Opinion | Studies in the Izenkot's Ideological Doctrine Israel today

It hurts me when I see that Ben Gvir is a legitimate political actor.

but what?

Whoever voted for him - knows what he will get.

Say an issue - and you know what he thinks.

And differentiate, but really differentiate, also Merav Michaeli.

Whatever is on the agenda - it will have a position: political, social, economic, and of course gender.

The application will already be done by its professionals in the office.

The vote for both is a worldview vote.

Now, tell me what we know about the Izenkots: generals who were in the IDF for years and came to work every day as "unidentified" so that they could be relevant to join with their release - to any party. By definition, military socialization, and rightly so, is pragmatism. Officials say to every incumbent, from every political side, that they will supply him with the goods and "flow" with every policy: disengagement as occupation, evacuation of outposts as their expansion, Oslo Accords as a defensive wall.

It is a culture that penetrates and shapes their ideological identity, in other words: there is no ideological identity among them.

They are ready to welcome any policy, to give it a security stamp, as long as it allows them to be part of the government-political hive.

The fact that they are in uniform not only has nothing to do with being worthy - for the most part - their military successes are related to their distant past, and being at the helm of the army is an aura-free period, at most they avoided significant actions and wanted to "return home in peace."

There is no need to look far - for example, we will look at Chief of Staff Aviv Kochavi, who is now counting the days to end his term. Television is where he "dares" to produce "safe" military activity: He is distributing on the screen to the Lebanese government, after the onshore military maneuver has disappeared.

Presumably, then the campaign will focus on its proper action in the Defensive Wall, just as Ehud Barak's broadcasts have always focused on Operation Entebbe.

It is just that those operations of the chiefs of staff from their days as combatants did not predict anything about their days as generals, and certainly not about their future conduct as statesmen. Ideologically, they put up for sale at too low a price the only resource at their disposal: the ability to frame the policy of the government, any government, as secure and worthy.

Is it good that another general is joining the political waters?

I will answer this: would it be good if I asked who of the politicians seeking to be elected to the Knesset of Israel express full worldviews, represent resolute ideological years and have a commitment to stable agendas - I will not have to remember only a provocative priest, or - unlike thousands Appoint a chief of staff of a nation.

Were we wrong?

Fixed!

If you found an error in the article, we'll be happy for you to share it with us