Day 73: Monday

Last week, I started by noting:

Tuesday 8:40AM: What’s missing from this week’s post is a reaction to Netanyahu’s statement last night in a Foreign and Security Committee debate that “the Oslo Accord [sic]  is a disaster that resulted in the same number of victims as October 7”. I would like to respond to that now, but I didn’t hear of it until half an hour ago, and there isn’t time before the deadline, so I will just have to let it simmer on a low light for another week., and pray that nothing even more egregious and outrageous emerges before then.

So, let’s start by getting that out of the way.

I’ve just googled ‘What is the difference between a statesman and a politician?’ The first twenty hits all contained the same message, best summed up by the aphorism: ‘A politician thinks about the next election, while a statesman thinks about the next generation.’ Looking back at politicians and statesmen of the past, I’m tempted to suggest another difference, which possibly covers different scenarios from the first. ‘A statesman acts morally, while a politician acts expediently.’

Either way, two things seem clear to me in the cloudy world that is political reality.. First., a general observation: If we illustrated this on a Venn diagram, there wouldn’t be a lot of overlap between statesmen and politicians, not in Israel, anyway!

Second, a specific observation. The days of Netanyahu even appearing to be a statesman are, regrettably, in the past. In the last week or two, he has demonstrated on at least three occasions that he is motivated in his public statements principally by the need to ensure his personal political future. He strives to do this both in the short term. by nurturing the right wing of his coalition, and in the longer term, by appealing to those sectors of the voting public that are to his political right.

First we had his appalling playing of a macabre numbers game, as quoted at the head of this post. It is a fact that between the signing of the Oslo Accords in September 1993 and October 6 2023, at least 1,334 Israel civilians were murdered in Palestinian terror attacks. It seems, at the time of writing, that the October 7 death toll was at least 1200 Israelis. (That we cannot be confident of a final figure after Israel has undertaken 10 weeks of the most intense, painstaking and painful forensic investigation is, itself, an eloquent comment on the scale of horror of the atrocities.)

The pogrom of October 7 resulted from a series of intelligence failures and operational misjudgements, and claimed 1200 lives in less than two days. Attributing responsibility for the failure of the Oslo Accords is a more nuanced subject. However, let us assume, for the sake of argument, that it was, similarly, a set of Israeli intelligence failures and operational misjudgements that led to the loss of life since the signing. Let us go even further, and assume that all of the murders of Israelis by terrorists between September 1993 and October 6 this year are attributable to the signing of the Oslo accords. Even assuming all this, to make a bald statement about numerical equivalence, while ignoring the difference between 2 days and 11,000 days, is ridiculous.

Netanyahu followed this up with an astonishing response to a question in a press conference on December 2, when asked about the horrible shooting in error of Yuval Castleman, who was killed at the scene of the terror shooting at a Jerusalem bus stop, when Staff Sgt. (res.) Aviad Frija, one of two off-duty troops who responded to the attack, shot at the two terrorists. He also opened fire at Castleman, an armed civilian who had stopped his car across the street and himself shot at the terrorists. Footage from the scene showed that Frija shot Castleman after the latter had put his gun down and was holding his hands in the air.

Asked about this, Netanyahu acknowledged that more guns in the hands of the public can produce more such tragic incidents. But more civilians with guns can save the day in times like this, he said, defending his government’s policy on encouraging more eligible Israelis to carry weapons. He then continued: “Therefore, I think that in the current situation we need to continue with this policy — I definitely support it. We may pay a price, but such is life [my emphasis].” For as experienced a politician as Netanyahu to fail to weigh his words so egregiously seems inconceivable. Either he regarded the whole matter as not worthy of his attention, or he was speaking specifically to Ben-Gvir’s constituency, knowing how central a plank of Ben-Gvir’s policy arming civilians is.

Finally, in the last couple of days, Netanyahu has been reiterating his rejection of the two-state solution and of the Palestinian Authority playing a role in Gaza after the war. While taking this position, which undoubtedly represents the Israeli mainstream at the moment, Netanyahu claims that he prevented the establishment of a Palestinian state and takes credit for “putting the brakes” on the Oslo peace process. In what has become his signature style, Netanyahu refuses to address the contradictions in his actions over the years. In 2005, he originally voted in favour of disengagement from Gaza. In his Bar-Ilan speech of 2009, he stated that he was willing to accept the two-state solution. In 2011, he triumphantly welcomed Gilad Schalit home, while releasing Yahya Sinwar and another 1,026 security prisoners.

Politicians are certainly allowed to change their mind. Situations may change. Politicians may reassess and reevaluate. Netanyahu, however, pretends that he has always been right and never changed his mind. I have long believed that this reflected his desire not to undermine his followers’ belief in his infallibility. I am now feeling that he has bought into his own rhetoric and believes himself infallible.

Let me finally offer another definition of the difference between a statesman and a politician. A statesman is elected in order to do what needs to be done. A politician does what needs to be done in order to be elected. For Netanyahu, re-election has changed from being the means to being the end. The fear is that if he succeeds, it may well be so.

Tis the season for grandsons to catch anything that’s going, apparently. Ollie seems his usual cheerful self, despite being under the weather; Raphael is enjoying being out in the weather; but poor Tao has been feeling proper poorly, as we say in South Wales. May they all, and you all, and we all, have a better week this week!