Throughout the lull in the fighting in Gaza, the war cabinet ministers, and in fact all government ministers, made sure to emphasize that this was a temporary lull. Not only to the citizens of Israel, they made it clear, but also to world leaders, led by President Joe Biden.
October 7 was a formative event. A moment when an entire nation was humiliated and dealt a painful blow. Even at a time when the leaders of the campaign order the IDF to hold the fire, it is important for them to convey a united front and make it clear that the fire will return again. This principle is maintained even in the closed rooms of security consultations, in the limited and broad cabinet. It seems that for fear that things will come out, even the officials do not dare to say things differently to themselves.
And yet, despite the united front and consistent line, it is possible to recognize in nuances the difference between the leaders of the war. Naturally, the subtle cracks in the first act will lead to political turmoil in the last. And if already at the stage of conducting the war there are different opinions, then on the question of "the day after" the significant gaps between the main players are already evident.
The issue of the day after is one of the most sensitive today, and it is not dealt with in any official forum, but only in internal consultations. If there is a significant point of contention with the Biden administration on the Gaza issue, it concerns this question. The other things can be manipulated. Bring in humanitarian aid at the request of the American president, and even fuel. The new demand not to cause harm to displaced persons in the southern Gaza Strip when the IDF begins operating there can also be met with a non-binding statement that "we will try."
But bringing in Abu Mazen to replace IDF forces on the ground is another story entirely. Benny Gantz and Gadi Eisenkot would have done so happily. Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Galant less. What they all have in common is that they all send a message that Israel has no intention of ruling the territory by itself from a civilian standpoint. Gallant means it in all seriousness. As for Netanyahu, I'm not sure. His clear statements that a terror-sponsoring authority, which transfers salaries to terrorists and educates its children in incitement against Jews, will not control Gaza, will not allow the Ramallah gang to enter Gaza. No other replacement is available. Therefore, the IDF will continue to control the Gaza Strip, military and civilian, at least for the foreseeable future.
This is joined by another program. Most cabinet ministers don't know about her. Nor are the ministers of the War Cabinet. It is not discussed in these forums because of its obvious volatility: the dilution of Gaza's population to a minimum. Biden strongly opposes, as does the entire international community. Galant, the chief of staff and top IDF officials claim that there is no such feasibility. But Netanyahu sees this as a strategic goal. He even tasked his loyalist in the War Cabinet, Minister Ron Dermer, with formulating staff work on the matter.
This is a plan that will bypass the American resistance without confrontation, the resolute resistance of the Egyptians without them starting to shoot refugees who enter their territory through the Philadelphi route, and the general global resistance that will arise when the first Gazans leave their homes and migrate elsewhere.
The phenomenon of refugees in war zones is acceptable. Tens of millions of refugees have left war zones across the globe in the last decade alone. From Syria to Ukraine. All of them had addresses in countries that agreed to accept them as a humanitarian gesture. So why should Gaza be any different?
This is not a transfer, but a release of the noose on Gaza's borders. Although the crossings into Israel will remain sealed, there are other options. Rafah is one of them, despite Egypt's fierce opposition. This transition, at times, was completely open and open. Even today, there is an underground crossing between Gaza and Egyptian Rafah, on the scale of a highway. The sea is also open to Gazans. Israel willingly opens the sea crossing and allows mass flight to European countries and Africa.
In the context of encouraging Gaza migration, the gaps between members of the government are enormous. While Smotrich, Ben-Gvir and quite a few Likud ministers see it as a necessity, others like Galant, Gantz and Eisenkot see it as something between an unrealistic fantasy and a despicable and immoral plan.
Is it really burning?
When Likud ministers and others are asked how confident they are that fighting will resume after the ceasefire, they all reply that there is no public mandate for any elected official to end the war now. The public is burning, they say, the soldiers inside are at their most motivated, there is no way to stop it now.
There is no more grim answer than this. A leader is not only supposed to listen to the sentiments of the public, but is supposed to be the one whose heart burns within him regardless of the mood around him. To feel the immense humiliation, the unimaginable pain and the feeling of revenge, the necessity of correction and raising one's head. These sensations need to flow through his veins, sucked into his lungs with each and every breath from the moment he wakes up in the morning to the insomnia of the night. The impression is that neither Netanyahu, Galant nor Gantz are in this place. It's no wonder, then, that they suspect from the first moment that all they care about is looking for a convenient nearby exit point. A picture of victory instead of victory and Samos instead of victory.
Before voting in favor of the kidnapping deal in the government, Smotrich asked to speak with Netanyahu privately. I say it as clearly as possible, he made it clear to him, we cannot remain in the government for a moment if the war is not renewed. Netanyahu replied to Smotrich that he thinks, like him, that the fighting must be renewed. The finance minister was not impressed, and reiterated that his party could not remain in any case and under any circumstances if the fire was not renewed. Only after the point was clear did he sit down and vote in favor.
