WarSclerotic

First lieutenant A. says he will never forget his first time. “I was in ecstasy, I felt like I was on top of the world. There is nothing like it; it’s better than anything, even the greatest party in town. Wow.

“I heard some tremendous information over the earphones. I was a young signals intelligence interceptor, two weeks after completing a difficult training course here. I just jumped up over my desk and ran to the commanding officer’s window and said to him: ‘I have gold in my hands. Gold!'”

Today, A. is the commander of a signals intelligence team in the elite Israle Defense Forces Military Intelligence unit 8200. His team is situated in an outpost atop the snow-covered Mount Hermon — an outpost that has been labeled “the eyes of the nation.”

For the first time, the IDF has allowed the outpost to be exposed in the media, giving a rare glimpse into the mysterious and secretive lives of the soldiers perched at the highest altitude in Israel, at 2,224 meters (7,300 feet) above sea level. They are glued to their headsets 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, and they listen to anything that moves, or doesn’t move, in Syria. The goal: to ensure that Israel is not caught by surprise, as it was 39 years ago, when Arab states launched a surprise attack on Israel on Yom Kippur, the holiest day of the Jewish calendar. They are not just the eyes but also the ears of the nation.

The outpost is located literally inside the mountain, in tunnels dug in the 1980s as part of the aftermath of the Yom Kippur War. Below the outpost lies a Syrian village, and you can see all of the Golan Heights from there. Not far from the outpost, bloody battles are being waged between the army of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and the rebels, and Israel is closely monitoring the developments, not without concern.

The 8200 unit transferred to this outpost some five years ago. A tunnel leads to the lower part of the outpost, inside the mountain. That is where the listening devices are housed as well as soldiers’ quarters, a dining hall, a lounge, a gym and a training room. The thick metal doors usually require codes, and everything is under wraps, top secret. There is a feeling of intelligence and information locked in every hollowed rock wall.

The upper level of the outpost, out in the open air, is where the antennas are held within giant domes. The small outpost looks like a decked-out mobile telephone company fortress. The unit gathers intelligence via signals (a field known as SIGINT), decrypts codes and uses cutting edge technology to do it.

Col. Y., the unit’s commanding officer, takes us upstairs in an almost pre-historic elevator that feels as if it might stop working at any minute. There is an indescribable difference between the two levels. The old, rusty elevator takes you on a minutes-long anxiety-ridden ride to the upper level, and that is were you really find yourself at incredible heights.

“Here, in front of Mount Hermon, I get the feeling that I am conquering peaks of information,” says Y. “I feel the weight of the responsibility we have been given. Everything begins here. This is where the initial information processing takes place. These antennas intercept signals that undergo decryption in technology networks and end up in the listening center. That is the core of the initial work on the intelligence chain. From here, the information is passed on to the head of military intelligence, to decision-makers, and to military divisions in the field.”

There are several security positions around the outpost, manned by paratroopers. The view is breathtaking. The unbridled power of the Golan Heights is laid out in front of your eyes. The feeling is that the entire world is in their hands. The Syrian homes in the village below look like Lego pieces.

Lt. Col. L., 8200 regional commander, says that every time he climbs up to the top and stands next to the mighty antennas he is reminded of the reasons he is so proud to be serving in the IDF.

“At the heart of every intelligence soldier lies the Yom Kippur War trauma,” he says. “We teach the youngest private never to take any chances, and if necessary, then yes, wake even the head of military intelligence in the middle of the night with this or that piece of information, even if it turns out to be less important than he or she thought.”

Couldn’t the enormous pressure on soldiers not to miss anything devolve into paranoia?

“There is no paranoia, but there is a lot of responsibility. They have to decide which material to process and which to ignore, and that requires a lot of thought, a lot of listening and a lot of understanding.”

Are there soldiers who couldn’t stand the pressure and asked to quit?

Base commander Capt. D. intervenes in the conversation, saying, “There were a handful of cases in which soldiers became stressed out at one particular point and we stepped in and helped them, whether it was by letting them skip a shift or by providing mental assistance, but I don’t know of anyone who quit. The screening for the unit is so stringent that we only get the best people — the ones with strong characters, maturity and a lot of motivation.”

“This is not a conventional place,” says another senior officer. “The entire region is undergoing profound changes, as are the technological circumstances, and I can’t overstate the drama that is unfolding here. [In the past] we had to monitor two and a half fronts, but today we live in a much more complex and challenging age, and so are the demands. Our job has come to cover a lot more ground and we need to keep reinventing ourselves.”

Can you say with any degree of confidence that Israel won’t be caught off guard again as it was in 1973?

“As an intelligence officer, I am never at ease. The moment I become comfortable, they will have to replace me. Maybe we won’t be surprised as we were in the Yom Kippur War, but that doesn’t mean that we can rest assured that we will know everything. In the past, you had to give warning before going to war. Today, things are different. Things are happening in Syria, Egypt has undergone profound changes, a lot of new players have entered the arena. We can never think that we won’t ever be caught off guard again.

