Israel-Russia relations today are not such as can cause an internal rift in Israeli society.
But still, this is another round of the carousel of relations that has accompanied the State of Israel since its establishment.
In the early 1950s, Ben-Gurion and the ambassador to the UN and Washington, Abba Evan, announced that Israel was ready to send large IDF forces to the Korean War, and on the other hand, Yehuda Amichai and Eleazar Granot wrote poems to Stalin.
Stalin created an existential threat to Jewry in the USSR, and MPM leader Yaakov Hazan embraced the homeland of Stalinism as a "second homeland".
In the current incarnation, it is Iran and its nuclear project that are at the heart of the relationship and the crisis in Israel-Russia relations, which has played out in the hands of an interim prime minister.
What characterizes Yair Lapid is that he is lagging behind the developments of the crisis curve.
The crisis with Putin and his country is not under control.
Closing the agency's activity is indeed a serious action.
How do you solve it?
This is a political event of 9 on the Richter scale and there are maybe two people who can handle the situation, but it is doubtful if any of them have any interest in getting into it after the ball fell out of Lapid's hands.
These are Benjamin Netanyahu, who for obvious reasons will not take it upon himself to deal with this problem now, and President Yitzhak Herzog.
Netanyahu severely criticized Lapid's conduct.
President Herzog and his brother Mike are the two adults in charge of Israel's foreign relations system, but the payment of a presidential visit to the Kremlin to settle matters borders on humiliation.
Almost the entire system of Israel's foreign and security relations is now washed away like walls built around a sand palace.
The Abraham Accords are losing their vitality due to President Biden's failed visit to the region, and especially his confrontations with the Saudi crown prince.
The Gulf countries and Saudi Arabia already prefer to close matters through direct contacts with Iran.
Relations with Poland, an important country that serves as a rear for Ukraine and is threatened by Russia, came to a practical break during Lapid's term as foreign minister, and have not really been restored.
Now Lapid has spoiled the relations with Russia, and political parties who were involved in the upgrading of the relations and the good coordination in the past, are furious about Lapid's conduct on the matter.
Lapid chooses to escalate the confrontation with Russia.
He has a world view that Israel should be invested in the West in terms of value, economy and politics.
Ethically, this does not include democratic procedures in the anti-democratic party body called Yesh Atid.
It's hard to think of a bigger mistake at the current time.
President Biden is investing all his energy in a conciliatory containment policy towards Iran.
Those Western countries that Lapid has his eyes on, such as France or Italy and to a large extent Germany as well, are very disunited and unwilling to confront Russia.
But Lapid thinks that sticking to the US in its policy in the Middle East is the right thing. Except that the American policy is not rational, and it stems from intra-party pressures and not from powerful considerations that can be explained. Nancy Pelosi's provocative visit to Taiwan indicates irresponsibility vis-à-vis China.
At the beginning of the Ukraine war, about four months ago, then Prime Minister Naftali Bennett started a weakened version of skipping and talking with Putin and Zelensky and his associates.
Although from the beginning it was a mistake, since Israel had to keep a distance from a war that was not hers, as Yuval Steinitz said, nevertheless Israel had a certain profit.
President Putin needed international legitimacy, and the Prime Minister of Israel gave it to him by acting in a similar way to the Turkish Erdogan.
We kept eye contact with the animal, and Israel stood out as the one that refrained from harshly condemning Russia.
In the period before the war, the Iron Dome deal with Ukraine was cancelled.
If we had not given in to the Americans on this issue, Israel would have been in a more comfortable position.
A symbolic defensive weapon in the hands of the attacked, and on the other hand it was possible to ignore what the world says about Russia.
In September 2015, Israel faced a crisis, which potentially could have been much more serious than the agency crisis.
Following the nuclear agreement, Russia entered Syria with its forces: missile bases, an air base, a port and a few ground forces.
This looks like the end of Israeli air superiority in Syria and the region.
