The prime minister definitely has more experience in politics
than in military affairs. Since the cessation of hostilities
with Hizbullah in the north, Olmert has been involved in a
personally more intense battle to keep his job.
There is a lot of public dissatisfaction with various aspects
of the way the recent fighting was handled by the leadership
at all levels, both civil and military. Most of the criticism
has not been openly political, and has come from various
points on the political spectrum, though there are certainly
political overtones.
As soon as the cease-fire took effect, returning soldiers
went straight to the protest lines. They complained about a
lack of leadership as reflected in mistakes, and also
changing and sometimes conflicting orders, as well as serious
shortages of basic equipment and supplies.
The soldiers called for a state commission of inquiry, which
is a body whose constitution and powers are defined by law.
It would be able to call witnesses, to compel testimony, and
to draw conclusions including dismissing officials, if it
found that is necessary. A state commission of inquiry is an
independent body that does not report to the government. It
can set its own agenda. A state commission is set up by the
chief justice of the High Court, who chooses its members and
defines the questions it is to address. The commission itself
decides what to publish. As a result, such a commission is a
potential threat to a sitting government.
On Monday evening, Olmert announced that he was establishing
two internal government inquiry commissions. Those are just
panels of experts that report to the government itself. They
have no special powers. Olmert argued that these commissions
will work faster and draw lessons quicker and are better
suited to actually rectifying problems. He claimed that a
full-fledged state commission would paralyze top political
and military leaders just when they should be preparing for
new threats — especially from Iran. However their
powers and perspective are limited to what the government
tells them to do, and they have no legal power. The prime
minister chooses the members of such a commission, defines
their mandate and decides which parts — if any —
of their final report to publish. The potential as a threat
to the government from such a body is much reduced, compared
to a state commission.
Olmert's move did not satisfy the critics, even those within
the government. Amir Peretz's leadership of the Labor Party
is very weak, and there are many within Labor who would not
be sorry to see him publicly chastised. He took over Labor as
an outsider, and does not have strong ties to the Labor Party
establishment. Also, he is just about the only one threatened
by a commission of inquiry. Thus, many Labor politicians are
very free with their criticism.
Even Labor government ministers criticized Olmert's move.
Ministers Ophir Pines-Paz and Eitan Cabel announced that they
would vote against it, arguing that a state commission is
necessary. As part of the Cabinet they bear part of the
collective responsibility for all the actions of the
government, but that does not seem to worry them. MKs who do
not have a Cabinet seat, such as MKs Ami Ayalon and Danny
Yatom, were also very vocal in calling for a strong state
commission. Naturally the opposition also demanded a state
commission of inquiry.
Olmert proposed to set up one panel under a former Mossad
chief, Nachum Admoni, that would look into the government's
decision-making. The IDF would examine itself. Olmert said in
his speech that the State Comptroller would focus on
shortcomings during the war on the home front. The
Comptroller said on Tuesday that he sets his own agenda, is
already looking into the war, and does not take orders from
the prime minister.
Polls show a dramatic drop in public support for Olmert and
his government: According to the Dahaf Institute, 63 percent
of Israelis would like to see Olmert resign.
After the 1973 Yom Kippur War and the first Lebanon War in
1982, state commissions of inquiry were set up. Prime
Minister Golda Meir retired from politics in the wake of the
Agranat Commission after the Yom Kippur War. The findings of
the Kahan Commission in 1983 led to Ariel Sharon's ouster as
defense minister.
Demands for a full-fledged state commission of inquiry are
unlikely to go away. Protesters have been camped outside the
Prime Minister's Office for more than a week. There are two
camps: One group of IDF reservists has linked with right-
wing settler groups to demand the immediate resignations of
Olmert, Defense Minister Amir Peretz and army Chief of Staff
Dan Halutz. The other continues to work with the Movement for
Quality Government for the establishment of a state
commission of inquiry.
The protests truly reflect widespread anger and
disappointment over the execution of the war. The Dahaf poll
also claimed that if elections were held now, Olmert's Kadima
party would fall from 29 Knesset seats to 17, Labor would
fall from 19 to 11, the Likud would rise from 12 to 20 and
Avigdor Lieberman's Yisrael Beiteinu would rise from 11 to
17. In other words, the center-left nucleus of Olmert's
current coalition would drop from 48 seats to 28, and right-
wing parties such as Likud and Yisrael Beiteinu would rise
from 23 seats to 37.
Both Labor and Kadima appear to have problems that are deep.
Kadima is a new creation that was put together by Ariel
Sharon and that Olmert inherited. His personal signature
policy with the further withdrawal from large tracts of
Yehuda and Shomron, and even he has finally admitted that
this is now a dead issue. It is not clear what, if anything,
could hold Kadima together, aside from the common interest in
a political job.
Olmert has come in for personal criticism for real estate
deals that he made in the past, as well as his appointments
while serving in an earlier ministerial post.
To survive, Olmert will have to come up with a new agenda. So
far he is trying to rally support for a national effort to
rebuild northern Israel and the western Negev, the areas that
suffered the most from rocket attacks.
In Olmert's favor are some recent events in Lebanon. Olmert
has also insisted that the results of the war are better for
Israel than generally thought. The Lebanese army seems
serious about taking charge of the South. Also Hizbullah
leader Hassan Nasrallah said that he won't interfere with the
deployment of the Lebanese or U.N. forces. Also, Nasrallah
said openly earlier this week: "Had I thought that Israel
would react as forcefully as it did, I would not have ordered
the kidnapping of the two soldiers."
Nasrallah claimed victory against Israel, but those are not
the words of one who thinks he has achieved a military
success. Also, as Olmert pointed out, the Israeli prime
minister travels freely in northern Israel that was recently
under Hizbullah attack, while Nasrallah was afraid to emerge
from his secret bunker even for a brief meeting with the
visiting UN Secretary General.
