The Munk Debates Podcast - Be it Resolved, Bibi is the best Prime Minister for an Israel at war

Episode Date: August 19, 2024

Israel is facing an existential crisis on all fronts. A devastating war in Gaza. Nonstop rocket attacks from Hezbollah in Lebanon. Drone attacks from the Houthis in Yemen. And the very real possibility of a full scale war with Iran that could break out at any moment. And yet, the man who has led Israel through one of its most tumultuous periods in its 76 year existence, Benjamin Netanyahu, maintains that he alone is the person who can keep the country safe. Bibi’s supporters argue that Israel’s longest serving Prime Minister is the best leader for Israel at this moment. His political and wartime experience coupled with a diplomatic savviness gives him the tools necessary to navigate both the physical wars on Israel’s borders and the increasingly tense relationship with allies and adversaries abroad. To his detractors, Bibi’s failure in leadership created the conditions for the Hamas attack, and in his desperation to stay in office he has pandered to the extremists in his coalition, harming world opinion and undermining Israel’s security and its relationship with its most important ally, the United States. For the sake of Israel’s survival, safety, and security, they argue, Bibi must go. Arguing in favour of the resolution is Ruthie Blum. Ruthie is a columnist at Jewish News Syndicate and most recently she served as an adviser in the Israeli Prime Minister's Office. Arguing against the resolution is Avraham Burg. Avraham has served in a variety of high profile public positions in Israel, including as member of the Labor Party, Speaker of the Knesset, and Chairman of the Jewish Agency.   The host of this Munk Debates podcast episode is Ricki Gurwitz. Become a free member and vote on who you think won this debate at www.munkdebates.com To support civil and substantive debate on the big questions of the day, consider becoming a Munk Member at https://munkdebates.com/membership This podcast is a project of the Munk Debates, a Canadian charitable organization dedicated to fostering civil and substantive public dialogue - https://munkdebates.com/ Senior Producer: Ricki Gurwitz Editor: Kieran Lynch  Become a Munk Donor ($50 annually) to get 72-hour advanced access to the full length editions of Friday Focus and Munk Dialogues. Go to www.munkdebates.com to sign up. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

You don't help the poor by making everybody poorer. The media has a frame, and the frame is Israel is the oppressor, and the Palestinians are the oppressed. I shouldn't be forced to acknowledge my privilege unless I desire for that to be part of my interaction with somebody else. What I know to be true and what all of my fellow Gen Z know to be true is that this is the most talented generation yet. With respect to every indicia of disadvantage, there is still a racial hierarch. And though I am, of course, an Anglo. I'm certainly not a Fri-Saxon. Welcome to the Monk Debates.

Every episode we provide you with a civil and substantive debate on the big issue of the day to arm you, the listener with enough information to make up your own mind. Today's debate, be it resolved. Bibi is the best Prime Minister for an Israel at war. As Israel's Prime Minister, I promise you this. No matter of all, long it takes, no matter how difficult the road ahead, Israel will not relent, Israel will not bend,

we will defend our land, we will defend our people, we will fight until we achieve victory, victory over liberty, rather victory of liberty over tyranny, victory of life over death, victory of good over evil. That's our solemn commitment. Israel is facing an existential crisis on all fronts, a devastating war in Gaza, rocket attacks from Hezbollah in Lebanon, drone attacks from the Houthis in Yemen, and the very real possibility of a full-scale war with Iran that could break out at any moment. And yet, the man who has led Israel through one of its most tumultuous periods in its 76-year existence, Benjamin Netanyahu, maintains that he alone is the person who can keep the country safe.

B.B. supporters argue that Israel's longest serving prime minister is, you know, uniquely qualified to govern at this moment. His political and wartime experience, coupled with a diplomatic savviness, gives him the tools necessary to navigate both the physical wars on Israel's borders and the increasingly tense relationship with allies and adversaries abroad. To his critics, Beebe's failure in leadership created the conditions for Hamas' October 7th attack, and in his desperation to stay in office, he has, has pandered to the extremists in his coalition government, harming world opinion and undermining Israel's security in its relationship with its most important ally the United States. For the sake of

Israel's survival, safety, and security, they argue, BB must go. On this installment of the Monk Debates podcast, we challenge the essence of these arguments by debating the motion, be it resolved, Bibi is the best Prime Minister for an Israel at war. Arguing in favor of the resolution is Ruthie Bloom. Ruthie is a columnist at Jewish New Syndicate, and most recently she served as an advisor in the Israeli Prime Minister's office. Arguing against the resolution is Avraham Berg. Avraham has served in a variety of high-profile public positions in Israel,

including as a member of the Labor Party, Speaker of the Knesset and chairman of the Jewish agency. Ruthie, Avraham, welcome to the Monk debates. Peace on you. Thank you. So today's debate is one we have been looking forward to having for a while now. We wanted to have it between two Israelis because it really is about the man who has arguably become the face of Israel over the past three decades and more specifically over the past 10 months. So Netanyahu's political endurance has been built around this one argument he's made

over and over again that he is the only leader who can ensure Israel's safety. It's an argument he used back in 1996 when he was first elected as prime minister of Israel, and it's an argument he still uses to this day. So with that in mind, let's get started. Ruthie, you are arguing in favor of our resolution today, be it resolved, B.B. is the best prime minister for an Israel at war. Let's hear your opening statement. Okay. Now, we have to separate two time periods of 10 months each. One is prior to October 7th, and that was from the time that Netanyahu formed his coalition after the election. And the 10 months that have transpired since the October 7th massacre.

