Bibi’s Toughest Test

THE OCTOBER 7 MASSACRE BY HAMAS CAUGHT Israel at one of its lowest points. Had the war not broken out, Israel would have continued to primarily focus on its divided society, and the protests against its government, spanning over 40 weeks. The Israeli parliament, the Knesset, is comprised of 120 seats. Sixty-four of those seats helped make up a coalition headed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, consisting of the centre-right Likud party along with rightwing parties that dragged the government to an extreme right position.

A few days into the war, Netanyahu understood that he need­ed a cabinet that would enjoy public trust, and thus, he invited into his war cabinet two former chiefs of staff—retired Lt Gen­eral Benny Gantz, who heads the National Unity, a collabora­tion of centrist parties, and his party colleague retired Lt General Gadi Eizenkot. Armed with these two former chiefs of staff, along with the minister of defence, Netanyahu has been able to satisfy the public that the war is being managed by professionals, and not by the rightwing extremists of his coalition who are accused of avoiding conscription. Netanyahu sought for even a wider coalition and invited veteran politician Avigdor Lieberman, and former prime minister and current head of the opposition, Yair Lapid. Both Lieberman and Lapid refused to join the cabinet on Netanyahu’s terms.

Relations between Netanyahu and his defence minister went through a roller-coaster this year. In March, Defence Minister Yoav Gallant spoke in public and warned Netanyahu that the crisis over his proposed judicial reforms was jeopardising the ar­my’s strength. Netanyahu fired him immediately. The dismissal provoked a spontaneous, unprecedented, and successful protest.

Netanyahu reversed his decision and Gallant remained in his role. During the war, the two are bound to work closely together, leaving their differences aside.

Netanyahu’s conception of Hamas turned out to be nothing more than a misconception. He operated from an economic standpoint. If Israel would allow Gazans to work in Israel and earn a decent living, if Hamas would receive funds from Qatar in order to manage Gaza, and if Israel would provide Gaza electric­ity and other essentials, Gaza would enjoy economic prosperity that would eventually bring stability to the region. The massacre has proven this to be unequivocally incorrect. In public opinion, Netanyahu will have to resign when the war ends. His popular­ity is at its lowest ever, and in his own party there are new voices which, although they do not dare to speak publicly, posit that he will have no choice but to resign. Until this war, Netanyahu’s Likud was very united (‘Likud’ in Hebrew means unity), with a strong coalition discipline. Only five Likud members have to withdraw their support to dissolve the government.

The massacre and the situation wherein 240 hostages are held by Hamas have provoked anger at the government. The main criticism of the government is that, instead of paying attention to security affairs, it created unnecessary and expensive ministries, and spent the 10 months since its formation on matters like the ju­dicial reforms, the allocation of huge allowances to ultraorthodox Jewish organisations, and other anti-democratic, illiberal laws.

For the first time since he was re-elected, Netanyahu held a press conference with the Israeli media that included questions. During the press conference, he was asked whether he had taken upon himself a personal responsibility for the omissions that caused the October 7 massacre. Netanyahu replied that his pres­ent mission was to win the war. Afterwards there would be an investigation, lessons would be learned, and appropriate respon­sibilities allocated. When Netanyahu was asked about the judicial reforms, he clearly stated that the matter was now off the table.

A few days into the war, Netanyahu understood that he needed a cabinet that would enjoy public trust. So, he invited Benny Gantz, who heads the National Unity. He had to show that the war is being managed by professionals and not by rightwing extremists