“I am rather perturbed by the threat coming out of Sinai, and from the no-man’s land that has erupted right under my nose. Even the border with Lebanon is never calm. Our job is to understand the dangers and the various scenarios, to accurately analyze all the challenges, to act in a much wider and varied fashion and to doubt everything. To be sober.”

Down below, the listening center looks like a beehive, teeming with activity. There are quite a few female and male soldiers, a small percentage of them young people who began the process of screening and selection before their recruitment, and then completed short basic training before moving onto a grueling training course. They come here after six months in the army.

Manning the listening center are signals intelligence (SIGINT) operators, equipped with headphones, technological and intelligence accessories, and facing computer screens. A standard shift lasts eight hours, and the operators remain constantly attentive, believing that every conversation they intercept can save lives, and that they have a crucial role in formulating deterrence.

Cpl. D. is a SIGINT operator. She is 20 years old, with big, inquisitive eyes, black, wavy hair, and pleasant smile reflecting a satisfaction which she is not particularly trying to hide. Every morning she jumps out of bed before 6 a.m. to get to her shift on time, already eager to begin her work, listen in on Arabic conversations, and intercept information.

She began serving here about a year ago. Like the others, she was marked for the role even before her recruitment. “In high school, I took Arabic at the highest level and always knew that I wanted to serve in intelligence. I specifically wanted to serve in this post in the Hermon. This is a small and intimate place which offers huge challenges and gives a lot of satisfaction.”

And also a lot of pressure?

“I don’t panic,” she says. “It doesn’t bother me to hear so much Arabic in one day, it’s my duty, and I’m not willing to give up on it. I wasn’t looking for an easy army service that was close to home. I didn’t want to be at the Azrieli Mall (in Tel Aviv) all the time after just another boring day at the Kirya. I wanted to go far, even though during the winter, it’s hard here. But this is the place. This is the core of the army’s intelligence. This is the work I dreamed of doing for so long.”

You’re not afraid of a war breaking out precisely during your shift?

“Sure, it has crossed my mind. We’ve been briefed over such situations. But I get excited every day by the fact that I can make an impact through the information that I am intercepting and passing on. We already had a situation in which we were all watching a good movie, and suddenly one of the operators burst into the room and said his group caught on to something good, a valuable conversation. Everyone stopped what they were doing and we all came to lend a hand. These are the moments we’re all waiting for — to catch valuable pieces of information, and as much as possible.”

“We aren’t chosen for 8200 based on how the prescription number of our eye glasses,” says a smiling soldier. “We need to know Arabic, English and sometimes other languages. We have to be well-versed in computers. But we’re also young guys who know how to live, laugh, dance. We’re not always so serious.

“We learned this technique for how you can slightly move the headphones from our ears so we can hear if one of the guys tells a good joke, and then our ears are split between laughs and listening to the information. This is very liberating; it’s something we need from time to time. Sometimes we also need a little breather, so every once in a while we’ll have an evening of fun near the antennas on the upper level. We bring our coffee kit, sit with our guitars and sing.”

Cpl. D. chimes in: “We have a good time. We are all good friends; it feels like family. After I finish a shift, I can go see a movie at the club or work out at the gym. We also cook good food for ourselves at night. There’s life after work.”

And yes, in case you were wondering, love stories have come out of the outpost, and even weddings.

“What Israel needs to do is say this to the Palestinians: ‘The moment you sit down at the negotiating table and begin negotiations, that is the moment we will freeze construction in the settlements,’” says Alan Dershowitz. “Yes, we have failed in the past, but this is a moral argument, and I am talking about a pragmatic argument. Israel has a huge interest in ceasing to be an occupying power.”

Despite what by all appearances seems to be an unprecedented crisis in relations between Washington and Jerusalem, Professor Alan Dershowitz, one of the most accomplished Jewish jurists in the world and perhaps one of the few people who is close to both Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Barack Obama, still believes that the latter has the ability to prevent an Israeli attack on Iran, and that he knows exactly what to do.

“Some time in the next few weeks, Obama needs to look straight into the television camera and say to the leaders of Iran: I say, you are now suffering because of sanctions and diplomatic isolation, and there is no reason for you to suffer. I promise you — and you can look me straight in the eye — that we will never allow you to develop a nuclear weapon. Why do you need to go through the agony of sanctions? No matter what happens, you will not get a nuclear weapon. If you cross our red line, we will use military force to destroy your capability to develop a nuclear weapon.”

“Obama needs to say this in a way that is unequivocal,” Dershowitz says. “He has two audiences — the Iranian leaders who need to believe him, and the Israeli leaders who must believe that the Iranians believe him. In my view, the Israeli leadership will be satisfied with this statement.”

Dershowitz sat down for an exclusive interview with Israel Hayom to promote the release of the Hebrew-language edition of his latest book, “The Trials of Zion,” published by Kinneret Zmora-Bitan Dvir. One of Israel’s most enthusiastic advocates in the U.S., Dershowitz reveals that he has been in frequent contact with Obama over recent months, during which he offered advice over how to deal with the Iranian nuclear impasse.

