WarSclerotic

Electoral politics and ego. These comprise the essence of arguments made by those critical of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s intention to attack Iran. The main underlying message of these arguments is that Netanyahu has failed in his job and found an easy target to which to divert attention.

Electoral politics and ego. These were also the essence of criticism raised against former Prime Minister Menachem Begin after he decided to attack Iraq in 1981. Browse through newspaper clippings and film segments from that time and one will prominently see then-opposition leader Shimon Peres accusing Begin of attacking Iraq “just for elections.”

The main problem of the arguments made by the opponents of Begin and Netanyahu is their lack of good faith, as well as basic belief in the necessity of the actions. Moreover, the arguments are hollow. Why? Because they ignore that a failed attack could lead to electoral failure.

If Netanyahu was cynical and utilitarian, he would avoid dealing with the Iran problem and push it off forever. Similarly, the claim that political considerations motivated Begin to destroy the Iraqi reactor appeared absurd even at the time, which was shortly after Jimmy Carter lost his 1980 re-election bid for the U.S. presidency. A factor in Carter’s loss was the U.S. military’s failed rescue attempt of the 52 American hostages held in Tehran. Begin saw this example but was not deterred from striking the Iraqi reactor, even though he was explicitly told that there was a chance the operation would fail and that at least two Israeli pilots would not return home.

The considerations for taking action were therefore similar, if not the same, then as they are now. Even the political circumstances are similar. Also in 1981, there was a clash with the American government, the heads of the Israeli defense establishment opposed taking action and the Left claimed that the prime minister was motivated by electoral considerations.

The opposition of the Left should again be examined. Why? Because when a leftist government orders military action, the muses are silent. And the question should be asked: Why is it not political when a leftist government leads an attack? The risks are the same risks, but the media silence, and sometimes support, speaks volumes. Also, the leaders of the nationalist camp don’t create demoralization during leftist-led military operations.

This is how it was, for example, in 1976 when Yitzhak Rabin and Peres ordered the Entebbe operation, which had many risks. Begin, then the opposition leader, supported them. “On this matter, we are together, even if God forbid the operation fails,” Begin said. This is also how it was in 1996, when Peres, then the prime minister, launched Operation Grapes of Wrath in Lebanon, just a month and a half before elections. No one claimed that he ordered this action due to electoral considerations. Netanyahu, then the opposition leader, supported Peres, even though he knew that this could hurt his chances of defeating Peres in the upcoming elections. Netanyahu also supported then-Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s decision in 2007 to bomb the Syrian nuclear reactor. Needless to say, in these cases, the voices of today’s critics were not heard from afar.

Peres and the opponents of the Iraq operation were wrong 31 years ago. They are also wrong today. Netanyahu must decide whether to implement the “Begin Doctrine,” in the spirit of Churchill, Thatcher and Reagan, or if he will be remembered as the unwitting successor of Chamberlain and the West’s policy of appeasement.