Ehud Olmert: “Arrogance prevented Israel from avoiding the October 7 attacks”

Iñaki Anasagasti, former deputy and former senator of the PNV, maintains that the expression “Chinese vases”—a very valuable object but that no one knows where to place—applied to former presidents who, once their career is over, feel free to say what they want. They think, no matter how unpopular it may be, it was invented by former Chilean president Eduardo Frei. In the current situation in Israel and Palestine, with 1,200 dead from the Hamas attacks of October 7 and another more than 21,000 due to the Israeli military response on Gaza, Ehud Olmert (Binyamina, Israel, 78 years old) fits well into that concept .

The former Israeli Prime Minister between 2006 and 2009 with the centrist Kadima party is aware of the strong social support that his country's military campaign has despite the enormous numbers of civilian deaths it has caused, but he believes that Benjamin's Government Netanyahu should stop the war now to free the 125 hostages who still remain in the hands of the Islamist group. Very critical of Netanyahu, who succeeded him in power and whom he considers finished, Olmert is in favor of resuming negotiations with the Palestinian National Authority with an eye toward a two-state solution. “Israel has to provide a political horizon,” he repeats.

Ask. After the attacks of October 7, Israel is going through one of its worst moments since its founding. How have you got here?

Answer. Israel was absolutely shocked. I'm sure Israel had all the intelligence needed to know what was going on. There were even concrete warnings from friendly services of the possibility of a very serious military attack by Hamas. Israel has long developed a certain degree of arrogance and complacency. Netanyahu said he did not want dealings with the Palestinian Authority. The Palestinian Authority is a potential partner for political negotiations, but from the Israeli government's point of view, political negotiations almost inevitably mean territorial concessions to the Palestinians. For someone like Netanyahu, whose political base depends on the concept of Greater Israel, it was impossible. So he changed direction and demoted the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, saying that he is not trustworthy, that they are terrorists… Netanyahu said that he would rather deal with Hamas. The difference between Netanyahu and the Palestinians was that the Palestinians were constantly increasing their military capabilities. Their goal was to do what they did on October 7: try to shake the foundation of Israel's trust and strengths to create this unprecedented earthquake. Netanyahu thought that he could buy Hamas with money because he thinks that everything can be bought. But you can't buy everything with money.

Q. How did he try to buy Hamas?

R. It allowed Qatar to finance Hamas with billions of dollars. And he thought that with that money he could buy their tacit cooperation. But not everyone is like Netanyahu. Yahia Sinwar [líder de Hamás en Gaza y presunto cerebro del 7 de octubre] He played it very skillfully. Although Netanyahu now calls him a “Nazi”, it was he who freed him from prison in exchange for the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit. He and 1,026 other Palestinian prisoners by a soldier. What he didn't know is that Sinwar doesn't play this game. Sinwar was helped by his experience in prison. He knew that the Israelis are very arrogant and that they did not believe that the Palestinians could do what they did. That they do not have that sophistication and wisdom to deceive Israel. Israeli intelligence and cyber intelligence is the best in the world and gave good results. The Israeli mentality was for something else and that is what allowed the massacre. Arrogance. That was the problem.

Q. Isn't arrogance a failure of the intelligence services?

R. There was no intelligence failure. There was psychological and intellectual failure, not intelligence. We knew everything. Now we can show films of how they trained, of what they did. This also happened in 1973, before the Yom Kippur War. With Hamas it was the same. We watched the training and asked ourselves: “Is Hamas going to play us? To us Israelis? We are the nation of startups. “We know everything.” We know everything, but sometimes we don't know how to read another person's mind. We didn't understand what was happening.

Q. Has this whole chain of errors affected Netanyahu's popularity?

R. I'm sure there are still some who support him, but their numbers are decreasing every day. All polls published after October 7 show that Netanyahu has lost more than half of the support he had until now. He is on his last legs.

Q. The goals of the Gaza war are to eradicate Hamas and free the hostages. Aren't they contradictory considering the violence of the military operation?