“I visited Israel not long ago,” he recalls. “During my visit, I went to Nanuchka, a restaurant in Tel Aviv where everybody dances on the tables. Suddenly, the phone rang. It was the White House on the line, and the president wanted to talk to me, but I couldn’t hear anything because of the noise. I think I’m the first person to ever ask the president to get back to them later.”

“Obama, who knew that I was in Israel, spoke with me afterward and asked me what are the three things that are most worrisome to the Israelis. I said to him, ‘I will tell them to you in order of importance — Iran, Iran, and Iran.’ I explained to the president that until this issue is resolved, he cannot compel Israel to focus on any other issue, chief among them the Palestinian question. The president invited me to the White House to meet him, and last June we sat down face to face. I relayed some of my conversation with him to leaders in Israel. Mediating and bringing the president and the prime minister closer together is one job that I’m happy to accept.”

How do you think Israel should deal with the Iranian threat? Is a pre-emptive strike a real option?

“I don’t have an answer to that question because I don’t have access to information about Israel’s operational capabilities. I can say that Israel has a 100-percent legal right to carry out a pre-emptive strike against the Iranian nuclear program. Iran is already in a state of war against Israel. It murdered many Israelis and Jews around the world. It threatens to destroy Israel, and it is on its way to developing the means to do this. So Israel has a full, legal, moral and pragmatic right to attack, and I would defend this right before any court in the world. This doesn’t necessarily mean that it needs to attack. It depends on its military capability and its relationship with the U.S.”

Can Israel trust the U.S. to deal with the Iranian problem?

“No country can trust another country to defend it. The U.S. would never trust Israel to defend American citizens. It doesn’t matter who is in power, and President Obama could make as many promises as he wants to attack Iran if it crosses certain red lines, but what will happen if and when the red lines are crossed and Russia and China threaten a counter-attack? No president can make such a commitment a year in advance. President Obama looked me in the eye and told me, ‘I’m not bluffing,’ and I believe him.

“On the other hand, Obama can’t tie his hands over what may or may not happen in another year or two. On the whole, I agree with Prime Minister Netanyahu, and President Obama also agrees with him, that no country can leave its self-defense to another country, regardless of how friendly that country is. Israel needs to decide on its own. The wise decision could be to allow the U.S. to do it, but this is a decision that I can’t say needs to be made.”

Aside from being a high-powered attorney, Dershowitz has also been one of the longest-tenured and most-respected professors at Harvard University, and a highly sought lecturer. He has devoted a significant part of his life to advocating for Israel and researching the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. His latest book, which he describes as “a work of fiction but historically based,” focuses on — what else — events in Israel.

“This is a very topical book which begins with a terrorist attack that kills a number of public figures during the signing of a peace treaty,” he says. “The theme of the book is that history will be the one to solve the mystery, and that it is impossible to solve the problems of the Middle East without understanding history.”

The protagonist of the book is a young American woman who travels to Israel to defend human rights in the West Bank. She ends up falling in love with a Palestinian Christian and joining the defense team of a terrorist suspected in the attack. Her father, a lawyer whose character is based on Dershowitz, also comes to Israel and becomes entangled in two trials in which his daughter’s life hangs in the balance.

How personal is this book? Could you envision a scenario in which you defend a terror suspect?

“Certainly. The first case I ever took was a terrorist trial, even though it was a Jewish terrorist who was a Kahane activist, but it was still terrorism. I won the case even though it was clear that the suspects were guilty, and I offered counsel in other cases in which the suspects were Arab terrorists. In one instance, I even convinced the Israeli government to release a suspected terrorist after I conducted an independent investigation which found that he wasn’t guilty. If someone is accused of a crime he did not commit — and it doesn’t matter how shocking and grisly the crime is — I will defend him.”

Given that you’re 74 years old, are you considering retirement at all?

“The truth is that I’m just about to finish up my autobiography. This was a very hard process which demanded a great deal of introspection and admission of mistakes that I made. Usually I’m much more wont to look forward than to look back, but when you write an autobiography, you have to look back to the past, and this was harder for me than anticipated from a psychological standpoint.

“In a year from now, on Sept. 1, 2013, there will be three things going on at the same time. I will be celebrating my 75th birthday, I will mark 100 semesters in 50 years of teaching at Harvard University, and my autobiography will be published. Everything is, as my grandmother would say, God willing. I have five jobs: I’m a lecturer, a litigator, I write all the time, I advocate for Israel as a full-time job, and I give speeches and lectures across the country. I can’t even dream of retirement. In the U.S., unlike in Israel, there is no age requiring one to retire, and the truth is that this is good for me because I’m still at the peak of my career.”

Dershowitz’s connection to Israel is an unusual one, almost extraordinary. He visits the country frequently, and he counts a number of Israelis as his good friends. Often, he becomes carried away in imagining himself making aliyah.

“My ties to Israel are emotional and very intellectual,” he says.

“On an emotional level, I deeply identify with the need for a national home for the Jewish people. Intellectually, I believe that even if I weren’t Jewish, I would defend Israel just as I have done all my life. I have no doubt that if I had two lifetimes, I would spend one of them in Israel.

