Conversation between Professor Uzi Arad, a former head of the NSC, and Professor Aviad Kleinberg
Professor Uzi Arad, a former Mossad, the National Security Advisor to the Prime Minister and head of the National Security Council, is a man who takes a heavy headWork seriously. There is some stiffness made it without – popular.Is a doer. When he found what he sees as a lack of seriousness, he is quite blunt, not diplomatic. ”Hard man” and he said he does not deny. His relationship with Netanyahu began pal around and not a political alliance. Lard no political aspiration. They had not eaten or drank from Sting with “good things”. In terms of his background, bronze allies not “natural” Netanyahu. His parents were members of Hashomer Hatzair.He grew up on a kibbutz. Then a new high school in Tel Aviv. Too far from religious messianism.Netanyahu recognized at some point in thinking and execution capabilities that impressed him.Probably identified an opportunity to influence. Return offered an impressive working capacity and loyalty whom States are beginning was anathema in Arad plant it.
Netanyahu, surrounded by quite a few people words, recognized him as a man of action. The fact that Arad “not nice” did not interfere with Netanyahu. Opposite – people depend popular boss. When did theirs, you can remove them without arousing any unnecessary disturbances. This is exactly what happened last year. Arad insisted too much to the NSC by the rules. Boss did not like it and sent him home. When he was arrested at the airport Shin Bet interrogation on suspicion of leaks, understood Sir education. Arad’s camp did not erupt. No Lard camp. Later cleared of suspicion, but then it was out.Significant slap Laird still painful. Unlike the others in his situation, he is not abusing the friend who betrayed him. He remained restrained criticism, matters. Again and again I found it protects, instinctively, the boss. He still believes it, at least not easy to get rid of old habits. I did not press.Although our opinions differ on many issues, I appreciate the integrity of the Bronze and dedication. I did not come to hear gossip. We had a conversation about the way Arad, who years “in the know” intimately and who is trained in strategic thinking in the country who thinks tactically, see our situation.
Heavy Head takes his job seriously. There is some stiffness made it without – popular. Is a doer. When he found what he sees as a lack of seriousness, he is quite blunt, not diplomatic. “Hard man” and he said he does not deny. His relationship with Netanyahu began pal around and not a political alliance. Lard no political aspiration. They had not eaten or drank from Sting with “good things”. In terms of his background, bronze allies not “natural” Netanyahu. His parents were members of Hashomer Hatzair. He grew up on a kibbutz. Then a new high school in Tel Aviv. Too far from religious messianism. Netanyahu recognized at some point in thinking and execution capabilities that impressed him. Probably identified an opportunity to influence. Return offered an impressive working capacity and loyalty whom States are beginning was anathema in Arad plant it.
Netanyahu, surrounded by quite a few people words, recognized him as a man of action. The fact that Arad “not nice” did not interfere with Netanyahu. Opposite – people depend popular boss. When did theirs, you can remove them without arousing any unnecessary disturbances. This is exactly what happened last year. Arad insisted too much to the NSC by the rules. Boss did not like it and sent him home. When he was arrested at the airport Shin Bet interrogation on suspicion of leaks, understood Sir education. Arad’s camp did not erupt. No Lard camp. Later cleared of suspicion, but then it was out. Significant slap Laird still painful. Unlike the others in his situation, he is not abusing the friend who betrayed him. He remained restrained criticism, matters. Again and again I found it protects, instinctively, the boss. He still believes it, at least not easy to get rid of old habits. I did not press. Although our opinions differ on many issues, I appreciate the integrity of the Bronze and dedication. I did not come to hear gossip. We had a conversation about the way Arad, who years “in the know” intimately and who is trained in strategic thinking in the country who thinks tactically, see our situation.
Beginning of the call: >>> 2. Hannibal
One. Introduction 2. Hannibal 3. We and Uncle Sam 4. New Middle East 5. Do not uproot the planted 6. Rule of Law 7. Beckett
3. We and Uncle Sam
– Before we move to the present, let me say a word about the past. If you look back to the Zionist enterprise of 100 years, you find that contrary to the image we like to cuddle, of self-reliance, practice Nsmcno always the patron. Over the years we had three: the British, although we fought them, but they had a large donation for the construction of military force, our economic and political. The French were important allies for a decade and more, and then the Americans. We were never alone. When the British left, the French support us. When fading States developed U.S. Israeli Israeli French American, and she embroiders shape gradually until it reaches the heights of those present. The problem is greatest allies Saturday is now in the process of introspection and internal debate had lasted ten years, set up its global policy. There is a heated debate about the grand strategy of the United States. Great game we depend on strategic decisions of the United States.