Prime Minister Netanyahu's accelerated move against Putin resulted in the opposite happening: security coordination was achieved, which subsequently led to a situation where Netanyahu and Putin managed the Middle East and stabilized it.
At the end of the summer of 2013, the relationship and trust were probably established, when the duo Netanyahu and Steinitz solved a difficult problem for President Obama and Putin played the role of the responsible adult.
It was the operation to remove the chemical weapons from Syria - as compensation for the fact that the US was involved in a chemical attack by Assad. These are deep and stormy waters, which the NCOs that claim to be an alternative to Netanyahu simply cannot swim in.
Former Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif testified in extensive leaks, published a year and three months ago, that there was an identity of interests between Russia and Israel.
He didn't say it in those words, but accused Russia of not wanting the nuclear deal to succeed because it would normalize Iran's relations with the West.
Therefore, Russia tried with all its might to place obstacles to the agreement.
The Russians wanted Iran isolated, so that it would depend on Russia.
Even Israel during Netanyahu's time did not want the nuclear agreement.
She also opposed the American conciliatory moves towards Iran, centered on the nuclear agreement.
It was John Kerry who revealed to Zarif the strength of Israel's strikes against Iranian targets in Syria (and also in Iran).
He was pierced in a number of 200 attacks.
Israel under the leadership of Netanyahu knew how to maneuver well against Russia, China and the Arab countries, without tearing the rope with the US. It seems that in the days of Yair Lapid, Israel is returning to the concept formulated for it by Kissinger: Israel has no foreign policy, only domestic policy. It was forbidden to spoil relations with Russia. Every time this happened in the past, we went to war. It won't be easy to correct the distortion, since the US positions Russia as a leper.
But it is possible and you have to find a way to do it.
advance medicine
A maritime economic border should be treated as a territorial border for everything, what is happening in the field shows a serious drop in tension in deterrence
As in other critical areas, also around the drilling rig in the Shark field, Prime Minister Lapid is not keeping up with the pace of events. The crisis intensified following a drone attack on the rig and its successful interception.
Hezbollah is all too sure that Israel's security policy is managed from Washington through Defense Minister Benny Gantz.
That's why they bet on "no war".
Israel is busy containing the attack on it.
Although a gas field is not a civilian settlement, it is a vital interest, and the maritime economic border requires consideration like the territorial border of the State of Israel.
Both sides, and this includes Hezbollah, do not want an all-out war to break out.
But what is happening in the field shows a serious drop in deterrence.
This means that Israel's response in the next incident or in the face of a severe attack but below the threshold, should cover a deep deficit in deterrence.
Deterrence against Hezbollah is something that needs to be worked on in a regular sequence of offensive initiatives, which do not cause a flare-up.
The clear case is the "Northern Shield" operation to eliminate the Hezbollah tunnels nearly four years ago.
There was a fear of a flare-up, but the proactive activity that was apparently defensive demonstrated that the IDF was not afraid to go to the limit. Even during the time of Chief of Staff Aviv Kochavi there were several actions that indicated a willingness to go to the limit.
But beyond the erosion of deterrence in the last year, the issue of gas in Syria and Lebanon is in the background of tensions.
It is about the fact that Egypt will export gas in quantities of 650 million cubic meters of gas to the Deir Amr station in Lebanon, and the gas will arrive via the Arab gas pipeline that passes through Jordan and Syria.
Awaiting American approval.
The amounts of gas will solve some of the electricity problems that plague the citizens of Lebanon.
Gas experts claim that Egypt does not have such quantities to export, so the source of the gas will probably be from Israel.
The one who wants to control the energy sources of Lebanon and Syria is Iran.
Did it repeat the exercise of the Saudi oil facilities in Abkaik, but in the Shark Arena?
Such a possibility cannot be ruled out.
From a defensive point of view, Israel is certainly much better prepared than the Saudis.
