The Myth of Right-Wing Security
Is it safer to be more to the right?
Many people believe that the more right-wing your politicians are, the better they are at security.
It’s easy to see how this belief developed. In the 1990s, left-wing Israeli parties were ready to give away Judea and Samaria in an extremely naive belief that the Palestinians were serious peace partners. Right-wing parties warned that they weren’t. And, of course, the right wing turned out to be correct - and the left collapsed.
Accordingly, since the Right were right and the Left were wrong, people think that the more Right you are are, the more right you are. But that’s sort of like saying that since tzniyut involves covering up, then the more you cover up, the more tzanua you are - with the end result being the “burqa babes” of Beit Shemesh.
There are two reasons why being more Right does not necessarily result in better security - and can even be worse for security.
First is that being more right has nothing to do with intelligence and strategic thinking. For example, it seems that our most right-wing government ever believed that IDF forces should be concentrated in Judea and Samaria rather than around Gaza. That, of course, was a fatal mistake. And perhaps they made that mistake because they were more obsessed with Judea and Samaria. Nor is it clear that handing out weaponry to all and sundry, without proper checks into who is going to act responsibly, is not going to have seriously negative consequences. And in general, anyone who is a “fundamentalist” - in the sense of having one absolute value, and never being willing to take into account the complexities of the world and the possibility of other perspectives - is not going to be good at strategy.
Second is that security is not just about IDF military power. It’s also about international political support. Many of the most right-wing people in Israel don’t even speak English and do not think or care about the effects of their words and actions on the rest of the world, or they think that that they don’t have to care about it. But the reality is that Israel is absolutely dependent on a certain crucial amount of political support, especially from the US. We don’t make our own aircraft. We don’t even make our own munitions! And that’s quite aside from the need for strong economic ties so that we can have a strong enough economy to power the IDF. For the sake of security, we do have to think about working together with our international friends.
Apparenly Ben-Gvir’s support has increased over the last three months. But anyone thinking deeply should realize that for all his bluster and gun-waving, he is going to seriously harm Israel’s security interests in the long run, even fatally so.
The post is mostly is a about failures on the right. Necessarily so, since the right has been in power for years.
Among the failures of the gov't RNS mentions is the neglect of security down south, the over-reliance of imported military equipment and the lack of domestic production of arms, and dismal communication skills. Tone deafness does appear to be a prerequisite for politicians, and is an affliction that affect both sides of the political spectrum.
But has the left really been an advocate for bringing home arms production? Did they sound the alarm about security for the south?
Has the left answered Ben Gvir's citizen arming scheme with one that would include background checks & proper training? Or are they against any loosening of Israel's very restrictive gun control?
(And does it matter anymore? Does the left still exist?)
As the commenters below note, you seem quite concerned with American military aid, but you have it exactly backwards. I'm not sure you realize that American "support" is what keeps Israel from developing its own weapons. Israel's weapons industry, and its export of same, would be much more unfettered if it didn't receive American "aid," which actually amounts to exactly *zero* dollars (I know, it's hard to believe, but look it up) outside of what Israel *must* spend in the US. At least part of that is a way of American politicians paying off the domestic defense industry without it being too obvious. There are a lot of political considerations at play here. The American aid helps AIPAC feel important, it helps American Jews feel that they are doing something, it's a way for American politicians to get Jewish votes and support while also throwing around a lot of pork...and any Israeli general who criticizes it soon finds himself out of a job, because there are a lot of political interests in Israel as well.
Don't believe me? One word: Lavi. Look it up.
As to the "concentrating on Judea and Samaria," that is a blood libel that was disproven almost immediately but which the Left won't drop, for obvious reasons. (For starters, it allows them to ignore that *they* were the ones pushing Oslo, and the Disengagement, and constant appeasement and money to Hamas. The last of course they've decided to blame on Bibi.) There was no withdrawal of IDF forces from the Gaza area. In fact, they went up. Were there soldiers in Judea and Samaria? Of course, because- get this- *there are Jews there*. And you may have forgotten, but the news up to October 7 was *full* of stories of terror attacks on the West Bank, along with all sorts of blood libels about attacks by "settlers" on Arabs and *something has to be done*. (Such libels are of course still ongoing. And the IDF has gotten much *more* active in the West Bank since October 7.)
There's lots of blame to go around, right up to the top. But this lazy and ugly blaming of the "settlers" for October 7 really, *really* ought to stop.
As for right-wing logic, it's really very simple: The less Arabs in our land, the less terror (and crime) we'll have to face. You may not like that, you may have a million arguments against it, but try to argue with the logic.