jaws of  victory.  Less than 48 hours after announcing expanded IDF ground  operations in Lebanon\u2014and a planned march to the Latani River\u2014Mr. Olmert  meekly accepted a cease-fire brokered by the U.S. and France.  From the  Israeli perspective, that deal should have been rejected as untenable;  Mr. Olmert has entrusted his nation\u2019s security (or at a minimum, the  security of northern Israel) to an \u201cenhanced\u201d U.N. peacekeeping force  that, like its predecessor, seems unlikely to take on Hizballah, as  first step toward securing south Lebanon.  In fact, if recent history is  any indicator, it\u2019s probably just a matter of time before reconstituted  terrorist units set up shop outside peacekeeper camps, with the  Hizaballah flag fluttering alongside the U.N. banner. . <\/p>\n<p>Mr.  Olmert is also showing inordinate faith in the Lebanese government and  its so-called \u201carmy,\u201d which will share security responsibilities in the  south.  The Israeli Prime Minister blithely ignores the fact that  various Lebanese officials have praised Hizballah for \u201cdefending\u201d  Lebanon, and that the terrorist organization is a major influence in the  current government.  Lebanon\u2019s defense minister has already announced  that his forces will \u201cnot do Israel\u2019s job\u201d by disarming Hizballah.  If  anything, the proposed security force for southern Lebanon may emerge as  a terrorist protection organization.  It\u2019s little wonder that  Hizballah\u2019s leadership is already crowing about their \u201cvictory\u201d against  Israel. <\/p>\n<p>Trying to put the best face on a bad situation, the  Israeli government (and President Bush) have tried to highlight the  IDF\u2019s operational and tactical successes against the terrorists.  And  their praise is valid\u2014up to a point. True, IDF units fought well, and  won every engagement on the ground.  Israeli troops also proved adaptive  in fighting against foes who were well dug-in and used civilians as  human shields.  On several occasions, IDF commandos were dispatched on  high-risk missions to minimize collateral damage.  When Hizaballah tried  to overcome Israel\u2019s advantage in armor (by using advanced anti-tank  missiles at long range), the IDF sent in sniper teams to eliminate  terrorist gunners, allowing Israeli armor to punch through. <\/p>\n<p>But  those \u201csuccesses\u201d carry little weight in a conflict largely defined by  media coverage and a lack of political willpower within the Israeli  government.  When the IAF was accused of killing \u201cinnoncent\u201d civilians  in the Lebanese town of Qana, the Ohlmert government ordered an  immediate halt to the bombing, while an \u201cinvestigation\u201d was conduced.   Never mind that the \u201ccivilians\u201d apparently died hours after the bombing;  nor that their building wasn\u2019t struck directly by Israeli bombs, nor  that the IAF destroyed another rocket launcher in one of Qana\u2019s  \u201ccivilian\u201d neighborhoods a few days later.  By that time, the Israeli  template of timidity and hesitation had been established, and Hizballah  ruthlessly exploited Tel Aviv\u2019s wavering resolve, aided and abetted by a  compliant western media. <\/p>\n<p>If Israeli claims of victory sound a  little hollow, they should.  In fact, they\u2019re a bit reminiscent of U.S.  post-mortems in Vietnam, where success was often quantified by the  numbers of bombs dropped, or the weekly, enemy \u201cbody count.\u201d  Years  after the war, U.S. strategist Colonel Harry Summers met with the  legendary North Vietnamese commander, General Gaip, and reminded him of  American successes on the battlefield.  \u201cWe won every battle,\u201d Summers  remarked.  \u201cThat is true,\u201d Giap replied, \u201cbut it is also irrelevant.\u201d   At the end of the day, it was the U.S. that left Vietnam, while the  North\u2019s tanks rumbled into Saigon. <\/p>\n<p>Thirty-one years later, it is  Israel that is leaving south Lebanon, after barely one month of combat  operations.  Stunned at the sudden reversal of events, some returning  Israeli soldiers are mounting a petition drive to continue the war  effort, which they believe was halted prematurely.  Their anger is  shared by many ordinary Israelis; though surprised by Hizballah\u2019s  resistance and targeted by daily rocket barrages, they were willing to  see the conflict through, whatever the cost. <\/p>\n<p>Instead, they have  been left with a doomed cease-fire, a residual terrorist menace across  their northern border, and an ineffective U.N. security force to deal  with the problem.  It\u2019s a combination that will send political  shockwaves across Israel, and (hopefully) put a quick end to the  government that created this debacle.  Though it sounds cruel, some  Israelis are openly speculating over who will expire first: Ehud  Ohlmert\u2019s Kadima-led coalition, or the party\u2019s comatose founder, Ariel  Sharon.