{Previously published in The Jerusalem Post}
I had a long discussion this week with Moshe Ya’alon.
“Bogie” is a self-described defense hawk,
whose strategic vision, especially regarding the dangers of Oslo and Sharon’s
disengagement from Gaza, was prescient. When asked if he is on the Right or
Left politically, he said he is not on either side, but only for what is right
for Israel.
In 2015 when Ya’alon was still defense minister, I had the opportunity to speak
with some members of the opposition parties, including Yesh Atid and the Zionist
Union, about Ya’alon. The consensus said they might agree or disagree with his
position on an issue, but they knew they could trust him to keep his word and
be an honest partner.
He is not the most charismatic political
leader, as he reminded me that modern democratic leaders don’t wear glasses and
have much more hair than he does. He said Harry Truman was the last leader he
can remember who wore glasses. His self-effacing personal warmth is clearly
present in person, but less appreciable by those who have seen him only on TV.
He stands out in one respect that is as rare as hen’s teeth among politicians –
honesty and integrity. Add to that a keen insight with a strong Jewish moral compass,
and you have an unusual description of a political leader in the 21st century.
I have spoken with Ya’alon at length before, but never when he was the
political leader of a party, now a joint party with Benny Gantz. So why did he
choose to align himself with Gantz’s party, as there were other suitors for his
talents and security credentials?
He said he surveyed the political landscape and was most comfortable with
Gantz’s integrity, realizing it is not about who leads the top of the ticket,
but what is best for the Israeli people. He said that anyone who challenges
Netanyahu’s monarchy is portrayed as a leftist, an epithet he says the prime
minister uses to delegitimize his adversaries.
Although senior to Gantz, who served under him in the IDF, Ya’alon has no
trouble being No. 2, and would consider becoming defense minister again, if
asked. He has publicly called for another popular former IDF chief of staff,
Gabi Ashkenazi, to join the team, but when pressed about other politicians
joining, such as Yair Lapid, he preferred not to speculate.
It should be remembered that Ya’alon did coauthor an op-ed with Lapid last July
titled “Will the West Cede the Golan Heights to a Psychopath?” It called on the
US to begin the process of recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan
Heights. Recent polls have shown that if Gantz, Ya’alon, Ashkenazi and Lapid
form a coalition, it could oust the long-reigning Likud grip on power,
replacing Netanyahu, which up until now seemed unlikely.
Ya’alon came to the conclusion a couple of years ago that Netanyahu should
resign, because of his interference in the government’s procurement of
submarines and frigates from Germany. At first he didn’t understand why
Netanyahu was bypassing the usual process for purchasing billions of dollars in
armaments by not bringing it to the cabinet, but when he understood that there
were serious conflicts of interests involving his associates, he asked
Netanyahu to resign for the good of the country and the rule of law.
Although Netanyahu has a range of alleged corruption charges against him,
Ya’alon spoke about the submarine case involving the German manufacturer
ThyssenKrupp, and the allegation that Netanyahu’s personal attorney David
Shimron used his relationship with the prime minister for financial gain.
Police have claimed there is enough evidence to charge Shimron with money
laundering. As for Netanyahu, Ya’alon has previously stated that there was no
way that Netanyahu didn’t know.
Ya’alon choose to leave the Netanyahu government when he was replaced as
defense minister rather than accept the offer to become foreign minister, which
would have left him as the likely heir apparent, if the prime minister were to
be forced to resign over his alleged corruption.
I asked Ya’alon if Attorney-General Avichai Mandelblit would indict Netanyahu
before the election; he said doesn’t know, but he did say that he trusts the
attorney-general.
WE MOVED on to his true area of expertise, the security of the State of Israel.
When asked who is Israel’s No. 1 threat, he said Iran. On this he agrees with
Netanyahu.
We first discussed the proposed American withdrawal from Syria, which he said
was a poor decision. It is not so much about boots on the ground as it is the
abandonment of the Kurds. He said that the previous American president, Barack
Obama, who withdrew from the region (Iraq), was forced to return to fight ISIS,
which was a consequence of that poor decision.
