WarSclerotic

The debate over the Iranian nuclear threat is crucial. Its focus is the fate and future of everyone of us, and we want the government to act responsibly and with wisdom. But responsibility and wisdom do not characterize government decisions in many areas, so there is reason to worry.

It has already been proven that even in existential matters, wrong decisions have been made, which stem, as was the case in several decisions made by Ariel Sharon – with cabinet backing – because of other reasons. In the past three decades, the Israel Defense Forces has also acted more than once according to a mistaken strategic concept and failed painfully in motivation and carrying out its missions – among other examples are the Lebanon War and the Second Lebanon War.

There is minimal knowledge among those debating the Iranian nuclear question, even those who make their opinions heard. They lack the intelligence information that is available only to a very few. Whatever their pretensions, they understand little of the complex technical details. One can see that they largely base their arguments against an attack on sources that are both manipulative and self-serving.

Adopting foreign interests also influences the debate. At the Saban Conference in Washington D.C., for example, the Americans spoke out strongly and harshly against an attack on Iran. The Israelis at the conference – the organizers gave the impression they were partners in formulating a policy that would save Israel and the region – adopted, with characteristic Israeli conformity, the American regional and global interest and the conference’s overall spirit. That’s how quite a few Israeli opinion makers act, and not just at that conference.

Even more pertinent, many of those involved in the debate (and not the least of them ) determine their positions according to their personal bias on the two main decision makers: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak. There’s no love lost for them among the leading media commentators and op-ed writers. Whoever opposes Netanyahu (and certainly those who hate him, and they are many ) presents him as obsessed and dying to pull the trigger. They relate in the same way to the tricky Ehud Barak. Netanyahu and Barak are accused, with Meir Dagan playing the role of the prophet Jeremiah in rebuking them, of being leaders who may well bring about the destruction of Israel, as did the ancient kings of Israel.

Most Israelis tend to trust the government on the Iranian issue. More than they are divided between political camps, despite the one-way propaganda, they are divided among themselves. Just as there are fears of an attack, there are also no less heartfelt fears of not taking a preemptive strike at the proper time.

In such a situation, the natural tendency – despite all the fears – is to rely on those who know and who are entrusted with the responsibility to decide. It cannot be, say most Israelis to themselves, that Netanyahu and Barak are not responsible people, or that they are not deeply worried about the fate of the people and the state.

Even in times of emergency, some Israelis – and the most influential of them actually – do not know how to rise above the fray; they are incapable of expressing humility and admitting they don’t know. They are incapable of detaching themselves from their prejudices, anger and hatred and do not know how to offer a helping hand. All of us and our national security are the losers.