Earlier this month, the world was shaken by the death of seven World Central Kitchen aid workers in an Israeli attack in the Gaza Strip. US President Joe Biden expressed his anger. Secretary of State Antony Blinken threatened policy changes. And Congressional Democrats, including former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who is hardly representative of the party's left wing, have called on Biden to halt arms transfers to Israel. But this weekend's Iranian attack on Israel, which Israeli officials say involved more than 300 missiles and drones, and Iran's attack on Israel's diplomatic facilities in Syria on April 1, Biden reaffirmed America's support for Israel after the attack on Israel, which killed seven people. But he also reportedly told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that the United States would not support a counterattack against Iran. More broadly, many in the United States, including President Biden's White House, are concerned that further escalation could lead to broader regional conflict.
Meanwhile, in Israel, these two attacks made headlines, garnered public attention, and sparked discussion and debate, but the conclusions drawn were, and continue to be, quite different from those here in the United States. . In both cases, the Israeli public's reaction did not significantly change from its prior stance on the war, government, and military. Rather, in the tumultuous past few weeks, Israelis have been confirmed as much as they have been challenged.
Daria Scheindlin, an Israel-based public opinion expert and strategic consultant, said of the WCK attack: “This is not going to turn Israelis against the war.”
News of the disaster reached Israel. The Israel Defense Forces issued an unusual apology and, following an internal investigation, dismissed two officers from the Nahal Brigades, the military unit that ordered the attack. Celebrity chef José Andres, founder of WCK, appeared on Israeli television and told Israelis that they were better than the way this war was being fought.
But even if many Israelis' confidence in the military's capabilities was shaken, it was not shattered. And in any case, the reaction to the airstrikes, and to the government and IDF response, fell along familiar political lines, confirming rather than changing existing opinion.
For example, Ari Dubnov, director of Israel studies at George Washington University, said that “the moment there was a strong statement from the United States and Britain,” the Israeli right did what it had been doing for the past six months. The belief that the world as a whole is anti-Semitic and overly critical.
Dubnov says: “Relatively speaking, it's not hard to find Israelis saying there's something wrong with their government. …But what Israelis deeply fear is that you will say bad things about their military. is.”
But in this case, “I think the question of who is responsible, political or military, cuts across political lines,” Scheindlin said. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's ardent supporters blame the military. Meanwhile, those who are critical of the prime minister, or who have defected from his Likud party over a lack of military planning and more general mismanagement of the country, blame the government, says Will Cavison. Stated. Israeli independent election consultant.
But the political line remains the same, unchanged by strikes and international reaction. Since mid-October or November, Prime Minister Netanyahu's coalition has had around 45 to 50 seats in parliament, according to Cavison. “It doesn't change anything either way,” he said. “As far as I can see, there's nothing that's making this work.”
That does not mean that no one has questions about the actions and capabilities of the Israeli military. For example, Dubnov said some Israeli liberals would take the WCK airstrike as evidence of the IDF's “indiscriminate killing policy,” and that the military's image of professionalism would be at odds with the reality of the military. He said he himself sympathizes with this view.
Dubnov cited the work of sociologist and political scientist Yagir Levi, who links the WCK airstrikes to a shift in Israel's military culture that continues today and has increased over the past few years. He pointed out that the situation was intensifying. In 2016, a Palestinian man named Abdel Fattah al-Sharif stabbed an Israeli soldier and was then shot and wounded by the army, at which point another Israeli conscript, Erol Azaria, executed him. This was caught on camera. Azaria was prosecuted and sentenced to prison, but his arrest and trial sparked a backlash, especially from the right.
“From that point on, the military began announcing the number of Palestinian fighters killed in operations, indicating that the military had no hesitation in engaging,” Levy wrote in a recent article in Foreign Policy magazine. wrote. And “the approach of using body counts as an indicator of success has been significantly strengthened during the current war.”
But Dubnov said “show us who is boss” is not the description of the military mission, adding that since October 7 “the whole environment is one of revenge.” And for some people, especially on the left, that reality, the image of the military as a wild west without accountability, was made even clearer by the WCK strike.
However, factions holding such views remain a minority within the country. And even if ordinary Israelis did not oppose the army or the war after Israeli military personnel shot dead three hostages in December, they will not after the deaths of seven aid workers in a combat zone. , Scheindlin pointed out. . In fact, after the Nahal Brigade soldiers were dismissed, Iris Heim, the mother of one of the three hostages who was shot dead, wrote a letter to the IDF Chief of Staff, Helj Halevi, urging him not to blame the soldiers. It reminded me of what I asked for. She responded to her son's death by saying, “Isn't my son's blood more important than the blood of a foreign nation?” That is, why did the military feel the need to take such steps now, but not after her son died? Fatally shot?
“Not really, but [the WCK deaths have] It didn't make the headlines, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.But it is [wasn’t] That's the public's number one concern,” Scheindlin said. And “even more broadly” we are asking questions like “What have we become?” “Are we acting as the most moral military possible?” she added. She added, “They can very reflexively answer these questions by saying, 'We didn't choose this war.'” ”
Thus the war rages on, the government holds out, and the people debate who is to blame.
This dynamic is unlikely to change anytime soon, experts say. Israelis not only process the news differently than, say, Americans across the ocean, they receive it differently. The left-wing Israeli news outlet Haaretz accused Israeli television of becoming the government's propaganda arm during the war. Or, as Ayman Ismail put it in Slate earlier this month, in Israel, “the media and nightly television depict a very different reality than the rest of the world sees.”
Opinion polls show Prime Minister Netanyahu and his government are unpopular, and large-scale protests continue. However, his coalition government has not collapsed, and although many are calling for elections now, the next Israeli elections do not have to be held until 2026. Moreover, polls show that Benny Gantz will win if an election is held. He is currently in the war cabinet with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and widely supports the war. The people who lead the country will continue to lead the country, at least in the short term. Those who came after them would also have supported this war.
Additionally, the Iranian attack, and the fact that Israel and its allies and partners (and, surprisingly to some, neighbor Jordan) were able to defend against the Iranian attack, was seen in Israel as a “huge success for the military.” Dubnov said. He added that this weekend reflects how many Israelis want to think about security. Israel's defense relies on superior technology and diplomatic cooperation to protect its people, he added, because the air force is a “bastion of secular rationality” in an increasingly religious country. .
Cavison agreed. “I don't think last night changed much. I think the reaction is more in line with existing beliefs in terms of the importance of having strong allies and criticism of Bibi's handling of relations with the United States.” . [the] the need to respond in some way, etc.,” he wrote in an email. “I don't think it will change too much. Instead, it just confirms what people already think.”
The filters Israelis use to process information “conform to how people have seen things before,” Scheindlin said of the WCK strike. “Like so many other things, did October 7th change everything? there is nothing. “
