What do you want?
Netanyahu has been in office for so many years that there is hardly a scandal that doesn't echo something in his past — or a previous case that contradicts it — or at least something that rhymes with it. With nine defense ministers and seven IDF chiefs of staff who have served under him, the most prominent example is the Harpaz affair. It was a highly unusual event because the prime minister himself — a figure for whom diving into details is not foreign — was completely absent. Former Defense Minister Ehud Barak and IDF chief Gabi Ashkenazi fought each other for two years, but the prime minister did not say a word. Both hawks expected backing, which never came.
Then as now, Netanyahu refrains from expressing an opinion. Perhaps it suits him to let the boys play before him — play and be worn down.
It's said that children who were abused become abusive parents. There are similarities between the odd and baseless hazing the prime minister inflicts on the defense minister he appointed, and the excessive and public hazing that the defense minister inflicts on the chief of staff he appointed. Netanyahu has recently been poking Defense Minister Katz at every opportunity, humiliating and belittling him. Katz has not disagreed with Netanyahu on a single issue, and yet he was scolded at the start of last week's cabinet meeting: "A primaries attack, a tweet attack — I don't recall anything like this on security matters."
Sharp-eared observers already noticed at the historic Knesset session with Trump, on the eve of Simchat Torah, that the defense minister wasn't mentioned at all — noticeably absent. Have we run out of enemies that we must invent one by force?
Likewise, it is unclear why Katz chooses to lash out at IDF Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir again and again. The public statements targeting Zamir began 19 days after he took office, when the defense minister protested the investigation of right-wing darling Brig. Gen. (res.) Oren Solomon, and received a swift response: "The chief of staff does not take instructions through the media." Then came the public (and very justified) cancellation of the military advocate general's appearance at the Bar Association conference, with public clashes over appointments in between.
Maybe Netanyahu is right and Katz is subversive; maybe Katz is right and Zamir refuses to accept authority. But any reasonable person sees that the defense minister has never publicly opposed the prime minister, and that the chief of staff is very careful about issues important to the defense minister. Despite the Kaplan protesters and Haaretz, Zamir refuses to utter the words "state commission of inquiry" and did not complain to the media when Katz decided to shut down Army Radio despite Zamir's own recommendation.
What's more likely is that Netanyahu and Katz have just been walking around with a hammer for so many years that every subordinate looks to them like a nail whose head must be struck.
And only the outside observer wonders: have all the state's security problems been solved that such tensions at the top can be tolerated? After all, it was Netanyahu who walked around delighted after replacing Yoav Gallant with Katz, and Katz who boasted about appointing Zamir in place of Herzi Halevi. If both chose such allegedly subversive protégés, what does that say about their judgment in making appointments?
Been there, done that
The chief of staff's office is the army's Wailing Wall, but even it had never seen generals cry. It happened this week, when Zamir told several generals they would not be called for reserve duty. From the outside, it looked like a symbolic, meaningless punishment, inconsistent with the historic scale of the failure. But the ousted officers saw it as a terrible insult — a stain that cannot be erased. One of them burst into tears when he received the news. "You've killed me and my family," he said.
People around the chief of staff admit the result was not ideal. The public struggles to understand how the greatest failure in the IDF's history ends with the removal of just two mid-level officers. The reason lies in the principled decision to limit the investigation of the failure to October 7 itself. Otherwise, hundreds of people would be candidates for dismissal, and Zamir would have had to dismiss his two predecessors — Herzi Halevi and Aviv Kohavi — from the reserves as well.
Then came the operational consideration of keeping the current head of Military Intelligence, Shlomi Binder. The argument was that dismissing him now would harm national security — yet the result is still puzzling. Another distortion was created by equating former intelligence chief Aharon Haliva, who believed no action against Hamas was needed, with former Southern Command chief Yaron Finkelman, who rushed overnight from his home in the north to his post.
Does Chief of Staff Zamir, like his predecessors, have his "favorite sons" who he wants to protect? Of course, the answer is yes. Two of them — Binder in intelligence and Omer Tischler in the Air Force — also enjoy support in the government. But beyond that, the guiding idea was to allow the IDF to move on from investigations that began poorly and dragged on endlessly. Zamir's suspicion is that the goal is to keep the army stuck in the mud indefinitely, and that's what enraged him.
Perhaps he erred in reacting so sharply toward the political echelon. There are things a chief of staff should not publish through the IDF Spokesperson about politicians, even if he is fed up. One can also assume that the army will survive 30 days without appointments without it causing "real harm to Israel's security." Maybe this unnecessary clash will mark a longer calm at the top. Still, it's a bit strange that from this week people will remember what happened to the IDF chief of staff — and not what happened to the chief of staff of Hezbollah.