“Many times, I thought about making ‘half-aliyah,’ and this possibility will always be ingrained in my head. I like coming to Israel. My closest friends live there, including Aharon Barak, Yitzhak Zamir, Amnon Rubinstein, Benjamin Netanyahu, Shimon Peres and Ehud Barak. One of the most profound pleasures in my life is that I had the chance to get to know so many respected dignitaries in Israel, and there are times that I do regret not being one of them. I often wonder what my life would be like if my grandfather had made aliyah in 1932. Recently, former IDF Chief of General Staff Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi paid me a compliment and said that if I had made aliyah, I would eventually become chief of staff. Maybe this is so. But even when I’m here [in New York], my friendship with Israel is always a part of me.”

Dershowitz does note, though, that despite the warm feelings, “my friendship with Israel is not devoid of criticism.” In 1970, he called for a two-state solution, and in 1973 made statements critical of the settlements. To this day, Dershowitz is disturbed by the continuing conflict. He believes that the two sides must work toward an agreement. Two years ago, he told Israel Hayom that he believed he would see an agreement in his lifetime. Even today, when it seems that the peace process is in a stalemate, he remains optimistic.

“I still believe,” he says emphatically.

“I think that it behooves Israel to be very generous and active and to offer a solution to the Palestinians that will make it difficult for them to say no. It is true that in the last 12 years Israel has done so twice and the Palestinians refused, but this doesn’t mean that it isn’t in Israel’s interest to put forward another offer.

“Israel doesn’t need to once again freeze settlement construction unilaterally, because this has already failed. What it needs to do is to say to the Palestinians, ‘The moment you sit down at the negotiating table and begin negotiations, that is the moment we will freeze construction in the settlements.’

“Yes, we have failed in the past, but this is a moral argument, and I am talking about a pragmatic argument. Israel has a huge interest in ceasing to be an occupying power.”

Has the Obama administration done enough to advance the peace process?

“No. I don’t think that any American president has done enough. But if you ask me who made the most critical mistake to Israel’s detriment in recent years, it was George W. Bush. The attack on Iraq made dealing with Iran much more difficult. Bush, for all intents and purposes, handed Iraq over to Iran, and from the vantage point of Israel, the U.S., and the Western world, there could not have been a greater mistake. Did Bush do this purposely to cause harm? No, he is a decent man who made a horrible mistake.

“When it comes to President Obama, he could have done many things differently. First, he didn’t need to say that the peace process begins with the ’67 borders. That means that the Palestinians begin with taking control of the Western Wall, the roads leading to Mount Scopus, the Jewish quarter, Maaleh Adumim, and Gilo. It can’t begin from there, but it needs to start from the lines outlined by U.N. Resolution 242, the formulation of which I took part in, and which states that Israel could make territorial changes according to its security needs and the changing circumstances on the ground. When it comes to the wider swaths of territory, like Ariel, we will have to make land swaps. But there shouldn’t be land swaps over things like the Western Wall or the road leading to Hebrew University, because that is just plain extortion.

“Obama’s second mistake, and I think he recognizes this, is that he should have come to Jerusalem after he went to Cairo at the start of his term in office.

“The third mistake that he made was in his speech. He should not have mentioned the Holocaust and the Nakba in the same sentence. There is no comparison. The Nakba is a small wound that the Palestinians inflicted on themselves, and the Holocaust is the death of 6 million people. It’s insulting to the victims of the Holocaust to be in the same sentence, the same paragraph, the same page, in the same book, and even in the same library, as the Nakba. I think that the president understands that he made a number of mistakes, but on the other hand his intentions are pure and I believe that he wants to be the president who leads the Middle East to peace. At the end of the day, I think that President Obama will end up being a better president for Israel than President Bush.”

With less than two months remaining until presidential elections in the U.S., Dershowitz, an avowed supporter of the Democrats, states that he will once again cast his ballot for Obama.

“I’ve never been enamored with politicians, because I’m critical toward some of the things that they do,” he said. “But in the end voting is a choice between two competing ideologies, and I believe in a woman’s right to choose to have an abortion, gay rights, universal health insurance, and concern for the environment. So how could I in any way support [Mitt] Romney or the Republicans?

“For most voters, the most important issue in these elections is the job market and the economy, and I’m totally on the Democratic side on these issues as well. Israel is also a critical issue, but what I want to do is take Israel out of the equation, so that Israel remains a bipartisan issue and that no elections are decided by the question over which party is more supportive of Israel. Unfortunately, this has become a much more difficult task.”

Dershowitz got a first-hand look at just how difficult a task this would be earlier this month, when the Democrats held their national convention in North Carolina. During the proceedings, any mention of Jerusalem was magically omitted from the Democratic party platform.

“There is a problem in the Democratic Party,” Dershowitz says.

“It is much more divided on the issue of Israel than the Republican Party. One of the reasons that I have remained a Democrat is that I have a major battle to wage, and I need to lead this campaign from within the Democratic Party and to make sure that what happened with liberal parties in Europe who have turned anti-Israel doesn’t happen here.