Share this on

During the 40-week protest, a new movement was founded called ‘Ahim La’Neshek’, or Brothers- in-Arms. This is a group of reservists that claimed the government violated the unwritten contract between the people and itself—democracy in lieu of volunteer reserve service. This movement grew to lead the pro­test and within 40 weeks built a well-functioning operation with strong logistics, social media, and a wide network across Israel. When the war broke out and many ministries did not function well, it was the Brothers-in-Arms that took the helm and created a logistics centre in Tel Aviv where they stored and distributed whatever was needed—providing uniforms and tactical vests for soldiers, clothes and other necessities for the survivors of the mas­sacre who lost everything, physiologists to support the survivors, and much more. This organisation even created the missing per­sons’ centre that was engaged in identifying the missing persons by using technologies developed in real time to track people. The strong sentiment about and appreciation for the activities of the Brothers-in-Arms may lead to a new party in future elections. It reminds many of a party that evolved from the social justice protest of 2011—Yesh Atid (“There is a future”), the party headed by Lapid that grew to be the second largest in Israel.

The hostages’ families are putting pressure on Netanyahu to make their loved ones his first priority. After the release of four hos­tages and the successful evacuation by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) of another one, there are presently 240 hostages, including 35 young children and 18 elderly people who are over 75 years old. Netanyahu has declared that his objectives are to eradicate Hamas and free the hostages. The families demand that he first prioritise the release of the hostages. They also strongly criticise Israel for al­lowing humanitarian aid to Gaza without conditioning it on the release of the hostages or the children, or at least allowing the Red Cross to meet the hostages and provide them with medical care.

The massacre affected every person who lives in the belt of villages and towns in a region called the West Ne­gev that neighbours the Gaza strip. The 1,400 dead, 5,400 injured, and 240 kidnapped are mainly from this region. Residents of the region were evacuated to hotels. But they are not the only ones. The mas­sacre and the tension along the northern border with Lebanon, where the terrorist outfit Hezbol­lah is trying to pull Israel onto a second front, has caused residents of the villages and towns next to the northern border to evacuate until the danger is over. The atrocities of Hamas in southern Israel scared the residents of the north and sent them into alternative accommodations. Over a quarter of a million people are in tem­porary accommodations. That’s a huge number for a national population of 10 million.

The war created a massive need for labour, especially in con­struction and agriculture. Workers from Gaza are no longer al­lowed to enter and work in Israel. About 90,000 Gazans worked in construction and many others in agriculture. Thai agricultural workers play an important role in the Israeli agricultural work­force, but at the start of the war they were called back by the king of Thailand. Nir Barkat, Israel’s minister of economy, announced this week that he plans to deliver 160,000 workers from India to address the increased demand in the agriculture and construction sectors.

The absence of the Gazans and Thai workers is just part of the problem. Over 300,000 reservists were recruited to the army and parents of young children prefer to stay at home due to the con­tinued rocket barrage over major parts of Israel. Nine thousand rockets were fired on Israel in the past four weeks. Although in each school there are shelters, the frequent sirens and the need to mobilise the kids within one-and-a-half minutes to shelters is a challenge that parents prefer not to take.

When the war broke out and many ministries did not function well, it was the Brothers-in-Arms movement that created a logistics centre in Tel Aviv where they stored and distributed whatever was needed. They even set up the missing persons’ centre

Share this on

The need for working hands in agriculture is temporarily ad­dressed by thousands of volunteers managed by the Brothers-in-Arms dispatch centre in southern Israel and other volunteer organisations. The volunteering spirit is quite unique, and Israelis are seeking to contribute to the needy, including farmers, survi­vors, hospitals, the evacuated communities, etc.

One of the major points of conflict in the recent protest was that the ultraorthodox community refused to be drafted into the army, a service that is mandatory in principle. At the commencement of the war, 2,000 ultraor­thodox men approached the army and asked to be recruited. This act was viewed by the secular community as a gesture of goodwill and even the first sign of reconciliation between the two communities.

The word on the Israeli street is that the country had to reach one of its lowest points since its estab­lishment in order to mend the rift between the left and the right, the secular and the ultraorthodox.

About The Author

Anat Bernstein-Reich

Anat Bernstein-Reich is chairperson of the Israel-Asia Chamber of Commerce, a Friend of India Awardee for 2020, and CEO of BDO Israel-India Investment Banking firm

•