Prior to the massacre, Netanyahu formed a government that was a majority, a 64-seat majority, but it was also very controversial because the rest of the country that did not support the coalition basically took to the streets to protest its main first moves and those had to do with judicial reforms. because there was a quite a lot of chaos in the streets, aside from having planned this massacre for quite a while, Hamas and its patrons in Iran, I think, took the opportunity. They saw an opportunity to strike while there was internecine strife in the country, especially since there were many Air Force pilots and other Army officers who said that if the judicial reforms passed, they would not fly planes and they would not fight in a war against Iran.

Now, when October 7th happened, everybody was in shock and horror, of course, because of the atrocities, but also precisely because Netanyahu is famous for being Mr. Security. And suddenly, even his supporters felt that we had been blindsided by the worst thing that's happened to the Jews since the Holocaust. And how was it that nobody knew about this? And then the country became divided between those who said that this is the fault of our military intelligence that did not inform Netanyahu on October 6th that anything was about to happen. and those who said it doesn't matter, Netanyahu is the head of the country and therefore he is guilty. Now, aside from the argument over this,

the question then is, okay, what has happened since then? We're all in a trauma over the horrible deaths that occurred and the soldiers who have fallen and the hostages who are still in Gaza. But many people now have come to feel that Netanyahu has his behavior, since October 7 makes him the most suitable leader to get us through this period. And I believe that.

Okay, thank you, Ruthie, for the opening statement. Avraham, you are arguing against our resolution. Bibi is the best prime minister for an Israel at war. Let's hear your opening statement. Thank you very much and thank you very much, Ruthie, especially for the comprehensive description of the reality. I do not want to go into this street first, but I would say I completely reject the notion hinted in the words of Ruthie that as if the street protests, which was the most beautiful democratic expression of the civil society in Israel, is responsible for the Hamas attack. On the contrary, if you feel that you are going to divide the society, don't divide it in order not to invite the invaders.

But that's a discussion we shall have later. I hear the resolution. I admire Routi who can still take a position after such a horrible year, the second 10-month period. I don't meet many people who really believe that Netanyahu is the right person for the job. And since I did not vote for him, I'm a little bit biased to say he's not suitable because I didn't think he's suitable to begin with. So let me just take Netanyahu's his own standards, his own Praetarians, his own missions that he took upon himself, and use him. him in order to defeat him. He shook the hand of Arafat and committed himself for the two-state solution that never happened and it's some word there knocking on our doors, but he failed. He promised the annexation of the West Bank. Next Sunday, he said, failed. He said, we are just

a tiny step from the absolute victory. Failed. He promised to annihilate and to cancel the Iranian nuclear program. Failed. He said, I'm a league above them all. Yes, with Putin. Yes, with Trump. Failed. He said, I'm the only one who understands American politics. Oh, yes, that's the first one, the only one and the main one who made Israel a controversial partisan issue in America rather than a bipartisan-supported consensus. He said, I'm strong against Hamas. Failed. He became the finance minister of Hamas. He said, We think we will not be a minister, and this a jean provocateur pyromanic one is a minister. He is the one who destroyed the international reputation of Israel in the world, made it a pariah for nowadays. He is the one who brought Israel for the worst economic crisis ever, the third downgrading rating of Israeli economy by the credit agencies around the world.

he is the one who declared, together we are going to win, and he is the number one divider and insider at the Israeli society. So therefore, when I look at this resolution, and since I was many years in politics, I would like to offer something that maybe be a resolution that both of us can adopt, okay? And this goes a little bit to the spirit of what's insanity, according to Albert Einstein, okay, which is to doing the same thing over and over and expecting different. results and I offer the follows, maybe Routi will agree. Be it resolved, Netanyahu, it's not Bibi, is not my friend, he's a prime minister, be it resolved that Mr. Netanyahu is the perfect, the perfect prime minister for Israel at wars, internal and external, wars that will never end,

but might end Israel, we knew and will do it over and over again with the same failing results. Bottom line and not cynically, Netanyahu is the worst leader the Jewish people ever had. He should be impeached yesterday. Okay, thank you, Avram, for that opening statement. Ruthie, now is your turn for a rebuttal. You can respond to anything that you take issue with in Avram's opening statement. Okay, Avram, you made a list, and I'm not sure I can, I probably won't be able to remember each item on the list. I will start with the first one.

And the first one was that he came out in support of a two-state solution. That was several years ago. Yes, he did, but with the caveat that it wouldn't be a terrorist state, that's number one. Number two, you said, you mentioned that he was going to annex the West Bank and he said he was going to do it. I believe it was like on the 1st of July. He gave a date. Well, something happened that made him not to do that. And that was the advent of the Abraham Accords

that President Trump at the time, former President Trump, had brokered between the Gulf states and Israel. So Netanyahu, being a pragmatist, decided that the peace accords with the Gulf states were more important because one of the things he's been saying for years is that the path to peace does not necessarily have to go through the Palestinians. But rather, you create a situation in which there's peace in the Middle East and the Palestinians can join it.

