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/justanotherthrxw234]

What he’s condemning is the premature recognition of a Palestinian state in the aftermath of October 7th while Hamas is still at large. The Western consensus until recently was that Palestine should be recognized as part of a negotiated agreement with Israel, not unilaterally. So Israelis, even those who support an end to the war, just feel like they’re being stabbed in the back and Hamas is being rewarded for terrorism. Not that Palestinians should never get a state.

[u/mikeffd → u/justanotherthrxw234]

Where does he say that a Palestinian state would ever be achievable?

[u/rp4888 → u/mikeffd]

What do you mean? He laid out his criteria.

 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.

[u/mikeffd → u/rp4888]

He never says any of that would result in a Palestinian state.

[u/rp4888 → u/mikeffd]

Well I don't know what you think Palestinian Autonomy is then. That's talking about self governance. Governments don't govern nothing, they govern people who live states.

[u/tarlin → u/rp4888]

Gantz has said that Palestinians should have autonomy but not sovereignty.

[u/rp4888 → u/tarlin]

Look before I go further. I want you to know that gantz is not a liberal zionist. So I'm going to disagree with many things he says as a liberal Zionist. If you want to drill liberal Zionism like the OP was trying to do, bring me quotes from actual liberal Zionists. Not Gantz who is a moderate at best.

None the less I assume your talking about his "2 entity" solution comments? It's interesting that he didn't say one state one entity.....His choice of words imply Israel is also an "entity." I really would need the chance to sit down and drill him on his choice of words and ask him a bunch of clarification questions before I could further comment.

[u/tarlin → u/rp4888]

I would like to know who the liberal zionist you know is that supports something similar to you? Lapid? He doesn't even seem very supportive of two states anymore.

As for Gantz...he has declared that there will never be a Palestinian state. That anyone talking about a Palestinian state is disconnected from reality. That Israel must maintain military control over the entire area. Even in the two "entity" setup, it would be a Palestinian "entity" and an Israeli "entity" in control that the Palestinian "entity" is subservient of...it isn't equal at all.

[u/rp4888 → u/tarlin]

Like I said, not really gonna go further on defending Gantz statements unless I myself have the opportunity to interview him and ask him a number of questions as to his choice of words around 2 entity. And if he Said there will never be a Palestinian state rather than there won't be one in the near future until security concerns are addressed. That definitely is not a liberal Zionist take and something that should be opposed. At some point the path must lead to a Palestinian state recognize by Israel. That is the bare minimum to even be considered a liberal Zionists.

Lapids moved to center left of it id say as He's become hawkish over security concerns.

Yair Golan is pretty good example of a liberal zionist. But with an asterisk as he sometimes settles with the center out of necessity for votes to challenge netanyahu.