Eran Yashiv’s clever and sharp note published this week in the Israeli newspaper HaaretzThe renowned academic and analyst Yashiv is the antipodes of being able to be the victim of facile derogatory qualifications.
Because of his nationality, his place of residence (Israel) and his rich academic and professional career, he is today one of the most qualified and solid voices in the analysis of what is happening in his country and in the region. A distinguished professor of Economics at Tel Aviv University, Yashiv has also been director of the Economics and National Security Program at the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) in Israel. Nothing less. He is not just any opinion-giver.
Netanyahu/Putin parallelism
By the weight of Haaretz And Yashiv’s own, both his fine analysis and his sharp and harsh comments regarding the ongoing war against Gaza, weigh heavily. His assessments of Benjamin Netanyahu’s grave responsibility cannot be trivialized or pushed aside with silly defensive claims about a supposed – and non-existent – “anti-Semitic” approach.
In his precise – and sharp – note, Yashiv mentions and develops several core issues, two of which stand out.
First, the Netanyahu-Putin parallel. According to Yashiv’s description and comparative analysis, both are sinister characters. Two characters who are leading their countries towards disaster.
According to Yashiv, “Netanyahu is leading Israel down a slope similar to the one Putin is leading Russia down, a slope that includes more and more deaths of soldiers and civilians, the destruction of the economy and the emigration of the strong segments of society, leaving the younger generation without hope.” He is leading Israel to disaster, due to its own mistakes and not because of terrorist actions.
Despite the different trajectories of Netanyahu/Putin, in Yashiv’s analysis “they are similar political types: both feel they have a ‘vision for their nation,’ both are disconnected from basic human emotions and have no moral compass, and both strive for absolute power.”
Undermining democracy
On the path to disaster, Netanyahu and Putin are similar in their drive to undermine democracy internally in their respective countries.
Yashiv comments that “Netanyahu is turning Israel into an autocracy, a Jewish Iran in the Middle East that could no longer be a true partner of the United States.” Blunt. While Putin, for his part, has “…gradually and effectively taken control of the judiciary and the media (…) turned the regime into a kleptocracy, plundering state resources (…) appointed his loyalists to control the security apparatus (…) institutionalized corruption, subjugated the main holders of capital and (…) forged alliances with similar rulers around the world.”
And something else: Netanyahu, whom he presents as a failed strategist. In this regard, Yashiv’s questioning of the Israeli head of government is forceful – and precise. Among other considerations, Netanyahu is carrying out “a war without purpose and without end” while “overlooking the threat posed by Hamas,” leaving Israel unguarded on October 7 last year.
Despite the country having one of the best security systems on the planet, the massive Hamas incursion passed right under Netanyahu’s nose. Israel and the world have yet to receive an explanation as to why this highly sophisticated system was completely inoperative, of no use. And on October 7, it was overtaken by dozens of individuals on their paragliders.
Towards the abyss
As to where we are going, Yashiv’s comment is accurate: “Netanyahu is leading Israel into the abyss. He is setting fire to the north of the country, its south and the West Bank…” And unleashing a serious institutional crisis in Israel.
Indeed, within this turbulent scenario, and within which Israel often presents itself – with some reason – as the only parliamentary democracy in the Middle East, the dimension of the institutional crisis generated by Netanyahu seems not to have been internalized by the majority of political actors in Israel.
War… without purpose or end
Netanyahu’s alleged “strategist” qualifications are severely questioned by the facts themselves: the disaster he is creating. This includes the fact that the internal legitimacy of Netanyahu and his government is seriously – and increasingly – questioned. As Yashiv astutely points out in his note in Haaretz“…this is a prime minister backed by a minority who lacks the support of public opinion, and it will also be understood that he is not legitimate.”
Therefore, he and many other Israeli analysts agree, “This government can be replaced and must be replaced democratically. The Biden administration has several levers to achieve this goal. For example, it has several channels of communication with the ultra-Orthodox parties; its 18 seats are crucial in the current Knesset and in future ones.”
Starting next year, this could be the task of the first female US president. Her constructive statements in favour of peace in the region provide a good basis for optimism about what she will do.
One answer: in this ongoing war, without purpose or end, the obvious way out is a cessation of hostilities. And, immediately, something more ambitious than a ceasefire: a return to the table of international law.
The responsibility of Western countries
But first things first: the responsibility of the United States and the “Western” countries that supply and seek to legitimize Netanyahu’s actions. Yashiv recapitulates political practices and facts regarding the Netanyahu/Putin similarity. And, based on this, many point to the need to do something so that Netanyahu does not repeat the instrumentalization that Putin made of Western countries, including the United States, for his authoritarianism.
As Yashiv reflects in his note: “The West viewed Putin as an interlocutor for dialogue for much of his time in power since 1999. But with the invasion of Ukraine, that approach changed, and Putin became a persona non grata. As a result, Russia became a pariah state…”
Interesting analysis. It could lead to proactive guidelines to end this war and sit down to seriously discuss peace. Progress must be made in refining, specifying and enforcing today, for example, the decision UN of two states: Israel and Palestine together. But an Israel with the borders defined by the United Nations when the State was created in 1948, and not adding Palestinian territories militarily usurped by Israel in 1967 with the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza (with which the “size” of the country was unduly tripled).
Translated into operational terms, Israel must return to its original borders, complying with all resolutions adopted by the General Assembly and the Security Council of the United Nations since 1967 (for example, 242/1967). All of them have been ignored with impunity by the invading/occupying State.
A good basis for a lasting peace and to finally be able to sit down at the negotiating table to move forward.
Follow all the information from El PAÍS América on Facebook and Xor in our weekly newsletter.
#Netanyahu #Putin