Your email is not valid
Recipient's email is not valid
Submit Close

Your email has been sent.

Click here to send another

Nine Lives

Grinning through each reversal, the ever-bumbling, deeply unpopular Ehud Barak maneuvers to remain a political force in Israel and its leading voice to the West

Print Email
Ehud Barak (Andy Friedman)

Perhaps the greatest mark of Barak’s influence behind closed doors is the fact that his positions about major security and diplomatic questions are hard to pin down. In public, especially in the United States, he pays lip service to ideas considered “correct” in the eyes of the international community, like peace with Syria and the pressing need for a Palestinian state. But when Moshe Ya’alon, a member of the prime minister’s inner Cabinet, said recently that not one of Netanyahu’s top seven ministers believed there was a chance of achieving peace with the Palestinians, Barak didn’t bother to protest. When faced with important dilemmas, such as whether to continue the attack on Hamas during Cast Lead, Barak comes off as a moderate, preventing Israel from going too far. Yet when it comes to a possible attack on Iran’s nuclear sites, Barak—who frequently asserts that “all options should remain open”—is considered a hawk, like his boss.

Given all of this—not least of all his flourishing relationship with Netanyahu—Barak should be enjoying the unparalleled respect of his peers and adoration of at least some part of the Israeli public. But he has managed again to sabotage himself. Late last year, Barak—long known as “Mr. Defense”—undermined his own public authority on military matters by engaging in a drawn-out and sordid quarrel with Major General Gabi Ashkenazi, chief of staff of the IDF. The relationship, by all accounts, began swimmingly. Ashkenazi had been appointed to his job three months before Barak’s comeback and gradually attained huge credit in Israeli public opinion for presumably fixing what was wrong with the army after its failure in Lebanon. And, for once, Barak did not try to interfere. They met for dinners with their wives, and their relationship was portrayed by the press as being warm and supportive. They reportedly combined to produce what became known as the “Barak-Ashkenazi doctrine” of limited warfare with the goal of strengthening Israel’s deterrence, which would shape Operation Cast Lead in Gaza, against the more maximalist goals of Olmert and Southern Command chief Yoav Galant.

But in the aftermath of the war in Gaza, which was widely seen in Israel as a success, an ugly battle erupted between the two men over who deserved credit for their joint doctrine. Ashkenazi’s cronies began leaking unflattering stories about Barak to reporters, and Barak lost his composure. Instead of taking the advice of his aides, who suggested that Barak “hug” the chief of staff—i.e., keep his popular enemy close—the defense minister chose instead to publicly alienate Ashkenazi. The ensuing bickering struck many Israelis as unprofessional and absurd. To take only the most ridiculous example, the men began fighting over Barak’s tendency for tardiness. “I understand that party matters come first,” the major general sniped sarcastically, according to a source, while impatiently waiting for Barak to start a regular Thursday morning meeting regarding the army’s confidential operations. In turn, Barak began to deliberately postpone approval for the chief of staff’s meetings with other ministers and foreign visitors. When journalists asked the defense minister why he insisted on humiliating the chief of staff, Barak retorted: “Gabi is too sensitive.” Then, a week after Barak appointed a new media adviser, a photograph was distributed to the press; in it, an assertive Barak is seen briefing a division commander while Ashkenazi, looking exhausted and unkempt, watches from behind. The morning after, Ashkenazi barged into the adviser’s office and threw the newspaper on his desk. “Don’t think I don’t understand what you’re trying to do,” he shouted.

The sparring between the two men has only gotten worse, as plans got under way to pick Ashkenazi’s successor. Each IDF chief’s term lasts four years, and Ashkenazi’s will end in February 2011. Once his final year began, Ashkenazi hinted to his friends that he might be interested in an extension for a fifth year, but Barak refused. Instead, the defense minister’s advisers indicated that he was considering the appointment of General Galant—a man despised by Ashkenazi. In August, the media got hold of what soon became known as the “Galant Document”—an informal summary of an intended smear campaign against Ashkenazi and Galant’s rivals for his job. Ashkenazi declaimed his outrage. But a police investigation revealed that an Ashkenazi crony had forged the document—and the chief’s own office had leaked it. Ashkenazi, of course, denied he was in on the scheme, a protestation that Barak does not believe. And yet Israeli public opinion sees it differently, blaming Barak for airing the army’s dirty laundry and humiliating Ashkenazi. And one thing is clear: The two most senior men in Israel’s defense administration have lately been busier plotting against each other than preparing for possible fights with Iran or Hezbollah.


The quarrel with Ashkenazi came at a bad time for Barak. The police are investigating the Philippine worker scandal, while the comptroller has been looking into other affairs, among them Mrs. Barak-Priel’s attempt at opening a public relations company that relied heavily on her husband’s connections. The worst scandal came in October 2009, when the comptroller published a lethal report on the lavish spending of Barak’s entourage during a visit to the Paris Air Show in June of that year. The day the report was published, Barak happened to be visiting Poland. He was photographed in Warsaw wearing an expensive, if outdated, fedora. Ever since, when the press wants to portray Barak as disconnected and uninterested in his voters—which these days is quite often—it uses the fedora picture.

