Last update - 02:23 15/01/2009
Defective judgment
By Haaretz Editorial
Several recent events stir doubts about the quality of the prime minister's judgment. In conducting the war Ehud Olmert has been in a harsh dispute with Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni. The two support an immediate cease-fire and believe that the Israel Defense Forces operation has achieved its goals and should be stopped now, for fear of complications. Olmert believes that the goals have not been achieved and that the military pressure on Gaza should continue.
The disagreement is legitimate, but its solution is being delayed because Olmert has refrained from convening the "troika" and the diplomatic-security cabinet. That is not the way to make decisions in wartime.
The debate among the country's leaders pales in comparison to the crisis caused by Olmert in our relations with the United States, in his attempt to influence its vote in the United Nations Security Council on a Gaza cease-fire. There are contradictory versions regarding the manner in which Olmert intervened and the outcome. What is clear is that Olmert phoned U.S. President George W. Bush late Thursday night, and in the end the United States abstained in the vote.
All the rest is in dispute: Did Olmert ask for an American veto, or only for an abstention; did U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice want to vote in the first place in favor of the decision, or to abstain; and did Bush accede to Olmert's request and twist Rice's arm, or did he refuse Olmert's request to cast a veto and accept Rice's suggestion?
But there is no dispute about what happened afterward: During a visit to Ashkelon on Monday, Olmert boasted about how he had interrupted Bush in the middle of a speech so the two could speak, and how Rice "was left pretty embarrassed" after Bush instructed her to abstain from the vote. The U.S. administration responded by declaring that Olmert's words were "100 percent, totally, completely not true," a diplomatic way of saying the Israeli prime minister is lying.
American support is a vital asset for Israel, particularly at the height of a military campaign that is not supported by the international community, which is calling for it to end. The prime minister's description to the effect that Bush does his bidding embarrasses the president and damages the authority of the U.S. secretary of state at a time when their support is of utmost importance for Israel. The public condemnation of Olmert is also seen as an expression of dissatisfaction with the continuation of the fighting and the contempt for the Security Council's decision.
Olmert's behavior is another reason for the immediate cessation of the military campaign, before Israel finds itself embroiled in a situation from which it will have difficulty getting out.