“At the moment, the U.S. and the Democratic Party are pro-Israel, but it’s a tight battle. Taking Jerusalem out of the platform didn’t happen by mistake. There are elements within the Democratic Party who wanted to change the platform, and nobody noticed, so they went ahead and did it. The mistake was that nobody paid attention to it, but the change was deliberately made by a group of Democrats that wish to see the U.S. turn against Israel.”

Dershowitz surprisingly blames J Street, a Jewish organization on the Left side of the political spectrum, for the problematic sea change that is noticeable among Democrats. In his view, the organization, which was established in opposition to the legitimacy of the settlements, has long ceased to be pro-Israel.

“J Street is the most important anti-Israel organization in the U.S. today,” he says. “It is acting against everything that the U.S. and Israel agree upon. Everybody agrees that an American military option against Iran needs to stay on the table. Everyone, except for J Street. At first, they offered points of view similar to mine regarding the settlements, but then they decided to build their base of support on the extreme Left, and they allowed people who support a boycott into their tent. They even accepted people who don’t recognize Israel’s right to exist.”

Given how increasingly divisive the issue of Israel is within the Democratic Party, what do you anticipate the breakdown of Jewish votes to be for this coming election? Do the Republicans have a chance to win a majority of Jewish votes?

“Generally, the Jewish vote doesn’t really matter. It’s the Jewish vote in the swing states, chief among them Florida, that matters. At the moment, it’s up in the air in Florida, so much so that I wouldn’t even know what to bet. It’s awfully close. It certainly won’t be 77 percent to 23 percent like it was in 2008, but it might be closer to 60-40, and this is a huge drop-off for the Democrats.

“I and others will try to change this, but at the end of the day the voters in Florida will be much less influenced by what I have to say than by what the president has to say. Today I was on the phone with the White House, and I implored the president to mention every one of the four issues that were removed from the party platform. He should talk about Jerusalem, the settlement of refugees in Palestine, negotiating with Hamas only on condition that it recognizes Israel, and final-status borders that will differ from the ’67 lines. If he does this, I really believe that he can bring the Democrats back to where they always were when it came to the Jewish vote.”

Last Tuesday afternoon, not far from Mount Hermon in northern Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu picked up a pair of binoculars and watched the soldiers of the Golani Brigade’s 12th Battalion train in the Golan Heights. They were tired, and nearing the end of an exercise that began on Sunday. The soldiers hadn’t slept since the exercise began, the commander explained. But they were still running, charging at the hills and destroying simulated enemy fighters, staging impressive attacks.

At that moment, IDF Chief of General Staff Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz whispered something in Netanyahu’s ear: “When I was a battalion commander, we charged the same targets. These guys are good.” Netanyahu, in response, took Gantz even deeper into the past, saying, “I ran here too. The same targets.”

When the exercise was over, Netanyahu took Gantz aside, far from the media’s microphones. It stands to reason that the conversation they held privately was about a completely different target.

“This is the most important conversation of his day,” one of the PM’s aides said.

Netanyahu insisted on speaking to the soldiers. He stepped into one of the armored vehicles, manned by soldiers who had just completed an arduous exercise, to talk to them in person. The following day, at his office, he confessed: “This job has its good moments too. It’s not just stress and difficult decisions. My conversation with the soldiers yesterday, for example, was a good moment. In general, when I go out into the field, it is a wonderful opportunity for me to recharge. It’s not all one long, serious effort where you’re just working and not enjoying yourself.”

The prime minister’s schedule kept delaying our interview. At first by one hour, then by another hour, and then by four hours. The time was 11 p.m. and Netanyahu and his team were still hard at work. It was a long workday that began at midnight the previous day, with a long-distance telephone conversation with U.S. President Barack Obama, followed by several additional important calls with other world leaders: Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and French President Francois Hollande. There was also a long discussion on economic issues.

The prime minister dedicates a lot of time to thinking about how to handle the Iranian nuclear issue. It is an existential threat that is rapidly approaching, Netanyahu believes. That is the main topic on his agenda, and a central issue in talks with American officials as well.

What did you say, and what did you hear, in your conversation with the U.S. president?

“It was a good conversation that revolved around significant issues and our desire to prevent Iran from progressing any further with their military nuclear program. It is natural to have disagreements. Israel is closer [to Iran] and more vulnerable. The U.S. is big, far away, and less vulnerable. Naturally we have diverging views on certain things. In the face of a threat like Iran’s nuclear armament, I believe that it is important that the international community set a clear red line. Iran has taken obvious steps in recent years and months toward developing nuclear weapons capability.”

Do you believe Obama when he says, “We will not allow Iran to obtain nuclear weapons”?

“I’m certain that he means what he says, just as the Europeans mean it when they say it and the same way we mean it when we say it. But the question is how to achieve this in a practical fashion — that is what we discussed. This is the main issue affecting our future. Naturally, a prime minister should be looking out for Israel’s essential interests. I do so in conversations with world leaders and in public remarks.”