From now on - everything by the book
Two weeks into the school year, the agreement between the Finance Ministry and the teachers' union was signed, and the big strike in the high schools was halted. The vacation schedule was rearranged, and mainly the increase in teachers' salaries was agreed in accordance with Ran Erez's demands. Shortly thereafter, the Finance Ministry signed a similar agreement with the Haredi school teachers' union. The teachers are the same teachers, the work is the same, only the representative organization is different.
The Finance Ministry doesn't like big changes. The salaries of teachers in state schools are part of the Ministry of Education's budget. They wanted to put the addition to the ultra-Orthodox in another category, in coalition funds. It's the same money coming out of the same pocket, but from a different branch of the bank. Managing multiple accounts is one way for Treasury officials to better control the treasury. Both in additions and cuts. The tighter the supervision.
Both agreements are underway, and all teachers have already received the salary revision agreed upon in their salaries. But then the war broke out and the need to devote large resources to the fighting and its accompanying causes forced the Ministry of Finance to present a broad program of cuts. The immediate opposition demand was to cut coalition funds. After a campaign of propaganda and sweeping support for the move by mainstream media outlets, Benny Gantz, from within the coalition, also announced that he would not agree to approve a budget that did not include the cancellation of the coalition funds. The teachers of Ran Erez's teachers' union will continue to receive the salary increase agreed upon, while teachers in Haredi schools will have their salaries reduced to their pre-agreement level signed in September. Not because these are worth more or those less, but because the source of money, in the internal distribution of the treasury, is different.
If any of the haredi factions demanded that the salaries of haredi teachers be included in the budget base – and not as part of the coalition funds – no one would have heard about it and there would have been no uproar, just as there would not have been a storm over tens of thousands of other budget items that surely lie in their state budget books.
Stand on the hind legs. Wasserlauf, Photo: Naama Stern
Lesson learned. Finance Committee Chairman Moshe Gafni made it clear after the cabinet meeting that approved the budget, with the opposition of the ministers of the state camp, that he would no longer sit in a government in which funds to the ultra-Orthodox are transferred through coalition funds. He intends to apply this requirement as early as the 2024 budget, which the Ministry of Finance is currently beginning to formulate. We learned our lesson, he said, no one will turn us around anymore. Our funds are like everyone else's and they won't get any other title, he clarified.
His words fell on deaf ears. From the finance minister to the prime minister, they understood the turn that was being made here, and they have no intention of leaving the situation as it is. There are no more coalition funds. Everything goes inside the book. Want to cut back? No problem, but let it be businesslike. There are hundreds of unnecessary budget items in wartime that are not in coalition funds.
Resilience of mayors
The plan being formulated for 2024 does not meet only the headline of cutting war expenses or returning the economy to functioning. It seems, it is a quest for revenge. The opposition, and the media, attacked the coalition funds because they all reflect a right-wing coalition agenda – from the ultra-Orthodox to the settlements to the Torah nuclei. In the next budget, many funds that the right-wing camp has less interest in will be cut, mainly culture, academia and the media. The planned plan of cuts will be sharp. It will cut into the living flesh. Cultural (secular) institutions will suffer, according to plan, dramatic cuts. The Ministry of Finance will demand that budgeted universities close or reduce entire faculties that do not help the economy in the war.
The battle will be tenacious. Senior coalition officials are hot on the matter and do not intend to give up. After the war against Hamas, the war will return to the resources of the Israeli public, when it is clear to everyone this time who started it.
As part of the campaign to cut coalition funds and unnecessary ministries, Yitzhak Wasserlauf's ministry – the Negev, Galilee and National Resilience – was supposed to undergo a drastic cut of more than 90% (!). Netanyahu, Smotrich and Finance Ministry officials thought that this would pass easily for them, as happened with the other ministries whose budgets were diverted over the past month to the needs of the war, the evacuees and the families of the abductees. They were wrong.
When Wasserlauf found out about this, on Sunday around midnight, he called the chairman of the local authorities Haim Bibas, the head of the development cities forum Benny Biton, the chairman of the regional councils Shai Hajaj and the chairman of the confrontation line authorities Moshe Davidovitch, and informed them of the treasury plans that had been revealed to him. More than that was not needed. Bibas and Bitton decided to mobilize all the mayors and began signing them all, in the middle of the night, calling for an end to the cuts in the ministry, which has helped local authorities more than any other ministry since the outbreak of the war.
Wasserlauf presented the treasury with 121 signatures of mayors. The planned cuts would have left the Ministry of the Negev, Galilee and National Resilience with a budget of NIS 4 million. Three hours later it was over close to 200 million
From the very first week, Wasserlauf poured a lot of money into NGOs and projects for the affected populations and was on the ground, while the other ministers were still in their air-conditioned offices, trying to digest the magnitude of the incident. While the signatures were piling up and sent directly to the Ministry of Finance, Wasserlauf was called in for urgent consultation with the finance chiefs.
When the negotiations ended, there were 121 signatures on the table from mayors, including Tel Aviv Mayor Ron Huldai. The treasury only begged him to calm the angry mayors. The planned cuts would have left the ministry with a budget of NIS 4 million. Three hours later, it was over at nearly 200 million.
Wrong? We'll fix it! If you find a mistake in the article, please share with us