There are several options. One possibility is that the United States sets. Case for Israel to find other sponsors, if any. Alternatively, despite the difficulties and doubts, the United States has not said all she has to say. In the short term, there is no doubt that the U.S. is the most important ally in our. In the long run, it’s hard to know. Many think China is a rising global power, and the Chinese are not settle over time economic power. Their interest currently limited us.
– Let me ask you about this. Netanyahu made by one of us very closely with the U.S. – in terms of its cultural identity is a person with dual citizenship. Certain ways is at home in American culture even more than culture., But Netanyahu relationship created with the Americans is not without political color. Contacts Netanyahu He clearly with the American right. what would happen if Obama wins a second term?
– Netanyahu and Israel should work with America, whether government may be. Whatever his personal, his position depends not only on the right-wing. Netanyahu’s two terms as prime minister, was in the United States democratic government. Yet despite the different colors, increasing the need for a common function of ideological preferences, if they exist.
– Is Netanyahu did not crossed the border in his last visit to the United States, when using his allies in the House and the public is actually imposed his will on Obama? Do not pay for it, assuming Obama wins again?
– Americans are pragmatic. I was present in most of Netanyahu’s talks with Democratic leaders. I saw flexibility and understanding. Is that one party has such a card and such, do not detract from the joint functioning capacity. Netanyahu speaks the language of American politics, the American moves slang. No one told him he was talking like a senior Republican senator. But a man of power, even when he talks with Democratic leaders.
– Does he remember that he was running a small and dependent in the Middle East as he thinks as a senator in the empire?
– He has a great awareness of our needs, as well as limitations of power and purpose to cooperate. Through partnerships and alliances which have stress sometimes, but that does not mean these tears. Have common interests. That’s what counts. America is an empire that is not declared imperial character. Style of the United States as an empire, it is less clicks Roman style. Amazing the patience reveal U.S. officials not only against Israeli partner, but even against Abu – Mazen. Even he, in fact who and what he is able to demonstrate to the Americans and give the president negative responses , and Americans respond with great patience. patience in relation to the Israeli chutzpah, have patience with things that we would become because of them the table is amazing.
– And speaking of herself and daughter relationship sponsorship, what do you think about Iran? Prime Minister often compare Iran to Nazi Germany and sees Iran’s return to nuclear holocaust. If we really are one step ahead of torch, might not have taken into account the opinion of the United States?
– I was quite a bit of intelligence assessments about the Iranian threat. Of course, I prefer not to elaborate publicly. As the lessons of World War II, I would add that what tipped the war machine of Nazi killing was the U.S. entry into the war in full force. Without this mobilization is doubtful whether it was possible to defeat Germany and stop the destruction. Returning to our region, I believe that only the practical American willingness to act vigorously and continuously can ensure (over time) that Iran will acquire nuclear weapons. State of Israel has never acted alone. was indeed attacked Iraq in 1981, but which prevented Iraq to achieve nuclear capability of the U.S. operations: the first Gulf War, the inspection regime and degradation imposed on Iraq and the second Gulf War.
– Ie preventing nuclear weapons from Iran is beyond the ability of Israel?
– Israel can not alone ensure that over time the dismantling of a nuclear Iran. Only power like the United States – the top global coalition – could make such a move effectively in the long term.
Next topic, in order of call: 4. New Middle East
5. Do not uproot the planted
– Chuck: But the world does not stand still while you wait to see what happens. There are people who live without rights for decades, has settlement offers less maneuverability ours, there is frustration. These are not frozen.
– Aa: you can reach an understanding about principles govern. There is a great deal of understanding about the IsraeliOccupiedTerritories have any future agreement. We have been sitting there, there’s people there living tissue, there has been two generations who live there. The whole idea of extractions is destructive by definition.
– But Israel says now – as evidenced interprets Hill alma mater – she did not want to pull anything. Extractions are not only destructive, but also theft of land. It beckons to us, Palestinians and the world distribution of the country you’re talking about do not exist – even the very limited parameters, and slightly utopian, label. Currently the State of Israel can not pull even one of the territories.