It appears as though you are currently in conflict with Obama. Is Israel in conflict with the U.S.?

“It is not a conflict. It is a question of emphasis on Israel’s interests, and that is the responsibility of the prime minister of Israel. I have been saying these things for 16 years.

“At first I was almost the only one warning against this danger, and then others joined me. I called for sanctions on Iran and I was nearly alone in that call, but then others joined me. I was the first one to demand red lines, and maybe I am alone at this time, but I believe that others will soon join me.

“A prime minister’s and a leader’s duty is to insist on the things that are essential to Israel’s security, even when it is not easy, and even when there is criticism, and even when there is no immediate agreement on everything.

“If, over the last 16 years, I had listened to the advice of all those people who told me that this or that is ‘unacceptable’ or that ‘now is not the right time’ or ‘wait until the circumstances shift in your favor,’ I don’t know if we would have made it this far. I was able to contribute to the establishment of a global coalition against Iran. We are encumbering Iran’s economy, but we have not yet reached the main objective: stopping Iran’s nuclear program. And Iran is getting ever closer to achieving its own objective. That is why I am saying things in the most responsible, thought-out, measured way possible — to our American friends as well — that we have a common goal: stopping the Iranians.”

When you make remarks to the Americans in such a blunt way, doesn’t it cause damage?

“I’m not saying things in a blunt way, but in an honest way, just the facts. I can make nice and word things delicately, but our existence is at stake. This is our future. We’re talking about a historic junction that has profound meaning. These are not just words and I am not exaggerating. That is what I have done, and that is what I will continue to do.”

Is the just thing also the right thing to do when dealing with the U.S.? Is it wise to disregard the advice of the American president?

“Who says that I am disregarding the president’s advice? I actually listen to his advice very carefully. But I think that when it comes to issues such as these — and generally, in life, I find this to be true in many respects — the just thing is always the right thing. If you do what justice and common sense suggest, it is also the right thing to do. Iran is obviously approaching the threshold of nuclear capability. Unfortunately, things have gotten this far.”

The U.S. is in the midst of an election year. There are allegations that you are intervening and impacting the elections. There are those who say that you are putting all your eggs in one basket.

“That is complete nonsense. The only thing guiding me is not the U.S. elections but the centrifuges in Iran. It is not my fault that the centrifuges aren’t more considerate of the Americans’ political timetable. If the Iranians were to hit the ‘pause’ button and stop enriching uranium and building a bomb until the end of the elections in the U.S. — then I could wait.

“But they are not waiting. They are progressing. The things that I am saying have to do with events in Iran, not events in the U.S. The desire to stop Iran is common to all Americans, Democrats and Republicans alike. There is no distinction in the desire to stop this thing. It is my duty as the prime minister of Israel, when I see Iran’s nuclear program barreling forward, to say the things that I think are necessary to ensure the future of the State of Israel. It has nothing to do with American politics.”

What needs to happen for Israel to shift from talk to action?

“I don’t think that there is any point in going into that.”

How long before Iran reaches the zone of immunity?

“Every day that goes by brings Iran closer to its goal.”

Is there a disagreement with the U.S. over that assessment?

“I don’t think that there are big gaps in our assessments of the point at which Iran will complete its preparations. The question is when action needs to be taken, not so much in terms of the date, but more in terms of the process: when Iran will reach a point beyond which it will be extremely difficult to stop. Obviously our answer to that question is different from that of the U.S. because there is a difference in our capabilities. But time is running out for the U.S. too.”

Are we alone in facing Iran?

“I am doing everything in my power to turn everyone against Iran. We are safeguarding our ability to act on our own in the face of any threat to our security and our future. The entire world is besieging Iran, financially speaking, and we should encourage that.

“A large part of the world has enlisted to the cause and answered our call. There is an international framework to press Iran, but we still can’t say that, despite all the real difficulties imposed on Iran’s economy, it is stopping Iranian aspirations. I see both sides of the equation, but I’m not satisfied with just one.”

When the top echelon of the defense establishment, the former heads of the Mossad and the Israel Security Agency (Shin Bet) and a former IDF chief of staff are all saying that we should not attack Iran at this time, and that we should wait for the U.S., how much weight do their opinions carry?

“I hear all kinds of different voices. I hear people saying that we should wait until the very last minute. But what if the U.S. fails to intervene? That is a question that we have to ask. What about red lines? I ask all these questions in the appropriate forums and in private conversations with our American friends. These are important questions. There is no point in discussing it in public forums.”

What about when President Shimon Peres makes those same remarks?

“There are many things that Peres and I agree on, and there are things we disagree on. The State of Israel is not a country that lacks varying opinions. We are a vibrant people and everyone is free to formulate their own opinion. Usually everyone also expresses their own opinion. But the country is run by the prime minister, and the person leading the government and deciding on policy is the prime minister, and that is how it will continue to be.”

Is Israel prepared for an attack on the homefront?