R. There are two different attitudes. One says that the stronger the military pressure, the greater the chances that the hostages will be freed. Then there is another opinion, according to which the longer the military operation, the lower the chances of liberation. We may be able to destroy Hamas, but we will have no living hostages. Therefore, there may not be a synchronization of these two objectives. Israel should stop fighting to exchange all hostages. The quick and the dead. Israel has hit Hamas in a very painful way. Hamas suffers, Hamas bleeds, but it is not destroyed. They have lost thousands of soldiers, but you have to understand it from the point of view of Yahia Sinwar and Hamas. To achieve their sacred goal, 10,000 soldiers killed is not a big deal. They have a completely different vision of human lives, of sacrifice. So yes, we have destroyed an important part of Hamas's military capacity, but not Hamas. It is very difficult to destroy a terrorist organization. Hamas has between 20,000 and 30,000 terrorists. You kill 10,000. It's a huge loss. But they have another 20,000 and tomorrow they will have another 5,000 or 10,000 more, because if they do not have a political horizon, if they do not have a political future, they will become terrorists. Defeating a terrorist organization means something completely different than what we are used to. We have killed many, we have destroyed their tunnels, their command posts, some of their commanders. Have we finished Hamas? No.

Q. Polls show that since October 7, support for Hamas in the Palestinian territories has grown. In the West Bank it has almost quadrupled.

R. I don't know if Hamas has increased its support in Gaza. It cannot be measured because there will be no free elections while Hamas is in control. In the West Bank I think they increased their support. Because people who live in the West Bank do not have to suffer what Hamas has done like in Gaza, where 50% of the territory is destroyed, buildings are collapsed, people feel that this is destroying their lives and not everyone is very happy. . But in the West Bank, you can go to a cafe, a bar… It's prosperous. When they see Gaza on television they identify emotionally and find it easier to support Hamas.

Q. You talk about st
opping the war now. Do you think Israeli society would accept it?

R. I don't say this because it may be popular or unpopular, but because I think it is right. A growing number of Israelis understand that the gap between the goal of returning the hostages and continuing the war is widening. We have to make a decision. Do we want to get the hostages back or do we want to keep fighting? I have always been against these deals, but this time it is different, because the hostages were kidnapped in their homes, their living rooms, their bedrooms, and where it is the absolute responsibility of the Government to protect them. And we couldn't. When you send the soldier to the battlefield, there is always the possibility that he will not return. But he is a soldier. No one would blame you for sending him to the battlefield and not bringing him back if that is the inevitable outcome of war. Citizens in their homes are the absolute responsibility of the Government. There can be no excuse or justification. From the point of view of the Israelis, the hostages are an unforgettable and unforgivable matter, and the Government must do everything possible to recover them. If the price of bringing them is the end of the military operation, even though it may seem insulting and humiliating, we have to pay it.

Q. The enormous loss of civilians is eroding international support. Is the Government aware of the damage to its reputation that the State is suffering?

R. Netanyahu may be aware of the erosion of sympathy for the State of Israel. But as far as he is concerned, his position and personal status seem to be more important. Either way, he is completely out of his mind. He has to go. There is growing distrust in Netanyahu. More and more Israelis understand that he is not the solution. He is the problem. And to get to a solution, we need to get rid of it.

Q. In public, the prime minister maintains the toughest speech of going to the end, but behind the cameras he takes steps that previously seemed taboo, such as accepting the Palestinian National Authority in Gaza or a partial withdrawal of troops so that the hostages return. .

R. It seems that she has lost touch with reality. She lives in a bubble. I think what he feels is that the only way to save himself is to continue with these hysterical and arrogant statements of destroy and destroy until the end, in the hope that while it lasts, he will distance himself from the impact of the events of October 7. But I don't think I'm doing the right calculation.

Q. Why do you systematically refuse to talk about the post-war scenario?

R. Because he has nothing to say. If you say what you really think, you will be rejected by the entire international community. If he says what the international community wants him to say, he will lose his Government. That's why he prefers not to say anything.

Q. From his experience as prime minister, what should that scenario be like?

R. Israel has to do three things. First, announce that we will withdraw from Gaza when the fighting ends. Then, reach out to our friends, the United States and Europe – I'm afraid we won't be able to talk to them. [el presidente español] Pedro Sánchez because he is not very cooperative—and tell them: do you have someone who can take charge of Gaza? No other country should set foot in Gaza after Israel. An international intervention force must be sent for a year or a year and a half to maintain the balance and not allow the terrorists to take power again, a provisional period to prepare for the seizure of power by the Palestinian Authority. Furthermore, Israel has to embark on negotiations for a two-state solution. Let's offer mediation to Egypt. Israel has to provide a political horizon. This will help Biden, Sunak, Scholz, Macron and others give Israel a little more time to further attack Hamas. That way they can say they don't like the humanitarian situation but at least Israel is prepared to start a political push toward a solution. If Israel does not offer any political horizon and thinks, against the international community, that it can fight indefinitely, it will lose much more international support.

Follow all the international information on Facebook and xor in our weekly newsletter.

_