You made some other points there. You said that he's the most divisive prime minister in terms of the United States, you know, creating a wedge between, let's say, making Israel a partisan rather than bipartisan issue. Well, that's actually not true for it's been decades now that the Democratic Party in the United States has gradually shifted away from its support for Israel, especially the radical elements within it. And this really had nothing to do with Netanyahu specifically. And in fact, he has tried, especially since the beginning of this war, he has done nothing but thank President Biden. When he went to Congress to address both houses, the joint session of Congress,

he made a point of talking to the Democrats and Republicans, both. Now, what I will agree with Avrim about is that he never liked Netanyahu, but it's not just that. I think that Avril, maybe you'll disagree with this, but I'm going to make the statement and you can rebut it, that you aren't thrilled with any of the leaders of the Zionist parties, and because your whole, let's say, outlook, about Israel without regard to Netanyahu is one that is, I would say, post-Zionist, you have a dim view of the Zionist enterprise altogether. No doubt that truth in myself are living in a two parallel Wikipedia universes. We read different realities as if we're not living in the same world.

From the fact that Netanyahu, for years, goes after democratic, presidents, embarrassing them, humiliate them with a lot of contempt in the time of Joe Biden actually becoming the responsible adult for the entire Israeli situation. Leave it aside. It's American politics. It's not Israeli politics. It's fascinating. But, and I even leave aside my own personal agenda because I came here as somebody who takes a public position, though I love to talk about my ideology. But I say very briefly, for me, Zionism was the necessary scaffolding to reconstruct the Jewish people from exilic structure to sovereign structure. It fully succeeded for Jews in 48, ended up in a tragedy for the Palestinian, and once the new

house was built in 48, the scaffolding can be removed, and a new entity came to the world. It is called the state of Israel, which should be the state of all of its citizens. That's it. Zionism expired in 48. After pushing aside the personal agenda or the kind of innuendo or accusation of Routi of me being unfaithful patriot, which I'm unfaithful to some kind of fascist or quasi-fascist politics of Israel, I'll say as follows. It's a beautiful catch 48, okay? Ah, Netanyahu didn't work for the two-state solution because they might become terrorists and therefore he financed Hamas in Gaza who will never begin.

be terrorists that are religious or other, I don't know, but he became the finance cash money minister of the Hamas, not just because he loved them so much, because he is using them in order to defeat the more moderate elements in the Palestinian people, because he cannot accept the notion of two states because it goes against his fundamental belief and against his religious, fanatic, messianic fundamentalist base. The second thing is, The Abraham Accord, as beautiful as it is, and I'm part of a, I enjoy a profit from me personally as an Israeli citizen, I would say it's a beautiful deception. Stupid Trump, and Trump is embarrassing, stupid president, was, and I hope will not be. He's the one who says, I remove the problem from the table.

Ha, David Copperfield, De Osex Machina, made it disappear. I wonder how he made it disappear in Nocklenow, Adon, October 7th. But the whole notion was there to help Netanyahu to climb down the tree of annexation that he promised. And he actually believed that it's possible to maintain the conflict rather than resolve the conflict. And I say after so many years, don't you see that there is another seven million between the Jordan and the Mediterranean that power and muscles and targeted killings and whatever it is doesn't work? Don't you see it? Don't you see that the best periods of the state of Israel were the peace with Egypt by Menach and Begging? The Oslo Accord, as short leave as they had till the assassination of Ishak Rabin by Yigal Amir.

Don't you see the importance of the peace with Jordan to defend us from our Eastern Front? Don't you see it? You still finance Hamas? You still support them. You still flirt with them. Go to the moderate element for God's sake. Okay. Ruthie, do you want to respond to you?

to that? Yes, I do. Well, first, before I say what I don't agree with you, I will say one thing. There's no question that Netanyahu was part of what we call the conceptia that we've been talking about since October 7th that led to it, which is to say, for example, letting Qatar finance Hamas, that peace and quiet. The idea was, and this, a lot of people shared not only in the right wing, it was the left wing. There are a lot of Israelis who shared this, that you have to give, for example, that terrorism is caused by poverty,

and therefore you need to increase work permits for Palestinians. You need to increase the money that goes into Gaza, that kind of thing. Now, one of the things that, one of the, that's one of those theories that has been proven for decades, not just in Israel, about terrorism in general, that it is not true that poverty causes terrorism. There are many wealthy terrorists, and there are many poverty-stricken people who are not terrorists.

So there were many ideas that Netanyahu, I have to admit, Netanyahu was part of them for a long time. However, and one other idea that he was part of that I disagreed with was that, for example, 10 years ago, And the war in Gaza 10 years ago, it ended before the tunnels were completely destroyed, before Hamas was destroyed, et cetera. And when asked today about why, if he knew that Hamas was ISIS and it was so terrible in Gaza, why did he not finish the job then? And his answer is, I wouldn't have had legitimacy inside the country or internationally. And the reason that I disagreed with that statement is that, well, then you mean you have to wait till so many people are slaughtered and raped and beheaded in order to gain legitimacy, which in the end you don't gain anyway. So there I would

say, I took issue with Netanyahu's statement. But what it does show, I will say, it does show that he has been doing a juggling act of monumental proportions with pressures from all sides. Okay, now if you take just the last 10-month period, pressures are from within the country, from the hostage families, from within his own cabinet, from the Knesset. That's the internal.