He said President Donald Trump should learn a lesson from his predecessor’s
mistake. It is important for America to be involved in the region for its own
interests. Ya’alon said, just look around: Except in Israel, all the
governments in the region are under stress, from Amman to Cairo to Riyadh, and
a withdrawal of American forces would destabilize the region.
When asked about the population transfer in southern Syria orchestrated by the
Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps and Hezbollah, placing a permanent hostile
force on Israel’s Syrian border, he responded by saying Israel has a very strong
destructive power that has and will keep Iran in check. Up until now, it has
not allowed advanced weapons or permanent Iranian bases to remain undamaged. A
future defense minister Ya’alon would have to deal with a permanently
entrenched Iranian presence in Syria.
Ya’alon took Netanyahu to task for his new strategy to publicly claim every
Syrian strike with video as an open provocation that serves no purpose, but in
fact removes the helpful façade of plausible deniability that had restrained
Iranian and Syrian responses. He said this was done only for Netanyahu’s
political advantage, not for Israel’s strategic benefit.
What about the new Russian S-300 antimissile system, which the Russians gave to
Syria, after Syria mistakenly shot down a Russian aircraft – will the Russians
use this system against Israel?
Ya’alon said the Russians and Israel are not on the same page in Syria; we are
not even in the same book. However, they are a dominant power in control, with
influence on Israel’s enemies. He said we have open lines of communication with
them, and they have worked until now, hopefully also in the future.
So why did they give the S-300 missile system to the Syrians? According to
Ya’alon, it is another card that Russia played that could be used against Israel
for leverage in any future negotiations.
On the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, what about the collapse of security
cooperation between Israel and the PA, due to the loss of American funding
because of the Taylor Force Act, and the Palestinian fear that accepting
American money opens them up to American lawsuits for complicity in terrorism?
According to Ya’alon, it is in the Palestinians’ interest, with or without
funding, to continue the security coordination with Israel. If the Palestinians
stop coordinating with Israeli security, they know that the likely outcome will
be the same as what happened to them in Gaza after the Israeli withdrawal – a
total Hamas takeover.
Right now Israel performs 70% of the security operations for the Palestinian
Authority in Judea and Samaria (West Bank), while the Palestinian security
forces do 30% of the work. He says it is definitely a challenge for the
cooperation to continue without funding, but on principle, terrorists and their
families cannot be rewarded with funding, as it encourages and promotes more
terrorism. He also had harsh words for UNRWA as a corrupt and complicit
international organization.
I mentioned that American Jews want to know if he is for a two-state solution.
Ya’alon said the two-state solution is something that is not possible at this
time, because the Palestinians cannot even accept Israel’s right to exist. In
the meantime, he would like to give them more autonomy, separate from them, and
would consider giving up some additional territory, if it serves Israel’s
purpose for calm, as long as it does not affect Israeli security.
What about the Qatari money to Hamas? He disagrees with Netanyahu’s approach of
giving millions in a lump sum and trusting that international organizations
will not let Hamas siphon off money for terrorism. Ya’alon says there is
experience in transferring funds to banks that can be withdrawn only by
noncombat civil servants with proper IDs, which he believes is a better
although not perfect option to buy calm in Gaza.
WE NEXT touched on the relations between Israel and its Diaspora Jewish
population, many of whom are critical of Israel. Ya’alon said we must be more
tolerant of, and sensitive to, our Diaspora brothers’ Jewish religious
practice, as Israel is the homeland of all the Jewish people.
What about Israel’s minority population, many whom call themselves Palestinian
citizens of Israel, and whose narrative is now aligned with Palestinians of the
West Bank?
Regarding Israeli Arabs, Ya’alon wants to integrate them more and says they
would like that, but for the malevolent role their political leaders play,
which he believes hurts their genuine aspirations to be part of the state. He
wants these Palestinian citizens of Israel to be required to do civil service
and believes most would want this, despite what their political leaders say.
As for domestic and socioeconomic issues, Ya’alon has previously spoken about
leading the fight against racism and sexism in society, and has said the
Nation-State Law should be nullified, as it has done damage to the
country.
What you see is what you get with Ya’alon: something refreshing in a world of
cynicism, where one expects the worst of elected leaders.
The author is the director of the Middle East Political and Information Network
and a regular contributor to The Jerusalem Post.