The clip of Yair Lapid’s speech from Saturday night, December 21, at a rally on behalf of the hostages left a memorable impression on those present and on the tens of thousands or more who viewed it on social media platforms. Alternatively shouting, shrieking, bellowing, and at times, going hoarse, he gave vent to his anger. He yelled out, stretching out the syllables, “We are the ma-jo-ri-ty!” thundering, “All revolutions around the world start like this! We will win! Bibi isn’t truly gaining strength!”
Lapid assured those assembled, “The people aren’t with them... they’re terrified... to death. They are afraid...” He promised them, “We’ll defeat them. Not just win – we’ll crush them!” And then, at the top of his strained voice, almost howling, he declared to the government, “You want a war? You’ll get a war! We’re not afraid of you! You will lose; we will not surrender!”
This conduct raised eyebrows and questions regarding whether Lapid has lost control. He has consistently presented a studied mien, speaking slowly during interviews, dressing well, and appearing in all the proper places in Israel and abroad – even if his attendance in the Knesset chamber and committee rooms has been below average,
In the week following Lapid’s speech, Yair Golan, who leads the Democrats, took to the same speaker’s podium at the weekly hostage support rally. There, he declared that he would “replace this horrible government with ‘loyalists of Zionism’ and ‘democracy.’” Golan accused the government of running “toxic” propaganda promoting “lies, racism, and hatred” and of prolonging the war in Gaza as “a way to stay in power.”
As if in competition with Lapid, Golan declared, “We are the power, and with that power, we’ll toss them out and return this nation to a discourse of sanity.”
We are witnessing the issue of the hostages being hijacked by political elements and Kaplan Force activists. The two vile allegations they hurl to justify their anti-Bibi ideology and call for new elections are: 1) It is Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who wishes to perpetuate the war and prolong all our suffering just to “keep his seat;” and 2) Netanyahu is apathetic to the plight of the remaining 100 hostages held by Hamas.
Debates whether Netanyahu or Hamas is preventing a hostage deal
WHILE WHITE House National Security Council communications adviser John Kirby has repeatedly stressed that it is the terror group Hamas that is the problem, playing obstructionist games and continually throwing up obstacles, Golan, along with many others, insists that it is Netanyahu who has “passed up three clear-cut opportunities for a hostage-ceasefire deal.”
One of the most outspoken of the parents of the hostages, Einav Zangauker, sought out by every reporter, was interviewed at last week’s rally, insisting that it is Netanyahu who “adds new conditions.” Last week, she told cabinet member Zeev Elkin that if her son returns in a coffin or body bag, she will take the law into her own hands.
Uri Misgav, in his December 26 column in Haaretz wrote: “Netanyahu doesn’t want [the hostages] alive here... He is not prepared to reach a ceasefire and end the war.” Misgav bemoaned that Brothers in Arms have abandoned their threat of refusing to serve in the reserves over the judicial reform – a policy he termed “a jihad against us.” This, he stressed, “cannot be met with a handshake or by turning the other cheek.” Misgav suggested: “They can only be met with war.”
The opening salvo in that war was fired on the night of November 16 when news agencies reported that two flash bombs were fired toward the Netanyahu home in Caesarea “and fell into the garden.” They landed near a security guard who was lightly wounded and in a state shock. Too many media outlets and reporters have sought to frame the firing as something non-violent; even as recently as December 24, an editorial in Haaretz insisted that “Firing flares at Netanyahu’s house is protest.” I can only imagine the reaction of the White House or 10 Downing Street to a similar event.
Broad sections of the broadcast, print, and digital media display outright hypocrisy in protecting the obviously violent turn from nasty slogans to the use of potentially lethal instruments. Incidentally, the villain in the 1989 film Dead Calm is killed by a flare.
Calling the prime minister a “Hitler,” and a “murderer,” and holding up posters with guillotines and gallows appears to have affected former senior military officers to the extent that they felt justified in the use of flares against the home of the prime minister.
In January 1952, Menachem Begin’s Herut Party suffered a near-fatal blow as a result of dozens of its supporters throwing stones at the Knesset, then located in downtown Jerusalem on King George Street. Begin, after calling David Ben-Gurion a “hooligan” during the following day’s debate on the proposed German reparations, was distanced from the Knesset Plenum for three months, charged with threatening violence against the Knesset. Those were different times, it would appear.
Over the past years the anti-Bibi campaign has steadily descended into a frenzy of denouncements and reproaches as vicious as they are illogical.
With this new round of castigations, now accompanied by real violence, Israel’s society is being put to a test, one it can ill afford to fail.
The writer is a researcher, analyst, and commentator on political, cultural, and media issues.