Right-wing man accuses Netanyahu of schism, thereby embracing the myth promoted by the left • In light of the century plan, it is precisely here that the personal motive overpowered ideology • Opinion

• Zvika Hauser // Photo: Oren Ben Hakon

Ariel Kahana's interview with Zvi Hauser in "Israel This Week" also failed to solve the political riddle of the past year, even more mysterious than Lieberman's: How it happens that central figures in the national camp, especially a person with such an ideological anchor as Hauser, joined in such a desire for opposition Who vowed allegiance to replace the right-wing government.

The Enigma actually intensifies towards the third day, when the right is particularly close to fulfilling a significant part of its aspirations. Dreams that were discussed decades ago in youth camps of the National Camp have finally moved to the execution wing, and whoever puts sticks in wheels is one of the movement's great trainees? Hauser does promise that white blue will embrace the Centennial Plan, but as Prof. Abbey Barley explained here, when Gantz states that applying sovereignty in the valley will only be done in coordination with the international community, the practical meaning is Europe's veto on invitation. Hauser is not so naive to think that the European Union, which has already ordered from the printing press to mark settlement products, will recognize the application of sovereignty in settlement blocs.

Hauser with Prime Minister Netanyahu // Photo: Flash 90

"Netanyahu runs a policy that crushes Israeli society," says Hauser. "Netanyahu's concept is the preservation of political power by creating controversies." We will skip the repulsive mustard campaign and the fact that he and his party members have bought into the habit of disdaining Likud and voting as "delusional right" and "personal cult." What is surprising is the troubled mindset of a man of historical and revisionist consciousness, who knows something about the tactics of schism, exclusion, and de-legitimization from which the movement that educated him suffered.

The "crushing of society" and the "squabble" are a myth that the left has cultivated to legitimize Netanyahu's era, after the economic, security and political collapse projections collapsed. How do you measure schism? Is Israeli society more divided today than it was during the Black Panthers? First Lebanon War? Oslo? October 2000 events? Disengagement? Is that a serious argument?

National Law Thinker

But if it is nonetheless urgent to state that Netanyahu is responsible for any division in society, one should be fair and admit that one is indeed named - and call it the "National Law." The intention was good, but the realization and the wording really hurt the minorities - Muslims, Christians and Druze - citizens of the state, who are also struggling with discrimination, prejudice and hostility. Ironically, however, one of the dominant thinkers and promoters of national law - was the deer Hauser.

In his comments, Hauser further states that "Netanyahu runs a strategy of crushing trust in systems ... deliberately compromises the confidence of the security, academic, cultural, legal and media systems." This is a continuation of the schism, and here too the irony climbs to the top of a tower. The deepest rationale behind the law of the nation was the desire to put in the governing tool a means of restraining the supreme power of the Supreme Judges, and to fight the rampant judicial activism under the auspices of the Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty. Hauser was one of the thinkers of the national law party to break the court - and after Netanyahu fulfilled his vision, did he accuse him of diverting society and crushing trust in the systems?

Hauser with Gantz // Photo: Eyal Margolin / Ginny

"I mourn the change that occurred in Netanyahu ... Everything is geared toward the same personal battle, including the Land of Israel and the unity of Israel," says MK Hauser sadly about the man who fulfilled all his youth dreams: the Golan Heights sovereignty (which Hauser was one of its leading founders); Regarding the legality of settlement, and the recognition of the right to apply sovereignty in the valley and lumps, it is known to date that Hauser has no ideological affinity for white, future, and "natural partners" at work and in Meretz.

I find it difficult to understand the motive for his actions, but the impression is that if there is someone who "put his personal name before the affairs of Israel" - it is himself. In a few days there is a great chance that Hauser will be recorded in history as someone who for the fall of Netanyahu was willing to sacrifice the rare historical chance of fulfilling the ideology of the camp in which he grew. A transformation into glory.