Barak makes plans to attack Iran, and the press laughs

The Hebrew-language media is abuzz with a blast from the past, or rather the lack of a blast from the past Sunday morning, with the media landscape dominated by weekend revelations from former defense minister Ehud Barak that Israel planned on striking Iran’s nuclear sites at least three times over the last few years.

Tabloid Yedioth Ahronoth calls the revelations, and the ensuing backlash, “the Barak storm” (which works better in Hebrew, since Barak means lightning), and the press focuses not just on the aborted Israeli plans but also on reading between the lines of Barak’s finger pointing at politicians and the army chief for not going through with it, and what that means.

From a hard news point of view, the papers add little to the story over what was already revealed Friday night on Channel 2, and in many places the news stories in both Yedioth and Israel Hayom are identical word for word, laying bare their weak attempts at transcription journalism.

Then again, the papers were likely hamstrung by censorship implications that made any actual reporting a near-impossible task. Yedioth tackles that bull head-on, reporting that the military censor only allowed publication of “what was already known,” hinting that there may be more to the story than the Israeli public is allowed to know about. Israel Hayom, meanwhile quotes some angry bureaucrats crying foul over what was revealed.

In Yedioth, commentator Sima Kadmon makes the uncharacteristic case that Barak’s revelations should have been kept hush-hush, both because of their sensitivity and because the former Labor leader may be full of hot air.

“One needs to note that it’s strange that [former IDF chief of staff Gabi] Ashkenazi was put under criminal investigation over an on-background conversation with two veteran military reporters, while Barak can do the same thing and reveal what is thought to be the most closely guarded state secrets, and it all goes hunky dory,” she writes. “And in any case, it’s safe to assume that anyone who knows Barak took his words with a grain of salt. … Anyone who followed the goings-on of [Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu and Barak knows that the chances they would take action were almost nil.”

However, in Haaretz, Barak Ravid takes a somewhat contrary view, noting that Barak’s revelations actually indicate that Netanyahu’s show of wanting to attack Iran was not a bluff, as many thought, but actually a real plan stymied by ministers and the prime minister’s own yellow belly.

“Barak’s version does not entirely pull out the rug from under these claims, but it weakens them greatly. It supports the idea that Netanyahu was not bluffing, but truly meant every word he said. It provides additional evidence that the battle of titans that took place in the forum of eight during those years was completely authentic,” he writes. “Barak’s account of the events proves there was no real Churchillian effort here. At the moment of truth and in the most important and crucial of issue for him, Netanyahu failed to deliver the goods.”

A red line, but whose?

Israel Hayom tries to move the story forward by focusing not only on Barak’s revelation, but on anger being telegraphed out of Jerusalem over his comments. Unfortunately the paper’s front page headline, “Ministers furious over Barak: He crossed a red line,” is created from whole cloth, as not a single minister is quoted saying that.

Who is quoted saying it, though, is the paper’s own commentator Haim Shine, who apparently has anointed himself minister and wastes no time jumping on the bandwagon to attack Barak for putting his personal interests, i.e., his memoir and legacy, over the nation’s.

“It’s hard to accept this corrupt behavior, whose significance is that ‘everything is personal,’ and which is based on bad blood. In the name of personal interests, security and the ruling regime are harmed,” he writes. “It’s too bad that the former defense minister revealed before the whole nation that on this existential issue, the personal trumps the national interest.”

Goodies on the way

With Iran’s nuclear sites sitting safe and sound thanks to the lack of action, the US is ramping up efforts to funnel some serious military goodies to Israel, for the next time the country decides to sit on its hands. “The compensation is on the way,” Yedioth writes, reporting on a letter sent from the White House to senators outlining military aid Israel will get in the wake of the Iran nuclear deal. And though Netanyahu is still refusing to even discuss the package, the paper notes that Obama is plowing ahead.

“The assessment in Washington is that after the vote in Congress in mid-September, the refusal will wane and negotiations will begin on the benefits package,” the paper notes, adding that on the table are money and technology for anti-missile and anti-tunnel development projects, and increased military cooperation.

In Haaretz, Chemi Shalev notes that Obama seems to have Congressional approval for the Iran deal in the bag, and Israel may now be shifting its focus from finding friendly Democrats to finding an Iranian smoking gun.

“It seems it’s all over. The campaign to repeal the nuclear agreement with Iran is facing imminent failure,” he writes. “The last hopes of Benjamin Netanyahu and the Republicans could very well depend now on Iran itself: a demented, violent move by Tehran could still turn the tide, especially if it is directed at America rather than Israel. Jerusalem’s efforts to turn the rocket attack on Israel’s north last week into an incriminating smoking gun have failed to do the job.”