<\/p>\n<p>Like Sharon, Mr. Olmert viewed the Kadima movement as  something of a \u201cthird way\u201d in Israeli politics, uniting elements of the  left and right.  After defeating the latest intifada, Mr. Sharon  believed he had the political capital\u2014and security presence\u2014to give back  the Gaza Strip and make additional concessions to Israel\u2019s enemies,  with little more than vague promises in return. When Sharon was felled  by a stroke earlier this year, Mr. Olmert inherited leadership of the  party&#8211;despite a stunning lack of military experience&#8211;and won an  electoral victory, with the pledge to continue his predecessor&#8217;s  policies.<\/p>\n<p>It is doubtful that Mr. Sharon, a retired general and  genuine military hero, would have waged such as fitful campaign against  Hizballah.  But, it fairness, it should be noted that  Olmert inherited  Sharon\u2019s security team, including the generals he appointed to lead the  IDF, including current Chief of Staff Lt. Gen Dan Halutz.  Collectively,  the brightest minds of the IDF put together a plan that failed to  accurately assess the Hizballah threat, over-estimated the effectiveness  of Israeli airpower, and was implemented haltingly.  It was a recipe  for strategic defeat that negated the IDF\u2019s victories at the operational  and tactical levels.<\/p>\n<p>In recent weeks, there has been much  speculation as to whether current events more closely resemble 1938,  when the western powers, so anxious to avoid another world war, made  every effort to appease Adolf Hitler, and found themselves in that very  type of conflict a year later.  Others argue that 2006 looks more like  1914, when the nations of Europe stumbled blindly along the path to  World War I.<\/p>\n<p>But from a military and political perspective,  Israel\u2019s inept Prime Minister and his security cabinet seem similar to  another group of politcians and generals, who ran Great Britain in the  decade before World War II.  In 1931, future British PM Stanley Baldwin  announced that his nation would put its money on strategic airpower as a  deterrent, claiming that \u201cthe bomber will always get through.\u201d  In  1936, as the occupant of #10 Downing Street, Mr. Baldwin got a chance to  test his theories, when Hitler and his fledgling military machine  marched into the Rhineland. Mr. Baldwin, of course, did nothing, and was  eventually turned out of office, leaving it up to his prot\u00e9g\u00e9\u2014Neville  Chamberlain\u2014to try the politics of appeasement with Herr Hitler.<\/p>\n<p>One  reason Mr. Baldwin failed to act in 1936 is because his 1931 claim was  largely an idle boast.  As a USAF historian later noted, few nations  ever embraced the \u201ccult\u201d of offensive airpower with the fervor of Great  Britain, and few did as little to give the air arm the personnel and  equipment needed to develop strategic capabilities.  The RAF of 1936 was  a largely hollow force, just as it had been in 1931.  While probably  sufficient to support ground troops in stopping Hitler in 1936, it was  not the decisive instrument of power that Baldwin described five years  earlier.    <\/p>\n<p>Seven decades later, the problem in Israel is just  the opposite.  Israel has the military capabilities required to defeat  its enemies, but the resolve of its leadership remains very much in  doubt.  Given the choice between continuing a protracted conflict and  accepting a fatally flawed cease-fire, Olmert chose the latter,  postponing the task of dealing with Israel\u2019s mortal enemies, and  emboldening Hizaballah to continue its campaign of terror and death.  Paraphrasing Churchill&#8217;s famous remarks on Baldwin&#8217;s protege, Neville  Chamberlain, the Israeli Prime Minister had a choice between war and  dishonor.  He chose dishonor, and he will certainly have war again,  after an illusory cease-fire.  Mr. Baldwin and Mr. Chamberlain, meet Mr.  Olmert.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Writer&#8217;s note: this entry was created on 14 August, in the aftermath of Israel&#8217;s acceptace of the cease-fire in Lebanon. At the time, I was traveling, and lacked internet access to post these remarks on Israel&#8217;s lack of resolve\/leadership at a critical juncture in the nation&#8217;s history. As Israeli troops begin their withdrawal from southern [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[1],"tags":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/109843"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=109843"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/109843\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=109843"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=109843"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=109843"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}