Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu urged political unity on Saturday night, two days after a late-night cabinet meeting ended in a bitter dispute was leaked to the media and the opposition called for the collapse of the government.
“Everything must be put aside and we must continue with united forces until absolute victory is achieved,” Netanyahu said in a video message in which he vowed to destroy Hamas.
He did not mention the heated cabinet debate, which captured media attention for the last two days, but his words were seen as a direct response to the political dispute over the composition of an internal IDF investigation into security failures contributing to the October 7 massacre.
A number of those who participated in the meeting, including Transportation Minister Miri Regev (Likud) and Public Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir grilled IDF Chief-of-Staff Herzl Halevi on the matter.
On Friday Minister Benny Gantz (National Unity) said that the heated exchange which occurred at the diplomatic-security cabinet on Thursday night “was a politically motivated attack in the middle of a war. I have participated in many cabinet meetings - such conduct has never occurred, and must not occur.”
He blamed Netanyahu for the outburst. “Yesterday, the cabinet should have discussed strategic processes that will affect the continuation of the campaign and our security in the future. It did not happen, and the prime minister is responsible for that.
״He has the responsibility to correct and to choose - between unity and security and between politics. If what is important now is security and unity, we must hold the essential discussion for the continuation of the fighting and as soon as possible,” Gantz stated.
Likud's claims on Gantz's goals
The Likud charged in response that Gantz was looking for a reason to exit the national-unity government which he had joined solely due to the war.
Gantz has been Netanyahu’s main political rival and has been leading in all political polls, showing that if elections were held now, he could receive 38 seats and would be able to form a government.
The Likud on Friday shot back at Gantz, stating, that cabinet members had a responsibility to ask questions and doing so was not political.
“During a war, when the people are united, Gantz is expected to act responsibly and stop looking for excuses to break his promise to remain in the unity government until the end of the war,” the Likud said.
Defense Minister Yoav Gallant issued a statement of support for Halevi, stating that it was important to keep the army out of any political debate.
“I appeal to all members of the public to stop irresponsibly using the IDF and its commanders for political gain,” he said.
Others saw the fact that the debate was leaked from a meeting that was supposed to be secret as a sign that Netanyahu was not capable of holding high-level security conversions.
Opposition leader Yair Lapid, a former prime minister and former foreign minister, said that the leaks were proof that this government needed to be replaced, even while the war was ongoing.
“The leaks from the cabinet [Thursday] night are a disgrace and further proof that this cabinet is dangerous. The State of Israel must replace the government and its leader. These people are not worthy of the sacrifice and heroism of IDF men and women and will not be able to make strategic decisions. They have to go now.”
Labor Party leader Merav Michaeli issued a similar statement.
“Every minute that these people make decisions about our lives endangers life and limb,” she said.
The chief of staff and senior IDF officers are battling a hostile government that is fighting them, instead of focusing on eliminating Hamas.
“Once again, it is clear how dangerous Netanyahu is for Israel and how urgent it is to replace him immediately,” Michaeli said. “This time, you won’t be able to escape,” she added.
The meeting had dealt with Day After plans for Gaza in advance of US Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s anticipated visit to Israel this week.
In an interview with Channel 12 on Saturday night, Regev said she had received information about the creation of the internal IDF investigatory committee and quizzed Halevi about the matter.
Ministers have a responsibility to ask hard questions and should not be taken to task for doing so, she told Channel 12, explaining that this was good governance and not politics.
Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich (Religious Zionist Party) took issue with reports that the meeting ended prematurely due to the heated exchange, explaining that it had already been scheduled to end at midnight.
“The meeting didn’t explode, the prime minister had said it would end – from the start – at midnight,” Smotrich stated.
At issue was opposition to an IDF plan for an internal investigatory committee that would include former defense minister and former IDF chief-of-staff Shaul Mofaz, IDF intelligence chief Maj.-Gen. Aharon Zeevi Farkash, and former IDF southern command chief Sami Turgeman.
The committee would be tasked with investigating the military failures that contributed to the Hamas-led October 7 attack, in which over 1.200 people were killed and another 250 were taken hostage.
The results of the committee were intended for internal use, to immediately improve flaws in IDF operations moving forward, and were not expected to constitute a formal investigatory committee.
Regev told Channel 12 she believed that the scope of the investigation was broader and should be handled by a national investigatory committee after the war.
Some of the ministers in the meeting were upset that Mofaz and Farkash were part of the team. Both men had held top military roles during the 2005 disengagement from Gaza and in the lead-up to the Second Lebanon War.
Among those who spoke out were National Public Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir (Otzma Yehudit) and Transportation Minister Miri Regev (Likud).
AFTER THE meeting Ben-Gvir said that "appointing Mofaz" was "adding insult to injury." He said Mofaz was “one of the main architects of the [damaging] disengagement, who is a political figure, and above all, was an essential partner in the [strategic] construction that brought us to this point.”
He added, “Given that any investigation must also include examining decisions around disengagement, its architect can’t be part of the investigatory process.”
Ben-Gvir also took issue with Farkash’s support of those who, during the fierce debate over the judicial reform, said they would refuse to serve in the IDF as a protest move.
Those actions were also “undoubtedly a catalyst for the events of October 7,” Ben-Gvir stated. “These are people whose actions should be investigated rather than being investigators,” he charged.
At one point during the stormy back and forth at the end of the meeting, Gantz defended Halevi and expressed his frustration with Ben-Gvir’s insisting that the strategic concept of disengagement was relevant to this particular issue.
According to Walla, Gantz retorted “This is a professional investigation, what does it have to do with the disengagement and the [strategic] conception? The chief of staff is f***ing conducting an investigation into what happened now, to serve the goals of the war and our ability to prepare for a conflict in the north.”