“We are living in the missile age, which we entered during the Gulf War. There has been a decades-long gap in preparedness. An entire generation has gone by without proper homefront preparations. I take this issue very seriously, and I hold meetings on homefront preparedness every other week. I am personally involved in the matter. In the same way that I was personally involved in building the fence in Sinai [along the Israeli-Egyptian border], which has stopped infiltrators, thus, here, we are also working methodically.

“We can’t protect every point in Israel, but we can protect most of it. One of the things that has made me very happy is the fact that the Iron Dome [missile interceptor system] has become operational. It was a decision I made during my term, and the results have been good.

“But it is important to remember this: You can protect from missiles in one way or another, but there is one thing there is no protection from: the atom bomb. The only thing that can protect us is preventing it from becoming a reality in the hands of the enemy. And, of course, we have to clarify to anyone who ever considers attacking Israel with weapons of mass destruction that he does so at his own peril.”

The prime minister sits with a stack of papers written in marker pens containing the main points he feels he needs to communicate during this interview. One of them is the tremendous investment in infrastructure that he initiated: the paving of new roads; new highway interchanges; underground rail tunnels in Jerusalem where a fortune is being invested. But “this the media doesn’t really want to hear about it,” he says.

“This is a revolution. Listen to me, a revolution,” he says. When he goes into detail and gives thorough explanations and presents data outlining the achievements in an organized fashion.

“We have revolutionized education. Free education from the age of three — that means a lot of money to citizens with children that age. They save 800 shekels on average per month, or more. Higher education also got a boost of millions upon millions. We established a new medical school in Safed.

“Meanwhile, we have made huge strides in the health system: free dental care for children until the age of 12; we added 1,000 beds to hospitals. These are accomplishments that we cannot let our nation’s short memory erase from the public’s awareness.

“I’m not saying that the current reality is devoid of problems or challenges. Obviously the opposite is true. In the last four years we faced two enormous challenges: the global economic crisis and the tremendous regional turmoil. These are things that haven’t happened here in nearly 100 years, but they happened now. We managed to maintain an island of stability. Israel is a small country, and it is located in the most unstable region in the world. Its population is greatly varied. There are a lot of challenges, but I find that we are able to do things that the citizens of Israel appreciate. But they don’t get any media buzz.

“Contrary to all the media reports, the citizens of Israel rank themselves 14th in the world happiness index. Israel’s economy ranks sixth. We are third in innovation and the life expectancy of Israeli men is the third highest among OECD countries. So something does trickle down to the citizens in Israel. I know that it is not always on the media’s agenda, but these are real things that are important to promote.”

The state comptroller recently submitted a report that deals with the rising cost of food. The report found that when Israel’s successive governments removed the price supervision from certain food items, in a centralized market, the prices skyrocketed. Is there any room to consider reinstating oversight over some of the products? What are the appropriate responses to handling the rising cost of living?

“This issue is on a lot of citizens’ minds. The treasury officials say that inflation since the beginning of the year is at about 2 percent. So there is no factual basis to this talk of rising costs. It is a feeling, and we must respect the citizens who feel this way. However, there was a drought in America [and] there are the rising oil costs and high food costs that affect not only us but the entire world. When I look at the price comparisons every day in Israel Hayom [which takes one product each day and compares its prices in Israel, Europe and the U.S.] and I see a product that costs 50% more here than it does in the European or American market, I get really angry. I ask, why? Usually, the answer is the absence of competition.”

In many OECD countries, differential taxation is customary. Thus, for example, certain dairy products carry a very low sales tax, or none at all. Should we not consider differential taxation here in Israel as well?

“We are considering a long list of measures to counter the rising cost of living. I have a lot of sympathy for the financial difficulties, but it is clear that the citizens of Israel are confronted with the same difficulty as citizens in other countries when it comes to gasoline prices, for example. The same is true of food costs. Israelis are having just as hard a time as citizens of the entire world.

“And still, during the last four years, despite the deepest economic crisis in a century, we have succeeded in maintaining an island of economic growth and job creation. Unemployment in Israel was at 6.5%. Meanwhile, there are countries in Europe where the unemployment rate has hit 25%. We have a more consistent growth rate than almost any other Western country.”

In recent weeks, scheduled budget talks were postponed. The Finance Ministry has warned that if the talks aren’t held soon, and preparations aren’t made, it will be difficult to pass next year’s budget. Are we to expect a budget for 2013?

“My goal is to have a budget for 2013. I am currently in talks about it with the heads of the coalition factions. We are still talking about it. We will finish in coming weeks.”

What are the cuts planned for next year’s budget?

“The cuts we will have to make will be a direct product of the fiscal guideline that determines how much we can spend in relation to the deficit forecast. That’s how we operate. But it is important to mention that there are a lot of benefits that have already been approved. Tax breaks for working parents of young children, for example. We also reformed the mobile phone industry, saving consumers hundreds of shekels per month.”

But the budget needs to be cut. Estimates suggest a 14 billion shekel ($3.6 billion) cut. How do you make such cuts in what will be an election year?

