Investigations galore

With all the Israeli coverage of the Islamic State, you’d be forgiven for thinking the group was about to enter downtown Tel Aviv. While the situation isn’t quite there yet, Israel’s papers want to make sure you understand the threat.

Israel Hayom’s front page quotes Obama saying, “No border will stop the war against the IS.” Inside, the paper highlights expected comments from Obama’s speech, which occurred after the paper went to press. It quotes heavily from a New York Times article that discusses Obama’s expected plan of action, including: airstrikes across IS’s territory (including Syria), and training secular Syrian rebels.

While Israel Hayom quotes the New York Times article; Haaretz puts a translated version on its front page. Inside though, Amos Harel tries to calm everyone down, saying “panic breeds panic.” While he doesn’t want to belittle the threat that IS poses, he says, “There is no reason for Israel’s leadership to be drawn into the circus over an organization that doesn’t even have us in its sights.”

Yedioth Ahronoth is the only paper not to put IS on its front page; instead, its prime front page real estate is taken up by something much scarier: how much Rosh Hashanah will cost this year. Unfortunately, the front page is just a giant teaser for the weekend paper so we have to wait another day.

But the Islamic State is on its page four and like the other papers, Yedioth sums up Obama’s expected moves as “Lots of firepower, only no ground troops.” In an op-ed accompanying the article, Orli Azulai writes that Obama can’t believe this is happening. Recounting his promises to close Guantanamo and end the war in Iraq, he now finds himself closer to Bush than he ever expected. Azulai writes, “Those close to him say that even he can’t believe this situation is occurring.”

A new home?

While IS is the top story, national politics takes the next spot with the Jewish Home party updating its bylaws. Yedioth renames the party Bennett’s Home, and details some of the changes that Bennett pushed through. Some of the changes are that nonreligious members can join the party, Bennett can save spots on the Knesset list for people of his choosing, and if Bennett is given the chance to form a government he can select ministers without going through the party.

Israel Hayom columnist Matti Tochfeld writes that the changes give Bennett a lot of power, but that doesn’t necessarily mean anything. Tochfeld recalls Ehud Barak’s decision to change Labor’s bylaws when he headed the party in 2007. Despite the powers he gave himself, Labor failed to improve under his leadership, which shows Tochfeld one thing: it’s the man, not the laws, that create success.

Who knew what?

Haaretz reports on its front page about the resignation of Bruno Stein, Israel Police’s Central District Commander. The resignation comes after a report published in the paper that stated he attended an intimate party with a lawyer suspected of corruption. Haaretz writes that the lawyer with whom Stein was associated is implicated in the Ashdod port bribery scandal. The resignation of Stein makes it three top police officials in the last two years. Stein will leave the force only after a replacement is found.

In Yedioth, the paper reports that the attorney general will be opening an investigation about how sexual harassment claims against a judge were mishandled. The paper writes that state prosecutor Moshe Lador knew about the claims against Judge Yitzhak Cohen but didn’t act upon them. It seems that the allegations stopped at Lador and weren’t passed on to the police, attorney general, or Supreme Court President Asher Grunis. Sources close to Lador told the paper that since there wasn’t enough evidence to charge Cohen, Lador didn’t need to notify anyone.

And just when you thought there was light at the end of the never-ending tunnel called the Harpaz Affiar, Israel Hayom crushes that hope with word of another investigation. This time the investigation is focusing on Ehud Barak and Yoav Galant and the possibility that they passed classified information to civilians. The documents allegedly passed included military intelligence assessments, classified weapons programs, and Southern Command battle plans.

More investigations

In the opinion pages, Dan Margalit writes about the recent decision by the IDF to open investigations into five incidents that occurred in Operation Protective Edge. Margalit praises the investigations by a fair body (the IDF) and then turns his sights on the Israeli and American left. He goes after J Street for criticizing the Israeli government for appropriating land near the Etzion bloc. “Although I fully share the view that the annexation is a wrong and harmful step, how can the Israel lobby support the punishment of Israel? What is left for Abbas do?” he writes.

Margalit goes on to say that while they have the right to express their opinions, punishing Israel shouldn’t be the only focus of these investigations. “Dual investigations are needed. One honest investigation from our side, and the other to find out about clinics in Gaza that were only dummy structures, and sponsored by UNRWA, that hide the entrance to the tunnels, which claimed the lives of our beloved children.”

The Haaretz editorial also tackles the military investigations, but the paper takes a different route. It writes that at first glance, the investigations look like an honest attempt to uphold the law, but the real test will be in the results. The paper quotes human rights groups Yesh Din and B’Tselem which say that the IDF “suffers from serious structural flaws” in its ability to investigate itself. Haaretz recommends the results of the Turkel Committee be implemented (though the paper doesn’t specify what these are). It concludes that while it’s natural for Israelis to support IDF soldiers, “they must also demand the examination of whether the soldiers acted legally.”