By Eliot A. Cohen
Tuesday, November 03, 2026
My most recent visit to Israel overlapped with its
election in October, but that was a coincidence. In 10 days of discussions with
generals and intelligence officers, entrepreneurs and university students, I
was reminded of what Moshe Dayan’s biographer Shabtai Teveth wrote about
Israel’s famous one-eyed soldier and diplomat: “His one eye glimmered with an
enormous lust for life, his other eye was extinguished beneath the black patch,
dead. At times he seemed to symbolize Israel itself, in which life and death
are close partners.”
I had visited
Israel in November 2023, while the horrors of the Hamas onslaught were still
fresh—more than 800 civilians and 300 soldiers killed, 251 hostages seized. I
saw the room where one disabled old woman had been burned alive in bed; the
house where a father was killed in front of his children, the scattered toys
and playthings. Only the bloodstains had, in accordance with Jewish ritual,
been painstakingly removed. It was a country in deep and open trauma.
The trauma is no longer on the surface. The traffic jams
are back, the restaurants are reasonably full, and the collective settlements
along the Gaza envelope are being rebuilt by those who’d fled them, along with
new volunteers. The trauma, however, is now like an artesian river: running
below the surface, but immensely powerful.
The election offered proof of that. Although important
substantive issues were at stake—efforts to restrict the independence of the
judicial system, or the question of universal national service, for example—the
election was about personalities: whether Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was
to be loathed or trusted; whether the ultraright leaders Itamar Ben-Gvir and
Bezalel Smotrich would retain a place in government; whether Israel should
trust Gadi Eisenkot, an admired and respected retired general but a political
novice, who had lost a son and two nephews in the fighting.
Foreign and national-security policy were not major
concerns. Israelis are far harder than they were more than three years ago.
Those who believe that a two-state solution is achievable in the near term,
rather than a modus vivendi with the Palestinians, are found only on the
political margins. The aggressive establishment of buffer zones in Gaza and
Lebanon—roughly 10 kilometers of devastation in southern Lebanon, as the
civilian population is pushed out—receives general approval. Such restraint in
the use of force as most Israelis favor is based on the narrowest
considerations of prudence rather than on foreign opinion.
Israelis do not give a damn about criticism from European
leaders, or feeble and performative gestures, such as their recognition of a
Palestinian state whose rulers have not called an election in two decades.
Israelis ignore foreign politicians who make statements and proclamations but
do not bother to visit their country. Young Israelis compete to get into elite
units in the Israel Defense Forces; when a war breaks out, the planes coming
home are jammed with Israelis returning to serve in the IDF, while the ones
leaving carry mainly foreigners. Thus, Israelis have little use for students in
distant lands who are innocent of the experience of war, wearing keffiyehs and
blocking campuses.
They despise those who call their campaign in Gaza—which
was indeed ferocious—genocide. Nearly 500 members of the IDF have been killed
in Gaza since October 8, 2023, and many thousands more wounded. Israelis know
that humanitarian aid has been flowing into Gaza through their territory; that
Gaza’s population has actually grown over the past 10 years; and that Hamas,
although no longer possessing an army of 25,000 well-equipped infantry
exploiting the biggest military tunnel network in history, is still in charge
in Gaza, still fighting, and still clinging to its ultimate goal of destroying
their state.
In many ways, Israelis have turned inward, and the
results may be dangerous for them. They do not pay a great deal of heed, for
example, to the waves of anti-Semitic rhetoric and criminal attacks that have
swept countries where they would once have been unthinkable, such as Britain
and the United States. To the extent that they do, they merely see it as
confirmation of their belief that the world’s oldest hate is at work, rather
than a reaction to anything they’ve done.
Worse, this grim view leads many of them, including
military and political leaders, to give up on public diplomacy as hopeless.
They do not understand how much the thuggery of some West Bank settlers
brutalizing local Palestinians has damaged their country’s standing. They do
not fully appreciate the significance of the collapse of support in both
American political parties, or the alienation of some of their previously
committed supporters in the Jewish and evangelical-Christian communities. “The
whole world is against us,” once the refrain of a mocking song from the past
century, seems to them a given. Proud, possibly overly proud, of their
deepening relationships with some parts of the Arab world and with states such
as India, they run the risk of losing their most valuable security and trading
partners in Europe and the United States.