Necessary seperation
Everyone has tasks at work they hate. A tell-tale sign: you push them off and push them off until the growing pile threatens to collapse the desk. Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara, with no criminal-law experience, is apparently very bored with the prosecutorial part of her job. One can understand her. There is plenty of glory in sparring with the government day after day, issuing legal opinions on illegality — another fine letter against Justice Minister Yariv Levin or National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir. That's the part of her job she loves. Here's proof: the statements that come out 24/7, even at hours when normal people are already sitting with a glass of red wine in front of Netflix or cooking for Shabbat. This is what passion for the profession looks like.
In contrast, when it comes to the fate of human beings suspected of crimes, the attorney general has zero motivation and all the time in the world. Former MK Abir Kara waited 20 excruciating months for her decision in a case as simple as double-voting. She tormented him and did not decide until a media report exposed the depth of the neglect. MK Hanoch Milwidsky apparently escaped rape charges because she delayed summoning him for questioning — for a whole year — until the witness against him disappeared to Russia. She remembered to act only when Milwidsky was promoted to chair the Knesset Finance Committee — and suddenly blocking his appointment became urgent.
The foot-dragging and denial of due process continue indiscriminately between friend and foe. The acting civil service commissioner, Roi Kahlon, has been left hanging for ten months because the attorney general hasn't bothered to decide whether to summon a key figure in the affair to testify or not. Conversely, even the decision regarding her associate — Channel 13 reporter Aviad Glickman, who is suspected of assault — was delayed for two and a half months. Why? Just because.
Baharav-Miara, of course, is not the only one. She was preceded by Avichai Mandelblit, who cooked Shas leader Aryeh Deri for six full years on a low flame between the start of the investigation and the decision on the plea bargain. When it came to his own case, he went mad over why State Attorney Shai Nitzan was delaying it and "holding me by the throat." A stunning lack of self-awareness.
So why does the attorney general protest so loudly against splitting her role into two — an attorney general and a prosecutor general? Because she can, of course. No institution likes to give up powers, and this unique governmental creature — unmatched anywhere else in the world — an attorney general who is also the prosecutor general, knows that its strength lies in the fact that ministers will not dare fight it when their personal fate is in its hands.
Before the Justice Ministry is the guardian of democracy, a "gatekeeper," and other pompous titles, it is a government office with Ottoman-level service standards — just as service in the High Court has significantly deteriorated and procedures have lengthened greatly since its doors were opened to anyone and everyone. A little less holy fury, a little more grunt work.
A partner, not a predator
The panic that seized Mansour Abbas' Ra'am party after Benjamin Netanyahu's remarks this week about outlawing additional parts of the Muslim Brotherhood was very premature. Beyond the fact that no concrete steps were taken to disqualify Ra'am from running for the Knesset, the prime minister's current political interest is actually for Arab representation to be as large as possible — not the opposite.
According to most polls, Bibi's bloc is far from attaining a majority, and it may need the Arab parties to help him block the Zionist, anti-Netanyahu opposition. They are a partner, not a predator.
Netanyahu, therefore, may be sorry to hear that the talks to form a joint Arab bloc have reached a dead end. In the Hadash party there is no one to talk to, because its leader Ayman Odeh is retiring, and his replacement has not yet been appointed. Meanwhile, Odeh's party colleague Aida Touma-Suleiman — glorifier of the "martyrs" — is expected to be replaced by Jafar Farah from the Mossawa Center, next to whom even she would be considered a paragon of Zionism.
Their common ground with Ra'am — a party that would like to join the next coalition — is minimal. What good are a few extra Knesset seats if they cannot agree what to do with them?
MK Ahmad Tibi hinted this week that behind the breakdown in talks lies a Jewish plot: "Friends in the opposition told me they prefer that the Arabs not pass ten seats." He apparently meant Naftali Bennett. Indeed, those inside the Arab parties claim he and Abbas have a secret pact. Bennett can prevent a strategic threat to his already dwindling chance of reaching a Knesset majority of 61 seats, while Abbas can gain independence and some wiggle room for the next round of negotiations.
Abbas watches with weary eyes the insistence in every interview that he call for Hamas to be dismantled — but he's convinced that when needed, everyone will call him to join their coalition. After all, he has already been through public vows not to sit with him that ended in a cross-camp courtship frenzy as the ballot boxes closed.
Could a joint Arab bloc still be formed? Yes — if Netanyahu actually gets close to the 61-seat mark in the next election. In that case, the Arab parties would suddenly find that unity is no longer a luxury, but an unavoidable last-minute move.
