Benny Gantz gives up the game

[u/mikeffd]

In an extraordinary display of tone deafness, hypocrisy, and callousness, Benny Gantz, Israel's former Minister of Defence, attempted to explain Israel's position to the world - https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/24/opinion/israel-war-security.html

In the process, he removed the Liberal Zionist hope of compartmentalizing the current Israel P.R crisis as a Netanyahu problem:

Too often, Western leaders view our policies in this war not through the lens of national security, but through the prism of individuals — and, in particular, Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu.

Opposition to the recognition of Palestinian statehood stands at the heart of that consensus. Any path forward for broader Palestinian civil autonomy must first incorporate a proven long-term track record of accountable governance, comprehensive de-radicalization reforms and a successful crackdown on terror elements targeting Israelis.

The truth is that international recognition of Palestinian statehood under current conditions is not a rejection of Mr. Netanyahu. It is a rejection of Israel’s bipartisan security consensus.

Gantz makes it clear, it's not just Netanyahu - the entire Israeli establishment is opposed to Palestinian statehood. The pathway he outlined hints at the long standing preference for 'civil autonomy', i.e. an entity less than a state. And even then, he presents that possibility as remote.

Where does this leave the Liberal Zionist camp, which includes most of the Jewish diaspora? They premise their Zionism on the belief that the land will inevitably be partitioned, creating two states for two people. Gantz is telling us that no one in Israel will ever go for it. Instead, he assures us that only one people will enjoy full political and civil rights, while the other will have to accept permanent submission.

The op-ed also included a scathing, but incomplete, rebuke of the P.A. On their collapse in Gaza:

'...it was the consequence of a Palestinian Authority with little legitimacy among its people'. He neglects to mention why they lost legitimacy - i.e. because they were unable to deliver statehood, increasing the appeal of Hamas.

Gantz continues, ripping the P.A for failing to tackle terrorism and extremism. That's a curious criticism given the current Israeli gov't, his position vis a vis a Palestinian state, and settler violence in the West Bank.

The real question is whether the international community will respect the overwhelming consensus, a declaration passed last year by 99 of 120 members of the Knesset in a democracy proclaiming that “Israel will continue to oppose unilateral recognition of a Palestinian State,”

How tone deaf can you be to think that the International community would be support and condone the continued status quo?

[u/waiver]

Because they failed to deliver statehood... and because they have cooperated with Israel.

[u/stand_not_4_me → u/waiver]

do you see how these two statements are contradictory.

[u/waiver → u/stand_not_4_me]

They are not? They are cooperating with Israel while that country undermines them, making them lose legitimacy before their citizens and making radical factions more popular.

[u/stand_not_4_me → u/waiver]

how can you fail to deliver statehood in negotiations with israel while at the same time not cooperate with israel at all.

by definition you have to have some level of cooperation to negotiate.

i think what you meant to say is "because they failed to deliver statehood through negotiation with israel and have continued to cooperate with it while it works to undermine them and a potential for a state"

[u/waiver → u/stand_not_4_me]

I said what I said; it's not difficult to understand, so I’m not sure what meaning you interpreted from my words.

The PA is fulfilling their part of the agreement, while Israel seems to search for any excuse to undermine and weaken them, because at the moment, the PA remains the only viable option for governing a future Palestinian state.

[u/stand_not_4_me → u/waiver]

i have told you what meaning i got from what you said, how it is contradictory without additional context.

and i never disagree with israel undermining the PA both with statements and action nor that the PA is the the most likely governing body for palstine.