They see renewed bouts of battle approaching. On the
Lebanon border, in particular, Hezbollah has reconstituted and begun rearming.
But although it had planned, before 2023, an assault along the border similar
to but on a larger scale than that of October 7, it is shifting its approach.
The drone wars of Ukraine and the Persian Gulf are coming to Israel, with
fiber-optic-guided drones that render the new buffer zone less relevant.
Israelis know that Iran is still waiting for its opportunity, and has new weapons
that can pierce their country’s sophisticated, but nonetheless limited,
defenses.
Thus far the black eye patch. But there is another side
as well. Israel’s economy has, astonishingly, continued to grow at 4 percent
annually. Many Israelis—not just the ultra-Orthodox—continue to have families
of three or more children, a stark contrast to the birth dearth of advanced
societies in Europe and Asia. Israel ranks eighth in the world
happiness index, just behind Norway but ahead of Switzerland, Ireland, and
Canada.
Israel may be a start-up nation, but the key to its
strength is social cohesion. An American businessman I asked about the
difference in organizational culture noted with a grin that in the New York
financial world, where he had worked, employees ate at their desk. Here, his
company gives chits to workers so that they can go out together for a proper
lunch. Extended families, secular as well as religious, gather for Friday-night
dinners. When I waited with a colleague at a road junction near the Lebanese border
to meet another friend, every car that passed—without exception—stopped and
asked if we needed help.
My trip began with a visit to Reichman University,
Israel’s only private university. Uriel Reichman, its founder, is a former dean
of Tel Aviv University law school who hated Israel’s stodgy higher-education
bureaucracy. He created, over 30 years, a spectacular campus with
state-of-the-art studios, classrooms, and laboratories. Reichman, now the
president emeritus, is hard at work building a medical school. His modest
office, and that of the current president, sits in a small, spartan one-story
building on the gleaming campus. By design, he and his successor bump into
students and faculty, and they into them. There are nice cafeterias on campus,
but no faculty club.
My visit coincided with a memorial ceremony for Yitzhak
Rabin, the prime minister assassinated in 1995, who had been the victorious
chief of staff during the 1967 Six-Day War. The lanky provost, a lawyer whose
expertise lies in mergers and acquisitions, gave a powerful speech to the
assembled students, a cheerful and fit-looking lot, even those with missing
limbs from their military service. Nearby stood memorials to their fallen
fellows, including one who had been taken hostage in Gaza.
He quoted Rabin’s
speech given barely two weeks after the Six-Day War, while receiving an
honorary doctorate from Hebrew University. The victories had been spectacular;
Rabin’s tone, however, was somber. He’d asked:
What is there in common between
military activity and the academic world which represents civilization and
culture? What is there in common between those whose profession is violence,
and spiritual values?
For Rabin, the answer lay in “the unique spirit of the
entire Jewish people.” He’d continued:
We find, increasingly, a strange
phenomenon among our fighters. Their joy is not total, and more than a little
sorrow, and shock, permeates their celebration. There are those who do not
celebrate at all. The warriors in the front lines witnessed not only the glory
of victory but also its price—their comrades who fell beside them, bleeding.
And I know that the terrible price paid by our enemies also touched the hearts
of many of our men deeply. It may be that the Jewish people never learned,
never accustomed themselves to experience the thrill of conquest and victory,
and so we receive it with mixed feelings.
Hovering over the Israelis of 1967 were the horrors of
the Holocaust. Today the living memories of those events are almost gone. New
demons, however, haunt an Israel that has lived through more history—some of it
sordid, some of it horrible—since Rabin gave his speech. The country has more
things to be ashamed of, and a greater amount of things to be proud of. But
surprisingly, beneath it lies, including in the living spirit of Rabin’s sober
speech, more solid common ground than one might think.
No comments:
Post a Comment