But if an attack of this magnitude is carried out, will Israel be able to be content with intercepting the drones and perhaps the missiles? A targeted pre-emptive attack should be in the military medicine basket, even if it is contrary to the opinion of the Pentagon and the State Department.
boycott nation
Of all the revelations of the Netanyahu trial, the only product is: "We will form a government without him" and a willingness to rule the minority through the Arab factions
Again, there is no choice but to quote a senior academic, who says that "the boycott of Netanyahu and the Likud is the way the left shapes its polarizing ideological tyranny."
The left has lived in an ideological vacuum since the collapse of the Oslo Accords, but the lust for power remains.
In his book "The Red Book" Assaf Inbari did not refer to the fact that the cruel ideological melodrama that also surrounded the personal lives of the local Stalinists took place when a large part of the kibbutzim still did not recognize the State of Israel.
This will be evidenced by the weapon's slides, which were intended for command and not for spatial defense.
In the current period, they managed to produce an internal boycott, more effective than BDS on campuses in America, against the Likud.
Against Netanyahu.
The power of the boycott is such that it rots the justice system, and at the beginning of the week News 12 heard the testimony of the former deputy head of the police, Moshe Saada, in an interview with Amit Segal. The picture Saada painted is not entirely new, but it is evidence from the inside of the existence of a connection between the police and the Lafel prosecutor's office. L) The Prime Minister. "It is in the interest of the state," said Shai Nitzan, and therefore prevails over all other investigations. This is the police that dealt with investigations of journalists and publishers on issues of intra-systemic discretion.
Moshe Saada in an interview on News 12,
Those who followed the many revelations in the Netanyahu trial are not surprised.
But it is clear that the allegedly criminal conduct of the police chiefs, to which Saada testified, was done in a certain public context.
She received kosher from the legal advisor.
It received ideological support from inflammatory headlines in the media.
It received support from the special sector of individuals, appointed by themselves to be overseers of public honesty and integrity.
And first of all the retiring Likud princes.
Dan Meridor and Benny Begin in the lead, that the massacre in Sabra and Shatila bothers them less than if they say about Prime Minister Menachem Begin that he lied.
And the accompanying voices performed by Limor Livnat.
And in the contemporary system, the monarchists Yoaz Handel, Zvika Hauser and Gideon Sa'ar.
What, of all the revelations of Netanyahu's trial, the only product is: "We will form a stable government without him"?
This is against the background of a dark drawing of the upper part of Netanyahu's face.
A vacuum has great suction power.
The burning jealousy of Gideon Sa'ar and the Likud princes of Benjamin Netanyahu's abilities has put them off their minds, so much so that they prefer to rule the minority through the nationalist Arab factions - while imposing a boycott on the Likud.
And the method breaks again
Taking the big party out of the game inevitably leads to regime instability.
Absurdly, there is no dominant party on the other side
Because of the excess of talk about "substantial democracy" basic lessons from the history of parliamentary democracies are not present in the public discussion.
In Italy, there has been chronic instability since the establishment of democracy after World War II until today.
The reason: there was one party, which held about a third of the voters' votes for many years.
It was the Communist Party.
But she was forbidden to touch.
Thus a black hole opened up in the center of the map, and the party of the Christian Democrats established coalitions that usually included socialist parties opposed to its path.
In France there was a similar thing until the de Gaulle revolution in 1958.
A very large communist party, but out of power with a severe ban.
Changing the system in France to presidential centralization brought stability.
In Israel, taking the largest party, the Likud, out of the coalition game inevitably leads to regime instability.
Absurdly, there is no opposing dominant party in this situation either.
The anti-right coalition seeks to compensate for the lack of voters (besides the connection to the Arab parties) through the hegemony of the "gatekeepers".
Of course, on the grounds that the right-wing majority is a danger to democracy.
were we wrong
We will fix it!
If you found an error in the article, we would appreciate it if you shared it with us