The brief // by Ben FrankelThe past as prologue: The Galant affair
On Monday, General Benny Ganz replaced General Gabi Ashkenazi as the IDF chief of staff; in the four months leading to Ganz’s appointment Israel witnessed a bitter fight over the government’s preferred candidate, General Yoav Galant; pragmatists in the higher echelons of Israel national security establishment resolved to do all they can to prevent Galant, a hawk’s hawk, from becoming chief of staff; the pragmatists’ main worry: the moderate Ashkenazi served as a break on the government’s more hawkish tendencies, and they were afraid that Galant would only reinforce these tendencies, leading to an unnecessary attack on Iran; the pragmatists succeeded, and Galant’s nomination was killed, but it now appears that the more moderate elements in Israel’s defense establishment took extreme measures — including forging documents — to achieve their goal
There are two on-going developments in the Middle East that should keep us focused on the region. The first is the popular uprising which is spreading throughout the Arab world. The second is Iran’s continuing nuclear activities.
At least on the second of these issues we may now relax a bit. We may do so not because Iran has stopped doing what it has been doing for more than two decades now, but because it appears that Israel is not on the verge of attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities militarily, with all that such an attack would entail for the region and for the world’s oil supplies.
Why is it that we say that Israel may decide to take its time when it come to a military strike on Iran? Because this past Monday a tense, taut drama at the top of Israel’s national security establishment came to an end, with the more pragmatic elements in that establishment having won a major victory over the more hawkish elements.
Better to understand the background of the bitter struggle in the Israeli leadership, I offer a short discussion of Allen Drury’s novel, Advise and Consent, to show that moderate, liberal, peace-loving people can engage in underhanded tactics to achieve their goals, and of the first five years of the Begin government (1977-82), to show what happens when dissenting voices disappear from decision-making circles.
1. Advise and consent
Moderate, liberal, peace-loving people can do dastardly things to advance the cause in which they believe. Here is an example: Allen Drury’s 1959 novel, Advise and Consent.
The novel’s plot:
The president of the United States wants to name a new Secretary of State in an effort to improve relations with the Soviet Union. His nominee is Robert Leffingwell, the darling of the liberal media, establishment, and academia. Leffingwell, however, is viewed as an appeaser of the Soviet Union by many of the more conservative senators who must vote on his nomination, while others have serious doubts about his character due to past performances before Senatorial committees
Senator Brigham Anderson of Utah, a conservative, is chair of the subcommittee holding the nomination hearings. He refuses to send the nomination to the full Foreign Relations Committee, enraging the president and the liberal senators supporting Leffingwell’s nomination.
One of the leaders of the liberal wing in the Senate is Senator Fred Van Ackerman of Wyoming, who heads the Committee on Making Further Offers for a Russian