He has pressure from Washington. He's got enemies, I mean, Israel has enemies surrounding it. And he has to juggle this and also fight a war, but not do it irresponsibly. That's why many people are saying why haven't you flattened Beirut by now? Or why aren't you attacking Iran already

that has threatened to wipe us off the map? He is doing a balancing act that I think very few leaders would be able to do under these circumstances. Since Ruthie went half the way towards me, I'd like to go all the way towards her. Okay? Okay.

Yes, Netanyahu is an arch juggler. Nobody in the world is a better juggler than him, but his juggling is a little bit in a different place than the one root he just so eloquently described. He juggles between his legal situation and political diasprate. He doesn't give, you know what about the kidnapped families. He doesn't have any real political pressure in Israel because he can have five different coalitions tomorrow morning that was support him till the end of the term about Gaza, about the ginnap, about the economy, about the international status, but he doesn't want to go there. Why? Because he was hijacked by the extremist

of his full-scale right-wing coalition, religious fundamentalist fanatics who recognize they smell the fear. They smell the weakness. They go there. So he juggled between Ben Gvere and Smotrich. both great international leadership. Kick them out of the table. Bring inside responsible forces or promise to you this kind of safety net and move on with a place

in which the majority of the Israeli society would like. Don't go with the extreme extremists. Okay, Ruthie, I want to pick up on something that Avraham said in his response just now when he talked about Netanyahu's own legal struggles. So there is a criticism against Netanyahu that in order to maintain power to protect himself from legal prosecution,

he has put Israel in a precarious position by bringing religious extremists into the party and therefore making Israel a pariah on the international stage, opening itself up to attack due to the more liberal elements inside the country, not wanting to support the government or, let's say, fight in the Army, which they threatened to do. So what do you make of that specific criticism? Okay, so the legal troubles, first of all, you have to understand that he was elected and he got his mandates in November of 2020, correct? Yeah, 2022, the end of it. That he got those mandates while he was on trial.

This has been going on for three years. So there are two parts to that. One is that his cases are falling apart. And the other is that the public, the members of the public who supported him thought that those charges were bogus. Okay. So that's one thing. The second thing is that while he was trying to form a coalition, there were so many parties

in the so-called center and in the left that said nothing doing. We're not sitting in a government with Netanyahu, which left him to form a party. a government with Ben-Vir and Smotrich, which, by the way, I think that calling them these messianic crazies is a little extreme, okay? And I'm not religious at all, but I think that it's become this kind of meme, you know, and that they just say it, Ben-Vir-Smotrich, do you realize that all over the world those two names have become famous more like El-Bist, you know, and people all over the world know those two names, more than I think Israelis even know them? So that's one thing.

The other thing is that when Benny Gantz joined the war cabinet, he did it, there were, he ended up leaving that war cabinet. Now, it is my opinion that if Netanyahu had wanted to become, to keep his seat, become the darling of the media, avoid any prosecution, do all those things we're talking about, his best course of action would be to capitulate to the left. As Ariksh Chahon did, when he announced disengagement and he left Likud to form a different party in order to do it, he became the darling of the media, the media that had loathed him before and discredited him and called him a monster.

And I think that Netanyahu, all he would have to do, it would be so easy for him to avoid this hysteria. But that is why I'm saying that it's good for him, that he's not caving to pressures that would, in my opinion, totally endanger the state of Israel. I think it is not true that he doesn't care about the hostages. Not in the least. I disagree with that totally. Well, let's begin with a normative life. Not everything in life is politics. Not everything in life is legal.

And when leaders of Israeli parties say to Netanya, we do not want to sit with you. They follow the norm that Netanyahu himself set. He said to Eld Ormert, the former prime minister who was under investigation, a prime minister under investigation and later indicted cannot be a prime minister because there is a risk that he will put his personal interest prior to the one of the nation. That's the norm Netanyahu put. So they came to him and said, deliver. This hypocrisy was good for you.

it's not good for me, is something that the Israeli normative politics rejects. And Netanyahu is an indicted hypocrite. The second is Ben Gvere and Smotrich are so famous around the world more than Elvis because of one reason only, because they are the real de facto prime ministers of Israel. The prime minister of Israel is abducted, silent, fearful of these two individuals who puppeteer him. Last but not least, it's beautiful to say right and left, et cetera. Lapid is not left, Gans is not left, and they offered him actually a coalition of what used to be Menachem Begging, Dan Meridore, President Rivlin Likud, liberal national philosophy. But he is not there.

He is an anti-personal indictment, criminal court, fundamentally. and personal gain. That's him. That's the corrupt Prime Minister of Israel at time of war. Okay, Avram, I just want to bring us back to our resolution today, which is Bibi is the best prime minister for an Israel at war. So my question to you is about his political acumen. So I think all of us would agree here that he is a master political operator.

He has managed to stay as Prime Minister of Israel for 17 of the last. the last 30 years, which is a real feat in Israeli politics. So at a time when Israel faces more threats, both internally and externally, than it has in its 76-year existence, don't you think that his strategic acumen is an asset? So his ability to, let's say, think 20 steps ahead while the rest of us are just trying to figure out how to process the latest news. Isn't this something, isn't this a character trait that you would want for Israel at this moment? Listen, if you talk about kingdom and kings that have a dynasty forever, let him be. But we speak about a democratic system.

