A not-so-cheerful but almost uniform chorus of journalists rushed this week to attack Chief of Staff Aviv Kochavi, for daring to warn of the dangers of a nuclear deal with Iran. “How is it that one star dares,” one of the newspapers chanted. Publicly expresses an opinion on a security issue, and in the same breath complained that his opinion was not heard on other issues. The problem did not seem to be in the fact that the chief of staff voiced an opinion, but in the fact that it was not the opinion that the critics wanted to hear.
Exactly on the same stage and on the same podium of the Institute for National Security Studies stood five years ago the then chief of staff, Gadi Izenkot, and spoke in favor of the opportunities in the nuclear agreement. His remarks were then applauded, and he was praised for having the public opinion different from The Prime Minister’s opinion This time the Chief of Staff’s opinion is close to the Prime Minister’s opinion, and therefore should not be heard, critics argued, who also gave the stars the title “Rhino”. He took another step, and in the best of Herod’s teachings he was also called a “clerk.”
The chief of staff in Israel is not an official. Although he is in charge, removed in spite of the elected echelon, he also makes the second most important decision in Israel, and as such is not apolitical. There is no government that can force a chief of staff to go to war he does not believe is necessary.
The chief of staff should not be afraid to express his position, even when it is inconvenient for all who hear it. This is what Ehud Barak did, when he pointed out the holes in the Oslo Accords on a hill in Latrun; We do not really want chiefs of staff who are afraid to express their professional position, certainly not on the issues they are in charge of.
Last month we heard US Chief of Staff Mark Millie boldly confront his commander, President Trump, declaring that he is loyal only to the constitution. We have no constitution, but our chief of staff is in charge of preserving an asset that is no less expensive: the best daughters and sons of Israeli society called For compulsory service. While the US Chief of Staff protects the interests of the United States in the world – our Chief of Staff protects our very existence. He has a duty to warn, even publicly, of what he perceives as a threat to our future.
Kochavi sees a return to Obama’s previous nuclear deal, which gives Iran a de facto license to advance to a nuclear bomb in four years, a threat to the future of our children and grandchildren. He has been consistent in this position and has been voicing it for years, both in decision-makers’ forums and in front of his U.S. military interlocutors. Not just stars – most of our top security officials believe that a return to the 2015 nuclear deal will be a cry for generations. And as if to reinforce Kochavi’s remarks, the next day the new US Secretary of State stated that the US aspires to return to the previous agreement as a starting point.
Wind direction
During his tenure as head of the Armed Forces, which ended in 2014 before the United States signed the agreement with Iran, Kochavi pointed to the possibility of reaching a good nuclear agreement with the Iranians, and even today he believes that an “excellent agreement” can be reached. In his view, an agreement that does not include a “sunset clause” that sets a date for the expiration of restrictions on Iran, which limits Iran’s ability to develop faster centrifuges for uranium enrichment and which establishes more effective monitoring mechanisms – is a good agreement for Israel.
Netanyahu is more skeptical than he is and does not believe the United States can be led to an improved nuclear deal with Iran. Despite this, he is patiently waiting for his first phone call with Biden, and next month will send Mossad chief Yossi Cohen to talks with the new administration. Only after he understands the direction of the wind blowing in Washington – will Netanyahu decide whether to go with the new administration or against him.
Israel’s options are not good. Although Kochavi has stated that he has already instructed to prepare operational plans for action against Iran, he does not have the budget to rebuild the military option, and even if he had – it is clear that once negotiations between the US and Iran open, Israel will be required to stop open military preparation. We were in this movie back in 2012.
Israel’s military option vis-à-vis Iran was and remains a poor measure, which could at most slightly delay the Iranians but not deprive them of capabilities. Iran has the knowledge to enrich uranium, and no attack or bomb will take it away from it. It is important that we have a military option, but it will only be used as a last resort.
In the Pavlovian reflex, many interpreted the chief of staff’s speech as an attempt to seek another budget for defense, but in Israel of 2021 – a budget is at best a vague memory of the days when there was a functioning state here. There is no budget, neither for the IDF nor for any public system forward. Kochavi, who from the moment he took office two years ago has been serving under an election campaign, can only dream of a tidy budget for next year.
The author is the military commentator for News 13