Jerusalem Post: Why is the dispute between Netanyahu and Galant intensifying? | Policy

Israeli newspaper The Jerusalem Post says it is aware of dispute between Israeli prime ministers Benjamin Netanyahu And his defense minister. Yoav Galant Prisoner exchange agreement with the Islamic Resistance Movement (agitation), bigger than any previous dispute between them.

The newspaper's chief military correspondent, Yona Jeremy Pope, noted in his analysis that the dispute between “the two most powerful leaders in Israel today” that had previously erupted publicly in a “chaotic manner” mainly revolved around judicial reform and Israeli government reform. Orthodox Religious people in the military, and whether it is possible to seek help from some of their employees Palestinian Authority Alternative Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) Gaza Strip.

But the difference now, The Jerusalem Post has learned, is that Galant has accused Netanyahu of directly endangering the lives of Israeli prisoners.

He had not disclosed it publicly before.

Pope said in his analysis that Galante has not publicly or explicitly expressed support for reaching the agreement that the US presidential administration is adopting. Joe Biden– Along with the Hamas movement to repatriate prisoners, and with the support of other senior leaders, e.g. Benny Ganz andGadi EisenkotTwo ministers from Israel's pre-war government.

Gantz and Eisenkot are fully prepared to reach a deal without entering, return the hostages and end the war RafaMaybe even without entering Khan Younis.

According to analysis, Eisenkot wanted to “surrender” to Hamas last November when Hamas proposed to release a smaller and different number of prisoners as part of the then-extended ceasefire agreement, while Galant sided with Netanyahu and opposed his surrender and allowed Hamas to make any changes.

The newspaper said that as soon as the cities of Khan Yunis and Rafah fell under Israeli control, Galant announced his support for the majority of the Israeli army, claiming that Hamas no longer had a large organized force, thus ending the war in what was not considered a major concession to the movement to allow the release of war prisoners.

The fierce battle is over

Pope analyzed that, according to this line of thinking, the five invasions launched by the Israeli army into parts of Gaza were all large-scale “attacks” similar to the attacks the Israeli army usually carries out in the Gaza Strip. Bank of the WestThey are not considered true intrusions.

Grant and the Israeli army believed that the intense fighting phase of the war was, so to speak, over, despite their political slogans refusing to end it. Galant believed that now was the right time to rescue as many Israeli prisoners as possible.

According to the former Small War Government Minister, any delay, any confusion or any attempt to tighten the terms of the agreement now would be a political move that puts the lives of prisoners at direct and unnecessary risk.

A Situation That Shocked the Military Leadership

The Jerusalem Post explains that this is also the view of the Israeli army's senior military leadership, who were “surprised” by the conditions announced by Netanyahu last Sunday evening, which contradicted important aspects of the agreement that Israel had already agreed to in theory. “

However, the Israeli newspaper added that Netanyahu might agree to a prisoner exchange and his announcement might be a statement for public consumption only, while some believe that after a careful analysis of his remarks, it can be said that the prime minister left many doors open for a deal.

For example, he only said that (armed) Hamas members could not return to northern Gaza, but did not say anything about unarmed members.

What bothers him most?

What most disturbs Galant, however, is that Netanyahu’s actions and rhetoric — including his attempts to tie the hostage deal to negotiations to integrate the religious Orthodox into the Israeli military — reflect his strong opposition to reaching an eventual deal to return the prisoners to Israel, their homeland.

The newspaper analyzed that this may mean that Netanyahu's ultimate goal is to keep Hamas in power as long as he feels that Hamas is “weak enough” and as long as he can continue to give orders to the Israeli army to launch attacks that look like a war against far-right critics.

The question remains, Popp believes, whether Galant would consider resigning if he believed Netanyahu had broken the deal, and whether that threat would motivate him to abide by the agreement, at least long enough to repatriate the first prisoners under the “first phase” of the agreement.

Source link

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button