In a democratic system, an individual, a regime or a position are like socks. If you don't change them every now and then, they stink. The last couple of terms of Netanyahu are stinking. His reputation is lost. His credibility is not there. No leader in the world listens to him. Israel is not ran by Israel. Lincoln is sitting in the cabinet and actually runs the decisions.

The empathy for the kidnapping, the abducted is given by the Germans and by the Americans. The economy of Israel is supported by taxpayers of other states. The military arsenal is empty and only the generosity of some external superpower. enables it to continue to do what should not be done. Netanyahu is not the prime minister of Israel anymore. He's a puppet of his own illusions. So, Ruthie, Israel for the past 30 years generally has had support from both Democrats and Republicans

in the U.S. It was a bipartisan issue. And yet in a recent speech to adjoined sessions of Congress over 130 Democrats skipped it, including Vice President Harris, which is pretty unprecedented for a country like Israel, which is supposed to be a close friend of the U.S. So he has a fraught relationship with a lot of the younger Democrats who support Israel needs, maybe not now, but certainly in the future.

Do you see that as a risk for Israel? What I see as a risk for Israel is the radicalizing, of the young liberals and leftists in America, the progressives, the woke culture. America, according to all polls, is very pro-Israel. We're talking about politicians in the Democratic Party. But not their youth, not their youth. No, for the young people, the numbers are smaller. That's correct.

But I do not see this as Netanyahu's fault at all. Now, I would like to just address something that you were talking about before Avrum, about Benvirn, Smotrich, and, and Netanyahu being a puppet. Let's not forget that in our system, in Israel, okay, it's not like in America. We vote for parties, right? Now, for some reason, the idea that politicians

so-called playing to their base, that's become a dirty concept. But it's actually a clean one. Why? Because when we vote for a party and the head of its party, what we're doing is saying we're putting faith in you, to implement policies that we want you to implement. One of the reasons that Netanyahu has to take into account,

and by the way, they're not, they're actually, he's not their puppet at all. He doesn't allow them to get away with most things. Yeah, he has to be drunk. One second, one second. He has to play to his base. Now, when I say his base, I mean, you say, you talk about it as though he's being dragged around here.

Yes, we're voters. And if he doesn't do what we voted him to do, then we will vote him out. That's how you lose your seat. And that's how Ben Gvir will lose his seat and how Smotrich will lose his in the next election by our system. The more seats you get an election, the more leverage you have when a coalition is being formed, which is what happened with Yaira Lepid himself many years ago when he became finance minister because he had won a lot of seats, and he had to have a serious ministry given to him

in order for him to join the coalition. That's the way it works. Now, I'm not crazy about this system, mind you, but that's the way it works here. So to somehow accuse him, Netanyahu, of implementing policies that somehow are against, no, I'm sorry, sometimes he doesn't implement policies that I would like

because he does them more to the, the left of what I would like, not to the messianic direction. I admire Rudy that he knows that Netanyahu has an agenda. I never realize what his agenda. But, okay, let's say he has an agenda, okay, whatever it is, ideological one, spiritual one, a value-driven one, for sure. I'm still waiting for it to appear, but, you know, I'm a very patient Jew. I have eternal patience.

Having said that, it looks like I don't understand the Israeli system. I don't know politics at all, so I don't understand me. I mean, I read politics a bit different than Routi, but I'm not at all sure that our audiences are into it, okay? There were different options because people did not reject the notion of the Likud, they reject the personality and the personality cult and worshipping that the Likud became. The Likud notion of being a national, liberal party is very respectful and not my taste, but not my cup of tea, but a very, very, very respectful and an important movement in the Israeli life.

The fact that at least as for now, so many people are leaving the liquid and go off to Gans or a new party to the right or whatever it is, it's an impulse vote of non-confidence. It's an indication, not yet a decision. When we go back to the polarization of the Israeli society, we have to keep in mind, polarizations in the world. And when we have polarization in America, yes, the woaks and the progressive and whatever it is. And by the way, progressive and walks are not the same thing.

Read the book of Susan Neiman about woke does not equal left. Some of the progressive ideas in America are fascinating and to listen to. But when I have to make a choice as an external, somebody who knows a little bit about America and understands the importance of this United States of America to my very being between this progressive wing of the Democratic Party and the religious fundamentalist, evangelical Zionist on the other one, I go with the left. The coalition between Christian fundamentalist, evangelical Christian fundamentalists and fanatics, primitive in their thinking, simplistic in their ideology, and their counterpartners on the top of

the hills in Israel, that's a frightening, coalition of three heads fundamentalist Hydra, Christian fundamentalism, Jewish fundamentalism, and Muslim fundamentalism. I'm against them all. Okay, Ruthie, that's an important point. Is Netanyahu courting support from the wrong political and religious parties? No, I would say, as you said, Avram, again, I'm going to sort of slightly agree with something that you said, All right. One is that I definitely agree that we've become. I have a good day today, Ruthie.

Excuse me? I have a good day today. You're coming a lot of. Yeah, you're having a good day. I would agree that we have become far to, let's say, personality focused, okay, which goes in both directions, both in the support for the personality and for the crazed hatred of the personality. So as I said, I also believe that leaders at some point, it goes on too long, you know, that it's time for new blood.