Though Barak should probably take most of the blame for his public image, he might be right in assuming that Israeli media has judged him harshly. At least some of the attacks against him seem motivated by his political alliance with Netanyahu, whose actions are in turn likely to determine Barak’s political future. If Netanyahu is heading toward an eventual attempt at a peace agreement with the Palestinians, as some still presume, the political verdict against Barak might be delayed. Indeed, whenever Barak is asked about the public’s contempt, he answers that bigger, more important issues are at stake, quipping that the future of the state of Israel should not be decided as if it was the fate of a contestant in a reality TV show. It seems likely that if Netanyahu would promise Barak the defense portfolio in his next government, Barak might join as an independent “professional” committed to the greater good of Israel—just as he has now abandoned the sinking Labor Party ship without looking back.

In the meantime, Israel’s Mr. Unpopularity continues to serve his country in his own inimitable way. In a radio interview a few weeks ago, Barak boasted of his survival skills, with his typical combination of confidence and deafness. “Look at all these politicians who hoped to eulogize me,” he said. “Where are they now?”

Amos Harel is the defense analyst for Haaretz. Avi Issacharoff is the newspaper’s Arab affairs correspondent. They blog at MESS Report, on

1 2View as single page
Print Email

Labor signed its death warrant with the Oslo agreement; the biggest disaster for Israel in the past 20 years. Maybe people outside of Israel haven’t caught on yet, but very few Israelis still buy into the “peace for land” mantra. Experience has taught us that it is suicide bombers or missiles for land.
Barak did a great job in the army but since then he has turned into just another in the long line of failed ex-general political hacks.

Israeli mantra believer says:

Carl – on what do you base your statement: “very few Israelis still buy into the ‘peace for land’ mantra”… as far as I know, the surveys still show a majority of Israelis (and Palestinians) favor this solution… got a better solution?

Now Israel is “led” by a trifecta of bloated egomaniacs: between Barak, Lieberman, and Netanyahu, the hopes for justice and peace will be bleak indeed.

Well, last year, when Israel was “led” by the mentioned above trio, was the most safest, the most peaceful year since the establishment of the state of Israel. Israelis never lived more peacefully. Well done, Netanyahu, Barak and Lieberman.

The surveys that I have seen show that there is support for a 2 state solution (although that is also decreasing because less people believe that the Palestinians really want a peaceful state alongside Israel)but not land for peace. Why should Israel sign an agreement with the PA when a) they cant bring themselves to recognize Israel as a Jewish state and b) Within a month Hamas will takeover the whole west bank anyway? Just because I don’t have a better solution doesn’t mean that we should go for the suicide solution.

23-Jan-11 B”H
I wish I could comprehend how a politician thinks he can gain trust of foreign nations when he turns his back on all that has lead to his political achievements. What value the commitment or words spoken, but this is small measure to the idiocy the reigns in the Israeli Educational system. Their seems to be a chauvinist approach to government bordering on a military dictatorship rampant in the chambers of the Israeli congress, and party to this attitude sexist infractions of the liberty of women citizens. Men are raised to be soldiers and the ladies are the national prize and taught to value themselves as little more; which is why we’re the last of the weakest in academic achievement, so imagine what the next generation of Israeli leaders is going to be like. This issue of Arabian Patriarchal society does have to fit itself to the image exported by the occidental imperialists to extricate the compliance of the citizenries. In fact, if the Jewish souls now residing amongst Anglo Saxons would take a look around them they might do well to appreciate what can be gained from the rich cultural history of Mesopotamia, shivering in their timbers more accurately that the influx of foreigners is going to bring about demographic changes that are the threat to Israel continuing to ignore the fact our populations are being swallowed up by African, Far East Asian, Russian and Eastern European Christians, all of whom have imposed their culture on Israeli life. One state, based on democracy of one man one vote is the glorious tradition that can be given to root in Mesopotamia; were that migrations of Jewish people had kept us in Arabian Mesopotamia, never having been in East Europe or the occident – those to whom we would refer to as terrorists are who we’ve become. Pereh adam may be explained to take the credo of the G-d of Avrohom and enforce throughout the world, Islamic conquer of the minds and souls over which only the government of Heaven has rule.

My mate and My hubby and i turned exclusively expressing a exceptionally dilemma, he’s got oftentimes endeavouring so that you could verify each person drastically wrong. Designs experience utilizing this happens to be vivid while in the what normally tips I’m. I merely at this point web based sent my mate my website to indicate her the come across. One time neglecting your web web site That identified himself savings and will also be seeking out it genuinely is which were identified to educate yourself about to read the paper your the latest!

I’ve said that least 4921943 times. The problem this like that is they are just too compilcated for the average bird, if you know what I mean


Your comment may be no longer than 2,000 characters, approximately 400 words. HTML tags are not permitted, nor are more than two URLs per comment. We reserve the right to delete inappropriate comments.

Thank You!

Thank you for subscribing to the Tablet Magazine Daily Digest.
Please tell us about you.

Nine Lives

Grinning through each reversal, the ever-bumbling, deeply unpopular Ehud Barak maneuvers to remain a political force in Israel and its leading voice to the West

More on Tablet:

An Insider’s Guide to the Most Important Story on Earth

By Matti Friedman — A former AP correspondent explains how and why reporters get Israel so wrong, and why it matters