Knesset member and former IDF Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot from the National Unity Party, who left the war cabinet along with his party members in June, spoke on Friday evening with Ofira Asayag and Chaim Levinson on Channel 12 News.
During the conversation, Eisenkot provided new explanations for his party’s departure from the war cabinet and revealed his tactical and political perspective on the ongoing tensions between Israel and Hezbollah.
According to Eisenkot, “There is no war plan for Lebanon. The plan remains as it was established in the first week of fighting,” and its objectives had not altered according to changes on the ground.
Additionally, he talked about issues during his time in the war cabinet. “The expanded cabinet wouldn’t be exposed to details of the deal, which were already on Sinwar’s desk,” and “the shadows of Ben-Gvir and Smotrich loomed over the war cabinet the entire time, even when they were not present in the room.”
Eisenkot claimed that he bears full responsibility for the failure to return the hostages until now, stating, “During Ramadan, there were better conditions to bring them back, between January and February, and it did not happen.”
He explained the National Unity camp’s departure: “We left after difficult deliberations that began around February when we saw that political considerations were leading to wrong conduct, contrary to the war’s objective for the day after, in building a governmental alternative.
“We saw this happening in the failure to introduce new objectives for the Lebanese front. It also happened in the hostage issue where we believed the team should be given a significant mandate to see if they achieved results, and if not, then replace them.”
Eisenkot’s critique of Netanyahu
Eisenkot, concerning the northern front and war objectives, added, “There are five war objectives that were set in the first week, and we supported them. [However] the strategic reality has changed significantly.
“The Lebanese front is active, we have tens of thousands of Israelis not in their homes, and the war objective remains as defined in the first week – deterrence and readiness. It needs to change dramatically.”
Eisenkot added regarding Hezbollah: “As was reported on October 11, there was a debate about whether to attack or not. I thought it wasn’t necessary. However, by November-December, there was already a policy we tried to promote to shift the focus to the north, but it didn’t happen.”
Regarding Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his conduct, Eisenkot said: “I am very troubled. Netanyahu is not a king. The cabinet is a collective that decides together. I trusted the collective more than his judgment. I served under him for four years as Chief of Staff and saw a different person in his decision-making.”
Eisenkot referred to the four objectives Netanyahu presented upon his inauguration as Prime Minister in the current Knesset: “When he stood and stated in the Knesset that the first goal is to stop the Iranian nuclear threat, I thought he meant it because I worked with him to achieve this [as chief of staff.]”
“I haven’t seen that happening in the last two years. When he said his second goal was peace with Saudi Arabia, I don’t see him advancing it. He’s giving it the cold shoulder. And when he talks about boosting the economy, something else is happening, and as for restoring security and governance, we see what’s happening.”
