There is no ambiguity in TV studios Israel today

Even in the past, everyone knew who did not hesitate to act in the Middle East. • Studios understand this well, but when it comes to Prime Minister Netanyahu, national interests are less important. • Opinion

• Most of our media cannot be trusted

  Photo: 

  From News 12

It goes more or less like this: when Netanyahu does something bad, it is a sign of a clear inherent failure of his right-wing worldview or of his flawed personality;

And when Netanyahu does something good, it's all thanks to other factors - the health funds, the defense establishment or the high-tech sector.

And the mehadrin add: it is tainted with irrelevant considerations.

The vaccines he did because of the election;

The closures for the campaign;

And the operations against Iran - well, that's to distract you from the fascinating issue of Ilan Yeshua's testimony in the Jerusalem District Court.  

In general it is impossible to trust most of our media when it comes to fair mediation of reality, easy and material when the political bias is so direct and overt.

The daily trend is to go against what has already won the Israeli "bragging" brand regarding the latest special operations - in Natanz and the intelligence ship in the Red Sea.

The "bragging" in question is information leaked to the New York Times, which attributes these and other actions to Israel.

Some of the information may have come from the US intelligence agencies, and some of the leaks may have been intended to embarrass Israel more than to "show off," but our media is ripe.

If it's Netanyahu - they are against. 

Israel is in an unofficial campaign against Iran on a variety of fronts and frontiers.

Over the years, it has walked the fine line of systematically harming Iran's intelligence and nuclear science infrastructure, while maintaining ambiguity.

But ambiguity does not mean that no one knows about her actions, but rather the opposite: know also know, but there is no official confession.

This is how deterrence is achieved but beware of escalation.

Today Boogie Ya'alon complains about the "bragging" but also the elimination of Jihad Mornia, when Ya'alon was defense minister, or the destruction of the reactor in Syria during Olmert's time, proceeded under the same paradigm: Israel did not say anything open, but everyone knew who to watch out for and who did not hesitate to act To keep him safe.  

The center of gravity of the nuclear campaign is not at all in Iran, but in the Western capitals - and especially in Washington - which has the military power, political power and economic weight that can push Iran into a corner.

Therefore, it is a much more political-political campaign than a military one.

And the actions attributed to Israel also play a dramatic role in this aspect: it signals to decision-makers that Israel is a regional player whose positions must be taken into account;

It reinforces the identity of the interests underlying the "Abrahamic Agreements" coalition with the Gulf states;

And it signals a direction for an alternative to the submission and submission of the democratic government. 

The indirect and implicit "bragging" that Israel systematically uses is an integral part of this campaign.

And I will tell you another secret: in the TV studios they understand this well, but in the question of national interests in the face of fair coverage of Netanyahu, they have long since decided.

On this issue, there is no ambiguity.