I agree with that. And I think most countries have proven that, even countries where there's a parliamentary system and they, and there are leaders who have been in power quite some time, and they get replaced. the thing about Netanyahu is, you know, the way you'd talk, you would never know that he keeps getting elected. I mean, in other words, the idea that somehow he has no agenda, he has no ideology, he's ruined the liqueod, everybody's leaving him, everybody hates him. Well, first of all, in the next election, we'll see. Second of all, even in the prior to the election, in the primaries, the Likud members voted for him. So you can hate him, you can say that's no good, but to pretend that that has no significance as though it just sort of happened and it's all because of fanatics is ridiculous.

And second of all, I see the United States and the marriage, one thing, the other thing I do agree with you is that the left in Israel is very significant. similar to the left in America, in much of its ideology and politics, the way the right is. And you call the right wing fundamentalist evangelicals and in Israeli, well, I don't see them that way, all right? I see them as people trying to save the country from insanity. It's gone overboard. The left has gone to extremes that I find dangerous. for society and I do not see them as the evil extremists. What I do see, I agree with you that Ben-Gvier's does things that I don't approve of. I think he's a hothead and Smotrich doesn't go along

with what everyone else is saying and he argues against the, let's say, unpopular sentiment sometimes. But so what? The people who voted for him and for Ben-Gvira didn't vote for him so that he could suddenly turn into somebody else. So if we don't like that, our society has to choose different leaders of different parties. Yes, but Ruthie, just to step in there for a second, Ruthie. Smok and Ben-Gvir, their support is very small. I mean, the only reason they have these big positions in government is because they were able to give Netanyahu the call. coalition numbers he needed. So they're not really reflective of the electorate. Hold on a second. And the Lapid Bennett government, Bennett had six seats and he formed the government.

This is the system. You want to change the system? We can change the system. But to talk about how small they are and he needed them, he was negotiating with other bigger parties. He was negotiating with Benny Guns. You talk about it. First of all, they're together. They form now. I can't remember how much they have together in the current Knesset, because there are so many polls going on, you can't even remember, right? But at least 10 or something, 10 or 11 or 12, it's not such a small number when this country has so many different parties, okay? So that's not such a small number.

And as I said, after what Naftali Bennett formed the government with a measly six mandates, we can no longer discuss that issue. Hi, Rudyard Griffiths here, the executive director of the Munk Debates. Well, if you're enjoying the kind of civil and substantive conversations that we have at the debates, where we're really trying to get at the big issues and ideas that are driving the public conversation, I want to urge you to check out the Hub. The Hub is Canada's fastest growing digital and news outlet. And like the Munk Debates, it's focused on those important conversations and bringing them to you in ways that are in

lightning, enriching, and again, focused on civility above all. You can check out the hub right now at triplew the hub.com. Or open your favorite podcast app and type in The Hub Canada. You'll go to the Hub's channel and see all kinds of great interviews, roundtables, discussions with thought leaders from around the world. So, Monk Debate Community, check out the hub. We think you like what you see, listen, read, in here, do that right now at triple-w thehub.ca. Now let's get back to our month debates program.

Okay, I want to again refocus our conversation today, which is about Benjamin Netanyahu and his position as leading Israel specifically through this existential crisis for the country. Ruthie, this question is for you. I want to take you back to last summer in the months leading up to October 7th. At the time, there was a lot of political unrest. and sporadic violence between settlers and Palestinians in the West Bank. And many have attributed this to Netanyahu's coalition government, specifically members like Smutrich and Ben-Fir, who were giving political cover to illegal settlers to act with impunity in the region.

And so in September of 2023, two companies of troops from the IDF's Commando Brigade, which were previously deployed to the Gaza border, were sent to the West Bank to help deal with this unrest to clamp down on this violence, which left the southern Gaza border vulnerable to attacks. And what I'm trying to articulate in this long-winded question is, is there a direct link between Netanyahu's coalition government and the attack that happened on October 7th? That his pandering to the right wing of his party left Israel vulnerable, to this horrific attack in the South.

No, I totally disagree with that. First of all, on October 7th, right before October 7th, the thing you're referring to is that battalions were moved away from the Gaza border. That was an army directive based on the assumption and the conceptia, as I mentioned before, that Hamas was deterred and that the Gaza border had enough technology, and cameras and young women field observers there to make it safe enough. You realize that the Nova Festival Party

was given permission to be conducted. You understand these are, there were blinders on. This wasn't the fault of settlers. If you wanted me to place the most blame, it was the fault of our military intelligence that should have been on the ball, at least, again, this thing,

didn't happen overnight. We're talking about years in the making. So that's a different discussion. But if we're talking about the immediate, the immediate days or night preceding it, well, then there's no getting around the fact that the military was not on the ball. And Avrab, would you agree with that that October 7th attack was the fault of the military on that day, not the Netanyahu government? I heard at the beginning of Ruthie's introduction that the one responsible for the vulnerability of the Israeli society is me because I was against the electoral revolution, the legal revolution. So I'm one responsible. Reform. No, sure. And now I understand the army is responsible. Thank God we have so many responsible parties. But the prime minister is perfect because he's elected, because he's this, because he's there. Guys, in a system like ours, there is one captain. He's the head.

He's responsible. You don't take responsibility? You should be beheaded. Netanyahu for 10 months did not utter the word responsible. Didn't say a word. And it's his responsibility. He's the head of the cabinet. He's the chief of staff.