– That it has no incentive to do it. We do not get anything in return.
– What should be the correct value wrong? And beyond the theft of standing here right of the government to decide where to settle and where not. Settlement gradually reduces the ability of political maneuvering that is so important to you.
– Look, there is the Palestinian Arab takeovers illegal, including East Jerusalem. If the Palestinians have rights in the homes, and they, need to find another solution: there are many solutions – by compensation or providing an alternative.
– I asked you a simple question: Is the territories now held by the State of Israel, you are watching the wrong future invisible move one way or another to the Jordanian Palestinian state, the sovereign State of Israel has the right to move even one?
– He has a chance.
– Basically only?
– We have proved that if you want can.
– I did not want to?
– We have legitimate needs and interests. When the Palestinians take into consideration that it will be possible to speak.
– But why the simple act of removing intruders private land requires a radical policy change on the Palestinian side? Why it with anything? Palestinians are subject to Israeli law. Is supposed to protect them. Is he doing this?
– You focus on it as if this is all.
– This is not everything in the I simply ask you whether Palestinians have rights under Israel’s control or sensitivities of the settlers only relevant? Does the government have the authority to determine where to settle and where not, or it just gives the valid decisions of political groups Ssicolihn are no real ideological – political?
– Look, if she wants she can.
– So she does not want?
– I add here the principle: in any case I would prefer not to be the chatter of the people. There are human rights, humanitarian rights have …
– Just for Jews? Israel decided to build the separation wall. Is expropriated land, crossed villages, moving people. It happens every day in the territories. People – Arabs – Mtortrim. Why can not you leave the three structures Hill alma mater.
– The Jews.
– The government of Israel can not turn three houses from the girls’?
– It depends. If she wants, and she thinks that this warrant and desirable, and is the only thing, then she can do it. Currently looking for a way to compromise between systems of different considerations. In any case I remind you that when they tried to evacuate Arabs Jewish-owned homes in Sheikh Jarrah for example – there are more homes than Hill alma mater – it did not. There are houses owned by Jews from the period between the wars, World War I and II. War of Independence got out of there because of the events, and came to Palestinians. In ’67, the owner came and asked to return to their homes and can not be them. Then things started to go up the Israeli court. And rose, and rose, and there were appeals, until a few years ago because the court ruled, belongs to Jewish owners. These dates will be honored invaded there and turn. All peace organizations in the world, and most governments around the world were against us.
– It’s not the same. A state of war and the homes of absentees, captured after the war. People live in them for decades. Hill girls’ new settlement has caught very different circumstances. But even if we do injustice to the Jewish owners here, I do not understand why it justifies injustice Palestinian owners. From now until I fix all the other problems of the world, will not be ready to correct injustice?
– Justice is right when he performed equally.
– Is it really seems you State of Israel is not equal to Jews? That not be done justice to the Jews can not do justice to the Arabs? You do not really think so.
– I do not want a selective application of the principles. If we tried to turn the Arab Sheikh Jarrah was an international uproar. This logic of reciprocal arrangements. You get when you give.
– But what’s the connection? How to become takeover of private land in to some of our negotiations with the Palestinians?
– That see it as a metaphor. The three houses are not matter.
– To what? Israel is a state law, and state law does not every man for himself? It actually own good. You, a man who believes very deeply statehood. And yet I can not get you to the basic statement that says: “My country is inconceivable that people do things against my law.”
– It is clear that the kingdom should enforce the law, but there are certain enforcement prior to another. Require law enforcement turn a blind eye captious May – Law enforcement in other areas, this is political preference. Everyone should do statehood.
– It seems to be covered mainly Palestinians.
Next topic, in order of call: 6. Rule of Law
– Assuming that the Hill girls’ and treat the law. If you ignore what is happening in the territories, are you satisfied from the law in Israel?