“Politically speaking, it is not ideal. But in terms of responsibility and the country’s needs we are handling this responsibly. Israel is a small country, surrounded by challenges. We live in the most unstable region in the world. There are different sectors here; new immigrants and veteran citizens. But we have managed to do things that the people of Israel appreciate. We’ve managed to do two things simultaneously: achieve stable security and advance economically and socially. We did this amid two of the most serious ordeals of the century: the Arab Spring and the global economic crisis. It is a fiscal and civil responsibility. These achievements don’t obviate all the other things, but they are a good indication that we are doing the right things.”

Several businesspeople labeled by the media as “tycoons” have run into some financial trouble recently. Will the government step in and help them?

“I don’t like the label ‘tycoons.’ I don’t want to institute policies that counter entrepreneurship and work against businesspeople. I am in favor of competition and I think it is the root of our success. Technological and scientific developments alone cannot propel economies. Soviet Russia was full of scientists and mathematicians. You have to incorporate that power into a dynamic economy that encourages entrepreneurship and business. The last thing I want to do is harm the business sector, because ultimately, it is carrying everything else.

“[However,] I will not accept cartels, because that is the opposite of competition. The opposite of competition is centralized wealth, whether it is governmental or private, that prevents real competition from coming about. Therefore, I do everything in my power to break up the monopolies and the cartels, the way we did in the mobile phone industry and the way will in the food industry. Without a growing economy there is no way to pay for and address security needs. We need a strong economy and to keep all the wheels moving in tandem. We are doing it with our fair share of problems and challenges. When you look at other economies in the world, you see Israel’s achievements.”

It looks as though housing prices have begun climbing again, despite various government measures. Will there be additional measures to bring housing prices down?

“According to the data I have, housing prices have risen by 1.8% since the beginning of the year. That is far less than in previous years. Prices are too high, in my opinion, and we are working to increase the supply of apartments. The current supply stands at 80,000 units. That is why the sharp price hike has leveled out. But we want more. Opening up the main routes on the highways will help. What was once considered to be in the periphery will no longer be in the periphery. Using the freeway you can get [to central Israel] in a short time and you can afford a house with a yard. You have to leave Gush Dan [central Israel] and then you can see the revolution. Even inside Gush Dan you can see the revolution.”

Are there moments of pleasure in your job?

When I’m out on the field meeting soldiers, that is a pleasure. It is a perfect way to recharge. When I met with Gilad Schalit [the soldier abducted by Hamas who was released in October 2011 after five years in captivity], when I congratulated Dan Shechtman [who won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 2011], when I met the delegation coming back from the Paralympics.”

“The average wage has gone up,” he says. “In what other country has the average wage gone up? Our minimum wage has reached an all-time record too. Do these things eliminate our other problems? No. Do they solve the high cost of gasoline? No. The rising food prices? No. Obviously there are those who will always look at the glass half empty. But deep inside, the public knows that we have handled the economic aspects responsibly and the security issues impressively. We are waging a global campaign against Iran that has produced unprecedented international pressure.

“In addition, there is political stability in Israel that hasn’t been seen here for years. My administration is completing almost four years in power. It is no coincidence; it is a direct product of policy and leadership.”

You have been blamed for the collapsing communications market: for involvement, or inaction, in saving Channel 10 and the collapse of the Maariv newspaper.

“Funny that no such allegations were made when industrial plants were forced to close down. I don’t think that we, as a government, can or should intervene in the communications market. If we do we will be accused of the opposite — people will say that we are controlling the media by providing assistance to this or that media outlet. There is a real problem in the market. It is simply too small to support the number of media outlets that exist. I hope that all the channels and newspapers find a way to survive, but the government can’t do everything.”

When should we expect general elections?

“Sometime in 2013.”

Will there be a 2013 budget?

“If it is up to me, then yes. I am talking to the coalition faction heads and I want to make sure that they are not making demands that will prevent [the budget from going through]. We are not done discussing things, but we will be done in the coming weeks. The possibility of early elections exists, but that is not my goal.”

Regardless of what he says, it still appears as though the prime minister is already thinking about elections. In a direct continuation of Israel’s struggles with economic and security issues, the prime minister is issuing a clear message to undecided voters deliberating between him and two new political players, whom he does not name, but who are clearly the two former journalists Labor Chairwoman Shelly Yachimovich and Yair Lapid.

“Israel is not a country that is easy to run. Some say that being the prime minister of Israel is the toughest job on earth. Indeed, it is a job that comes with a lot of challenges. To lead this country, to do this difficult job, you need experience and know-how on how to handle the economy. You need financial understanding and the ability to mobilize the international system.

“Personally, I look at my first term as prime minister [1996-1999]. I was the youngest Israeli prime minister, at 46. I had 14 years of experience in the political arena. I was an Israeli envoy in Washington and then the ambassador to the United Nations, then deputy foreign minister and then leader of the opposition.

“During my second term [which began in 2009], I can say that the experience I have amassed since then really changes your perspective and gives you a greater ability to work for the benefit of the citizens of your country. To anyone who aspires to get to this place I say: Get some experience. It is important. It will help you cope.”