‘If Hamas agrees to the offer, Netanyahu has no exit route. He can’t say no’

Palestinians move past destroyed buildings along a street in Khan Younis in the southern Gaza Strip on 14 May 2024

Yossi Verter writes in Haaretz on 3 June 2024:

Over two days have passed since U.S. President Joe Biden revealed to Israelis the details of the latest Israeli proposal for a hostage deal. It is a far-reaching proposal, undoubtedly, one that gives hope to many and infuriates others. Little has changed since then, except for an expected development: blatant threats from the pair of politicians starring in the nightmares of the hostages’ parents – National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich – to dissolve the government if the proposal is adopted. Which is the Israeli one.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is saying nothing. In his initial response, an hour after Biden’s speech, the prime minister confirmed that the proposal was his, including each of its stages. He then shoved in a reservation to the provision ending the war. Since then, though, nothing had been heard from him.

“He’s in trouble,” a knowledgeable source said. “If Hamas accepts the proposal, Bibi will struggle to find an escape route from it this time. The entire world will turn against him. For months, he has maneuvered, deceived and manipulated and managed to stay above water. But you can’t fool all of the people all of the time. Not even Bibi can. There is no option of refusing the proposal. None.”

On Sunday, too, Biden administration officials continued to press Netanyahu on the proposal. “This was an Israeli proposal,” said White House national security spokesman John Kirby. “We have every expectation that if Hamas agrees to the proposal – as was transmitted to them, an Israeli proposal – then Israel would say yes.”

It wasn’t really an understatement. The first signs of desperation are apparent. The Americans know their customer well. They know his tendency to break commitments, to deny, to distance himself from himself. “Netanyahu keeps his word” is a phrase that no world (or Israeli) leader has ever said.

Some are proposing that Netanyahu announce the adoption of the first phase of the deal. This would entail a 42-day cease-fire that includes Israel’s withdrawal from population centers; the release of female, elderly, ill and wounded hostages in exchange for hundreds of Palestinian prisoners; the return of residents of northern Gaza to their homes and an increase in the delivery of humanitarian aid. This wouldn’t be an end to the war.

But even this scenario is problematic for Netanyahu on two fronts. One: after a six-week cease-fire, the international community will put tremendous pressure on him to continue to the second phase, which includes discussions on a permanent cease-fire. Two: who says that his usual saboteurs, the advocates of the war and Jewish settlements in Gaza, would agree to pay the minimum price for living hostages – the release of hundreds of Palestinian prisoners and the return of northern Gaza’s people to their ruined homes?

President Isaac Herzog assured the prime minister that he had his “full support” for the deal. That’s nice, but how many Knesset seats does Israel’s unelected president have?

There is no doubt that this week will be particularly challenging for Netanyahu. Two nontrivial politically threats loom over him: the dissolution of the government by the extreme right if the deal is adopted and the resignation of the National Unity Party from the wartime government if it isn’t. He is also facing the Supreme Court’s approaching ruling on the ultra-Orthodox draft-dodging bill.

Any hope still remaining in the Prime Minister’s Office that the conservative, right-wing justices on the panel hearing the case would show empathy for the government’s case was sorely dashed in the hearing. It was the remarks by conservative justices Noam Sohlberg and Yael Willner that were unequivocal.

There are some statements that encapsulate an entire story. One example came in the Supreme Court’s September 23 hearing on the abolition of the reasonableness standard, in which the government’s (private) attorney, Ilan Bombach, said that Israel’s Declaration of Independence “was drafted hastily” (historically false) and that its 37 signatories had not even been elected.

Another example came this Sunday, when the government’s (again, private) attorney, Doron Taubman, tried to defend the abomination that is the Haredi exemption from the draft, Asked about ending the flow of state funding to yeshivas for married men, he said: “Ultimately, we are dealing with dinei nefashot” – the term in Judaism for cases involving life and death – “for tens of thousands of Haredim.” Two hearings, two momentous issues, with separated by nearly a year – and so much callousness, chutzpah and cynicism.

It’s clear that the court will rule that ultra-Orthodox men must be included in the draft as soon as possible – at least 3,000, at first (out of around 65,000 who are eligible). It’s also quite clear that it will extend the ruling barring state funding for yeshivas whose students don’t enlist because their rabbi said not to or because they don’t feel like it. What will the leaders of the Haredi parties do if thousands of yeshiva students are designated deserters, criminals for whom any encounter with the police – at demonstrations, or because they failed to stop at a red light – could result in arrest? Would the elderly Rebbe instruct the parties to leave the governing coalition?

What else is clear in this reality, in which it seems nothing is clear? It’s clear that Netanyahu and his Likud party can’t afford an election campaign that revolves around the issue of continuing the exemption and draft-dodging, all while graves are being dug for hundreds of soldiers all over the country and the anger rises among the part of the public that does serve, and whose children are fighting and being wounded and killed (in reality, not in the study hall or as off-the-books labor).

If an early election is a done deal, it is very possible that Netanyahu would be better off facing voters over the hostage deal, with all its dangers and merits. Normalization with Saudi Arabia and a regional coalition against Iran would be quite the electoral boon. It was once the prime minister’s raison d’etre. Now, he has to be dragged to the altar, kicking and screaming.

This article is reproduced in its entirety