– No. When you look at what is happening in Israel, you find that the term “law” becomes plasticine. In most places in the world are things fixed laws. Once the law was passed, especially in matters that should organize our lives, we should respect it. What is happening in Israel is very different. You can cancel TODAY ground rules – for example the size of government. Basic Law of Governance was set by a maximum of 18 ministers. Ehud Barak broke it last Knesset decision within 72 hours. Created a precedent that even the basic laws were only temporary. Here today and gone tomorrow. Israel does not have a constitution, but the ground rules. Actually created a norm can legislate and change the ground rules from day today. Very difficult to get any public respect the law when he knows the law says now allowed to travel green and red tomorrow. The law reflects the political mood is changing when the political mood changes. The second problem is the phenomenon of “citron.” That is, if a particular factor does what you want, you close your eyes its delinquency law in another. Each side in the political arena close eye on breaking the law, if the offender goes to the desired path. The third problem is the separation of powers. Separation of powers was born, because they wanted checks and balances. What has happened now in the Netanyahu government is a coalition made up draws large parts of the legislative branch into the executive branch.
– An opposition not bother you?
– It is not without opposition – hardly left Parliament! Parliament as a supervisor, auditor and limits disappear. More specifically, Parliament is now a branch of the executive.
– That the agreement between Mofaz and Bibi undermines the principle of separation of powers and endanger democracy?
– I do not know. Actions are not illegal, of course, but they have consequences. With all the difficulties involved, there will be no escape from making a constitution, a constitution that would prevent the chronic liquidity that characterizes the Israeli political system.
– So you’re not one of those who think that the more together better?
– I am concerned about the lack of checks and balances that allow democracy. American system belongs to the House of Representatives is often the president’s camp, the executive branch. But they have other checks and balances. Congress has the power to budgeting, you know. The executive branch can not touch budgeting. It creates mutual dependence and mutual respect. The Supreme Court has very great power, to declare the law as unconstitutional. Our Supreme Court attempted to control other authorities by the fundamental laws, and rulings of the Supreme Court. Due to exaggerated claim “everything is justiciable”, came a reaction. Now attempt to return to parliament to control political means, make it the final instance, over the rulings of the Supreme “Justice. These significant constitutional changes, made almost casually by politicians who do not realize they are shocking the constitutional structure of democracy.
– But this move is not dropped from the sky. This move by Netanyahu.
– Netanyahu is part of the volatility that characterizes Israeli politics. He makes moves that others broke their way. I think we needed a constitution that can not continue. Ostensibly there is nothing to prevent a situation in which 120 members of the Knesset will be the executive. Nothing will stop it. The role of a constitution is to rediscover the proper checks and balances, to find the right basic laws, and make them almost impossible to reflect fluctuations and changes in political needs pass.
– Again Fungus Netanyahu responsibility. Although others fought his way through the dangerous movement (and anti – democratic) His term is the knowledge and consent. A typical decision Netanyahu immediate term – profit – political or image. In the long run, we are all going to pay a price for it is clear that this is the weakest of the system, of politics, of democracy. Is this typical of thinking and action?
– The precedents created by others. Netanyahu in his first term honored the “Basic Law: The Government.” He had 18 ministers. And it functioned well. Who considerations of opportunism, broke the law and created a loophole that the government can expand like an accordion was Ehud Barak. Netanyahu Overall obeys the accepted norm. As a basic law is respected. Those who remained silent when abused predecessors democratic principles can not come now claims to Netanyahu.
– But is this not the definition of opportunism – taking advantage of opportunities without limiting principles? Is not that characterizes the way in which Netanyahu work? Benefit from opportunities in the short and long term damages?
– I think that Netanyahu hesitated before this move, watching him. Time will tell if whether the benefits are many disadvantages. No one knows. By the way, nobody knows if it will last.
Next topic, in order of call: 7. Beckett
– Chuck: Soon to be published on the State Comptroller’s Report NSC. Filled an important role in the establishment of this body, the position of the head and finished the job jarring concrete due to disagreements between you and the Prime Minister. What do you expect?
– Aa: I’m not allowed to what I saw in the draft report, but there is no doubt that the report will address the question of what the goals of NSC implemented by law enacted in 2008 and which were not achieved.
– On a personal note – it seems that Netanyahu was not thrilled with the way you got the role of the NSC and at one point decided to get rid of you. However, and certainly not a slight sensation. I remember the story of the King of England Henry II and his adviser Thomas Becket. King called his office the Archbishop of Canterbury . independence when it discovered the rest position, make sure the king dismissed the boss of the attorney made problematic. now no longer executed, but long your investigation by the Shin Bet at the airport and removing security classification – which if not through brutal inform you’ve fallen from grace ?
– Let’s not compare the incident I went through at the airport and the murder of Becket in the cathedral of Canterbury.