I happen to belong among those who believe that we should start taking stock of what happened to us on October 7, 2023, and the period that led up to that atrocious day. The problem is that there is apparently more on which we disagree than agree.
Among the issues we seem to agree on, the first is that something went very wrong in the period that led up to October 7, which left us unprepared to cope with what that day brought for at least several days.
The second is that the financial support we encouraged Qatar to provide Hamas in the Gaza Strip for several years before the war, in order to strengthen it vis-à-vis the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank (Judea and Samaria), was a catastrophic mistake.
The third was the misconception that we should replace our large and rather cumbersome military force with a small and “clever” one, high in electronic and technological devices.
The fourth is that those responsible for what happened should pay the price – our enemies, immediately during the war, and those in our political and military leadership who blundered, after the bloody “seven-front war” that we got ourselves into finally comes to an end, but perhaps even before.
The fifth is that the state is responsible for returning all the remaining hostages who were taken by Hamas, alive or dead.
Unfortunately, we do not agree on why all these mistakes occurred, and what must be done to rectify the basic situation.
The first issue we do not agree on is how the blame should be divided between the political leadership and the security leadership, when the issue should be reviewed, and by whom.
The second issue we do not agree on is whether and how we should plan our future relations with the Palestinian people, who today number anywhere between 6 and 8 million persons in the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and the sovereign state of Israel, compared to over 7 million Jewish Israeli citizens and inhabitants.
The third issue we do not agree on is where the extra manpower should be taken to perform all the necessary tasks, and how to balance the burden among the various population groups (especially the issue of enlisting haredim who refuse to serve for religious and ideological reasons).
Regarding the fourth issue, there are those who demand immediate general elections and the establishment of a national investigation commission, while others wish to hold the elections in due course (preferably October 2026) and establish a less effective investigative body.
On the fifth, we disagree as to whether bringing the hostages back immediately – before it is too late to bring at least some back alive – at the cost of temporarily ending the war and releasing hundreds, if not thousands of Palestinian prisoners with blood on their hands is the right thing to do.
Before we can even start trying to resolve any of these issues, and others that are not necessarily connected to the war (e.g. the legal reform/revolution), we must reach a state of mind in which a majority of us seek and are willing to make the necessary compromises, whenever feasible.
However, because our togetherness is rapidly becoming increasingly acrimonious and difficult to maintain, perhaps it is time for all sides of this turmoil to take a look at their own conduct.
The Oslo Accords
Towards the end of the 1990s and beyond, I started to be asked by right-wing friends and foes how I could remain a left-winger after the dismal failure of the Oslo Accords, and especially the increase in the number of Jews murdered by Palestinian terrorists.
My reply to this question was and remains that indeed, the Oslo Accords were largely a failure, but that we do not know what would have happened without them. Undoubtedly, Jews would have continued to be murdered by terrorists without the Oslo Accords, quite possibly in growing numbers.
Besides, being a left-winger does not only involve a belief that we must seek to talk to the local Palestinian people, who, as mentioned above, are about equal in number to us Jews west of the Jordan River. It involves beliefs in the welfare state, a mixed economy (state vs private), support for and defense of human rights for all citizens and residents, respect for the rule of law, etc.
Furthermore, although the Oslo Accords did not bring peace, this does not mean that one can bring peace without an agreement with the Palestinians. The right wing does not offer a solution that promises to result in fewer fatalities. So let us agree that neither side in Israel has a viable solution at the moment, and let us simply respect each other’s beliefs at face value, without efforts to demonize each other needlessly.
There is also frequently a problem with the way left-wingers approach the opposite side. Since October 9 there has been a rising phenomenon of left-wingers who due to the horrific crimes committed by the Palestinians who infiltrated Israel from the Gaza Strip on October 7, but also other events of the last few years, have shifted politically to the right. Some of these persons have become outspoken in viciously condemning and mocking their former colleagues in the left – frequently on TV Channel 14.
One of the milder members of this group is Professor Moshe Cohen-Eliya, an expert in constitutional law who has remained a liberal in his approach on many issues but has shifted away from the left.
When the legal reform crisis erupted soon after the formation of the current government, he was active in a group that tried to work out a compromise between the coalition and opposition within the framework of the president’s forum. According to Cohen-Eliya, quite a bit of progress was made, but his left-wing colleagues turned out to be extremely rigid and rejected all the compromises offered.
He felt that all they wanted was to bring down the government, not to compromise. He painfully relates, whenever interviewed, that due to his political shift, numerous persons he had considered friends in the past now refuse to talk to him.
Cohen-Eliya is not the only former left-winger who has been boycotted by former colleagues. The life of attorney Eldad Yaniv, who shifted to the right after the last elections, when he started to support Netanyahu, also turned into hell as a result of an extreme social boycott against him, which led him to stop appearing altogether both in public and on social media.
I am no fan of Yaniv, but such conduct is unacceptable, no matter how annoying the victim. What we need is more moderation and tolerance.
The writer worked in the Knesset for many years as a researcher and has published extensively both journalistic and academic articles on current affairs and Israeli politics. Her most recent book, Israel’s Knesset Members: A Comparative Study of an Undefined Job, was published by Routledge.