I mean, the political chief of staff. He's the designer and the architect of the policy and the politics and the strategy of Israel. The conceptia is his. 30 out of the last 40 years, he is the head of the state. Netanyahu is the number one failure. Now, about his support, 30 members of Knesset is equivalent to 25% approval rate in elections in America. That's all what he has. From now and on, it's negotiation.

He decided to go this way rather than that way. Now, eat it. I'm so happy about this full-scale right-wing government. Go settle the land. Boycott America. Declare war against China. Abandoned the abducted. Do everything you want, Smotrich.

Do everything you want, Ben-Vir. Anyway, Netanyahu is such a marshmallow weak, laying duck in front of you. And by the end of your term, all Israelis understand the damage of this extreme philosophy, and that will be the end of them. because they are actually cutting the own branch, the international status, the Americans going after the Israeli finance minister, because of his stupid politics, having a second Nakba philosophy, genocidal discourse by ministers, throwing a-bombes on Gaza,

let them go, let them do it. And then we can clean the system. And I actually, I don't know about that on our thing. I'll listen to the people who worked with him and the minute they stopped working with him the established parties against him Gidon Saar, Avigdor-Liberman, Naftali Bennett, I can give you the list.

I never voted for him, so I'm okay. But they worked with him. They were part of the machinery. Why do they go after him? Because they know how corrupt he is. They know how rotten the structure is. And for me, personally, from the other side, Racklow, Bibi, everybody,

but BB is not an agenda. It's bullshit because he's defining his own camp. He's defining my camp. He doesn't define me. There we go and agreeing on something. The three elements that Israel has to decide and any future government should decide and I vote accordingly.

The first is the whole set of relationships between church and state or Knesset and Beta Knesset. The second is the economic, social economic philosophy of Israel. And the third one, us and the Palestinians, us and the region. Give me as an Israeli voter, give me an answer to these three questions and I'll make up my mind, how do I decide? Being negative and say, I don't have an agenda, but I'm against the left. I don't have an agenda, but I want to kill Arabs. I don't have an agenda, but I'm against the Americans. This is not a political agenda for me. So as we reach the conclusion

of this debate, I want to ask you, Avram, specifically about the war that is taking place in Gaza right now. So after October 7th, Netanyahu made it clear that Israel's war aim in Gaza was a total and decisive victory against Hamas to completely destroy its military and governing capabilities. Now, a lot of people said this couldn't be done that it was unrealistic, too costly for Israel, and would cause too many casualties, which I believe we can all agree has happened. And yet, from reports we at least are getting here in the West, Hamas looks to be severely weakened and has lost control in many parts of Gaza. So has he succeeded in his war aims? October 7th is the, let's first formulate the October 7th. Everything that Israel done to the Palestinians

from 48 Nakba up until October 23, everything we've done to them and a lot of wrongs we did does not justify the first millimeter of move of Hamas towards the atrocities of October 7th. And everything that Hamas did in October 7th and on around Gaza and wherever it is does not justify the horrific atrocities that Israel execute in Gaza. Both wrongs. But my question is, has Israel and specifically Netanyahu achieved his warrant? Oh, no. Oh, no. He has two amorphic goals to bring back the abducted, but he doesn't do a thing about it. He just said the other day, they don't die, they just suffer. He doesn't care.

He has no empathy. He hardly met any of the families. And on the other hand, what is absolute victory? Total annihilation, kill them all, okay? After 50,000 people, how many more you have to kill? Demolish the whole place? And then what happens the day after? The problem is not how to win yesterday or today or tomorrow.

The question is, what happens in 25 years' time? They go out of the tunnels. We go out of the place and we see the demolished Gaza. How do you restore it? Who takes over? Who will be the teachers? Who will be the janitors? Who will deal with garbage collecting?

People who yesterday worked for the Hamas and now will work for another entity. Who will be this other entity? Israel, like Smotrich wants or Daniela Weiss, settling the land? That's one agenda. Or a Palestinian self-governing or international force? this way, that way, that way. Israeli occupation, Palestinian self-ruling or international force that later on will give birth

to a new Palestinian governing body will incorporate people from Gaza who supported Hamas. So there is no defeat in the term that Israelis and the base of Netanyahu understand absolute victory. First, he promised we are so. small step from absolute victory. Wow, this small step is quite long stride.

And second is, it doesn't, it's not there. Just one second. Even Benny Gunz said this war is going to take a long time, okay? Benny Gunts is in 10 months. Benny Gunts in his best days of his is simple. Don't bring him as any kind of intellectual argument. He's simply a simple, embarrassing political entity. Avraham, is Netanyahu the best person to stand up to Iran?

According to Ruti, Netanyahu is the best person for everything. Really? Is that what I said? I didn't hear myself say that. I will say, according to his failure, he's the worst one. He is the one who felt that he can, with his own calculation, manipulate Trump to withdraw from the agreement. And by the end of it, Iranians will be in the farther position with their nuclear capability. Happened so that, yes, Trump listened to Netanyahu. And many times Republicans listen to Netanyahu like the war in Iraq and other situations, and it ended up in a catastrophe.

And Iran is closer than ever, closer than ever, under the guidance and the international leadership. of Netanyahu to a nuclear capacity. I mean, there was an agreement. Was it perfect? The answer is no. Could it be different? Maybe yes. Is the current situation good?

The answer is no. Who is responsible? Netanyahu Trump. Biden, because the ripping up of that deal and then applying maximum economic pressure and sanctions actually had an effect. Iran, once the Biden administration came in and said, no, no, no, we need a new deal. And now we're going to remove a lot of the sanctions. Iran got billions of dollars with which to continue funding its proxies all over the place

and work on its nuclear program. The point about that was that, and Trump wasn't manipulated by Netanyahu. Netanyahu showed him the trove of documents that the Mossad retrieved from Tehran in 2018. 18. That's not manipulation. That is telling an ally. Look what we've seen how close they are to the bomb. Now, Iran at the time, they weren't letting inspectors in there anyway. There was no advantage to that deal. But Avram, do you see a link between the lifting of the sanctions? Wait, Avram. You don't believe the hocus focus of Netanyahu. That's a bullshit mumbo-jum. Avram.

Show up at TV. Avram, do you see a link between? the lifting of sanctions by the Biden administration, the influx of billions of dollars into the Iranian economy, and the subsequent attack on October 7th. Everything is linked in the world. I mean, nothing is not disconnected. Nothing is standalone operation. The conflict in Gaza is connected to the West Bank, which is connected to Lebanon, which is

connected to Iran, which is connected to China, which is connected to Russia, which is connected to Ukraine, which is connected to Taiwan. everything is connected. So in a situation like this, the question is not who did what, but how you try to contain the damage that Gaza will not become Sarajevo of 1914 and will be the trigger for the Third World War. That's the mission. This is why, and this is how Biden moved the entire American force against the American psyche of isolationism and against the election year that nobody cares about foreign affairs in the Rust Belt in America or the Bible Belt in America. It's not an internal affair in America, but that's the responsibility of the leader to do something

because otherwise without the American immediate jumping into the region. And now, second time again, it's that close that Gaza will be connected to Ukraine and then let's put the fire back. It's impossible. the whole effort now is to minimize the level of flames rather than ignite new ones. So if you were Netanyahu right now and Iran attacked tomorrow. I'm sorry? If you were Netanyahu and Iran... It's impossible question.

It's an oxymor. Put yourself in the shoes of the Prime Minister of Israel. And Iran attacks tomorrow. What would you do? I'll give you something, a foot for thought. How many weeks now Israel is shaky, hysterical, troubled by the Iranian threat? A couple of weeks now? Every Israeli is troubled today, tomorrow, Tishabyeh, yesterday, buying waters, charging batteries.

And they don't have to move for the Israelis to feel like that. What does that mean? That when somebody attacks you, you don't have immediately to react. Sometimes the patience, sometimes the perspective. Sometimes the perseverance is much more powerful. Imagine that in October 7th, Israel would have done the same thing to the Palestinians and to the others that the Iranians are doing to us now. They said it was a severe attack. We shall never, shall never.

We shall never hide it or put it under the carpet. But wait for our reaction and then create the international coalition and then create the policy and then make a solution. and then make a solution. Learning from the patience of the Iranians is critical. It's an unbelievable strategy. I don't know how they will hit. And I hope that by the end of it, it will be a kind of retaliation that both sides can say, yalla, it's over, let's put it behind us.

If it will not, the threat for a larger regional conflict is there. Okay, on that note, we're going to move to closing statements. Our resolution today is, be it resolved, BB is the best prime minister. for an Israel at war. Avraham, you are arguing against the resolution. Let's hear your last words in today's debate. My closing statement is, Ruthie Bloom, be it resolved that Ruthie Bloom is the best Prime Minister

at Yale representative in the media, better than he himself, though he is the most eloquent Israeli-English speakers in the world. Okay. Ruthie, do you want to give your last words in this? From the bottom of my heart for the backhanded compliment, I take any compliments I can get. My closing statement, I would just like to say a word about northern Israel, that unlike what Avrum says that all I do is think that Netanyahu is perfect, I'm actually very disturbed by the fact that we are allowing our northern border not only to be evacuated, but be on fire, but be under

assault and treat it as though it's not the same as where I live in Tel Aviv, for example. I think that it's time that, you know, it's true. We were told by Netanyahu and the military that we can't really do anything with Chisbalah until we finish Gaza. But there is a limit to how much these people cannot go back to their homes, nor will they. Their kids aren't in schools or they're in other schools and they're in hotels and with family members. It's a lot of, a terrible situation. And I would like to end by saying that we will not be able to avoid having a much wider conflict than we're having with Pizbalat, with this tip for tat back and forth, because we have seated an entire section of our country with Israelis who are equal

to all other Israelis in the country, including those sitting in cafes on the beach, in Tel Aviv. Okay, thank you both for participating in this conversation on behalf of the Monk Debates. We really appreciate you joining us today. Thank you very much for having us.

Thank you. Well, that wraps up today's debate. I want to thank our participants, Ruthie and Avraham. You've given us a lot to think about. A reminder that you can have your say on who you think won this debate. Go to our website,

www.munkdebates.com to become a free member and cast your vote. If you have any feedback or reflections on what you've just heard, please send us an email at podcast at monkdebates.com. We always love hearing feedback from our listeners. Thank you for helping us bring back the art of public debate and dialogues, one conversation at a time. I'm your host and moderator, Ricky Gerwitz. The Monk debates are a project of the Aurea and Peter and Melanie Monk Charitable Foundations.

Rudyard Griffiths and Ricky Gerwitz are the producers. Be sure to download and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. And if you like us, feel free to give us a five-star rating. Thank you again for listening.