World  
comments_image Comments

Revolt of the Spy: Ex-Israeli Intelligence Chief Blasts Benjamin Netanyahu's March to War With Iran

Yuval Diskin, the former head of Israel’s General Security Service, has caused quite a stir with an interview that roasts Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu alive.
 
 
Share

Benjamin Netanyahu speaking at the United Nations' 2012 General Assembly.
Photo Credit: Avi Ochayon/Israeli Government Press Office

 
 
 
 

The former head of Israel’s General Security Service, commonly known as the Shin Bet, has caused quite a stir with an interview that roasts Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu alive. Yuval Diskin paints a disturbing picture of Netanyahu as a leader who, far more than most, is motivated by personal political gain rather than by strategy. Cynically, and one might even say appropriately, most of us routinely ascribe such motives to most politicians, but Diskin’s point is that Netanyahu leans much more toward this motivation than most.

When one considers the amount of power an Israeli Prime Minister holds, and the impact Israeli actions have on world events, having someone like the man Diskin describes in that office is alarming even while it explains much about why, even for Middle East affairs, the current status quo is so bleak. But here in the United States, it should also give us pause as we consider who this man is that our Congress, led by the Israel Lobby, is so enthralled with.

Diskin describes all the other Prime Ministers he worked under since Menachem Begin as ultimately being driven by their view of Israel’s best interests. He does not suggest they were immune to personal interest, but that when it came to the really crucial security decisions, it was not their primary motivation. But Netanyahu, and Ehud Barak, are different, says Diskin: “Unfortunately the feeling that I have, and that many senior security officials have, is that when we talk about Netanyahu and Barak, that with them the personal, opportunistic and current interests, are the thing that take precedence over anything else. And I emphasize that I am reflecting here something that not only I feel, but also many of the colleagues at my level with whom I spoke." Whether Diskin’s assessment of historical Israeli leadership is on target, the fact remains that he obviously sees a huge difference in the extent to which personal gain motivates the current government’s top decision-makers.

When it came to the push for war with Iran, Diskin’s words are even more chilling. “I have a very deep sense that on the Iranian issue, Netanyahu is 'haunted' by Menachem Begin, who attacked the Iraqi reactor (this refers to Israel’s 1981 attack on the Osirak nuclear reactor in Baghdad- MP), and by Olmert, about whom it is claimed in all kinds of places that he attacked the (nuclear) reactor in Syria (in a 2007 attack). Bibi wants to go down in history as someone who did something on this scale. I often heard him talk disparagingly about the things done by his predecessors, saying that his mission-Iran-is on a completely different scale.”

That’s just breathtaking. Netanyahu and Barak launched an unprecedented campaign to push the United States into either attacking Iran or helping to facilitate an Israeli attack. For years, as well, we also heard that the military and intelligence upper echelons in Israel were opposed to an attack, but Netanyahu and Barak cried to the heavens that Israel was facing imminent destruction, that a second holocaust, in the form of Iranian nuclear weapons, was in the offing. Now, based on Diskin’s words, we learn that not only was there a strategic disagreement within the Israeli leadership, but the pro-war side was motivated more by one-upping previous Israeli governments than by any fear that Israel would be under nuclear attack.

This needs to be understood in the context of Netanyahu being far and away more involved in US politics than any of his predecessors. The neoconservatives have always seen Bibi as their man and have worked closely with him for decades. And that ideology, directly and indirectly, is dominant in both AIPAC and the much larger Christian Zionist movement, spearheaded by Christians United for Israel (CUFI). It’s bad enough that we have such a powerful lobby, with very little to balance it out, that advocates for Israel’s interest above all else. But if that lobby is being bent to the personal, political ambitions of an individual leader, that is even worse.

 
See more stories tagged with: