Experts and analysts believe that the differences between politicians and the military in Israel pose a threat to the Israeli military performance in the war on the Gaza Strip, and serve the Palestinian resistance in Gaza, which seeks to turn Israeli society against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The Israeli Channel 12 had previously revealed that a dispute had broken out between the Prime Minister and Defense Minister Yoav Galant, after Netanyahu prevented the heads of the Mossad intelligence service, David Barnea, and the Shin Bet, Ronen Bar, from attending a war cabinet session.
The researcher specializing in Israeli affairs, Adel Shadid, pointed out the collapse of trust between the components and factions of the political system in Israel, including within the representatives of the Likud Party in the government, as the crisis is no longer between the Prime Minister and Chief of Staff Herzi Halevy, but rather between Netanyahu and Defense Minister Gallant, who belongs to For the Likud Party.
The most dangerous thing is that the collapse of trust – adds Adel Shadid – has taken on institutional dimensions, as there is almost a lack of trust between the political level represented by the government and Netanyahu’s partners, specifically the group of National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, and the hard-right base – also – in the Likud Party, and so on. Between the army institution, which Israel has been keen since its establishment to remain outside of all political tensions, to the point that the army was described in the 1970s and 1980s as a “sacred cow” because it was forbidden to criticize it.
The researcher specializing in Israeli affairs – who was speaking during the daily analytical session on Manhattan Tribune channel “Gaza…what next?” – said that there is a conviction among the Israeli military elite that Netanyahu has been carrying out – since the beginning of the current war in the Gaza Strip – a broad campaign of incitement against the army. And security, and they are responsible for the major failure on October 7, 2023 and its aftermath.
From the point of view of the military and strategic expert, Brigadier General Elias Hanna, what is happening in Israel today is that the political dimension affects the military dimension, and that the Al-Aqsa Flood operation “brought down a very large security system, and even security, intelligence and strategic convictions, and this matter was covered by the war on Gaza.” .
He said, “The tactical level reflected the internal disputes in Israel at the strategic level,” highlighting that the political government set major goals, or maximum goals, represented in: “Destroying the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas), destroying infrastructure, and creating an environment in the Gaza Strip for a period after Hamas.” ..”.
He added that the battle on the field demonstrated the incompatibility of the military and the political, stressing that the political division poses a threat to the military performance of the Israelis in their war on Gaza.
The writer and political analyst, Hossam Al-Dajani, spoke about the position of the Palestinian resistance in Gaza regarding internal divisions in Israel, and said that it monitors everything large and small and works to strengthen these differences, and that the media materials that the resistance broadcasts regarding its Israeli detainees aim to reinforce the idea that there will be a societal movement. Inside Israel against the Netanyahu government.
He said that the letter from the head of the Hamas political bureau, Ismail Haniyeh, to the US Secretary of State, Anthony Blinken, comes from the aim of strengthening the American position, stressing that the resistance believes that Benny Gantz – a member of the Israeli War Council – is more closely linked to the US administration, and then working to disintegrate it. The ruling coalition running the war in Gaza.
In a speech he addressed to Blinken, who was visiting the region, Haniyeh said: “We hope that Blinken has drawn lessons from the past three months and realized Washington’s mistakes in its support of the occupation.”
