C. J. Polychroniou: The October 7 attacks by Hamas’ military wing—the al-Qassam Brigades—and several other Palestinian armed groups shook Israel to its core, and the nature and scope of the operation, called Al-Aqsa Flood, which resulted in the deaths of nearly 1200 people while some 250 were taken as hostages to Gaza prompted the extreme far-right government of Benjamin Netanyahu to embark on a maniacal campaign against Gaza which has led so far to a Palestinian death toll that has risen to over 41,000 although the true death toll is undoubtedly much higher. Indeed, the utter destruction of Gaza was a stated objective as Israel’s war cabinet had vowed to wipe Hamas off the earth. Now, it’s been said that the attacks created a strong sense of solidarity among Israelis, with the overwhelming majority supporting the military response against Hamas, including limiting humanitarian aid to Gaza, but that old divisions have returned and that Israeli society is divided about the lessons of October 7. Can you give us a sense of the mood in Israel today, especially since Israel is pressing forward now on two fronts?
Idan Landau: Probably the single most divisive issue in Israel concerns the fate of the hostages. By now it is clear that the military “pressure” (a euphemism for rampant killing of Gazans) not only fails to facilitate the release of the hostages but directly contributes to their death. So the terms of the dilemma have grown more brutal: Are you or aren’t you willing to sacrifice the lives of the Israeli hostages for Netanyahu’s promise of “absolute victory”? Note how the human aspect has been removed; their lives are no longer considered the ultimate end, to which different means may be deployed. Their lives are one more strategic means, along with others, like holding on to the Philadelphi road, or using 2,000 pound bombs, etc. This reflects the increasing dehumanization that affects not just Israel’s victims but Israelis themselves.
Now, the constant demonstrations for the hostages, which attracted hundreds of thousands of Israelis, were a real nuisance to this government. It did and still does everything it can to demonize the demonstrators; they directly target family members of hostages—miserable fathers and mothers and siblings, who have gone through many sleepless nights of anxiety and sorrow—so that police forces and random mobs beat them up on the streets. In this context the new Lebanese/Iranian front really serves Netanyahu perfectly; it silences the protest, quite literally, as the emergency regulations simply prohibit people to gather outside. Even mainstream analysts agree that among Netanyahu’s motives for escalating this never-ending war with ever more new fronts is the forceful pacification of the internal divisions that threaten his coalition.
Israelis are traumatized, exhausted, and feel defenseless more than ever under this state of endless war. That’s exactly when societies cling together and refrain from challenging their most fundamental assumptions.
Regrettably, on the major questions of Israel’s policies there are no serious debates. Was it moral or wise to bomb Lebanese towns, kill around 2,000 Lebanese citizens since Oct. 7, and invade the villages in southern Lebanon? There’s increasing talk now about “a security zone”—the same false idol that persisted between 1982-2000 and which Israel eventually abandoned (tail between legs), and one that will surely be established in the Gaza Strip. There’s absolutely no promise of security in pushing your enemy a few kilometers away from the border if you constantly fuel its hatred. Thus, the most important lesson has not been learned: Military force cannot solve everything. And coming back to your question: Israelis are traumatized, exhausted, and feel defenseless more than ever under this state of endless war. That’s exactly when societies cling together and refrain from challenging their most fundamental assumptions.
C. J. Polychroniou: The situation in the West Bank has deteriorated significantly since the start of the war in Gaza. Settler attacks against Palestinians have increased dramatically and Israel is seizing a record amount of Palestinian land in the West Bank, which is in total violation of international law. Does mainstream Israeli society support what’s happening in the West Bank? Is there any resistance to the settlements in Palestinian territory?
Idan Landau: Here I can say that most Israeli media simply lost interest in these developments; an average Western observer probably knows more about them than an average Israeli. Only if you read Ha’aretz (around 5% exposure) are you exposed to the magnitude of land theft and state-sponsored terror in the West Bank. The media is totally complicit in these crimes, either by ignoring or by normalizing them. Importantly, since Oct. 7, the far right is working very hard to obliterate any distinction between Gaza and the West Bank, between Hamas and the Palestinian Authority, and erase any imaginable indication that Palestinians are as diverse as any other people. They’re all faceless terrorists, in Rafah or in Tulkarem, no difference. That’s the prevalent outlook. So daily incidents of forced evictions of herder communities or live shootings at unarmed demonstrators simply fall outside of that outlook; Israelis literally can’t see them, they are conceptually unequipped and often informationally deprived of any means to even consider what they think about such matters, let alone come to oppose them. It is really hard to convey how insulated the Israeli mind is, especially during the last year, from any hard evidence that we commit unjustified, unprovoked crimes on a massive scale. I don’t mean to exempt the common Israeli from responsibility. This ignorance is often willed, it is not a passive state, and it requires constant repression of unpleasant facts and findings, that do seep in (we can all watch CNN, we observe the mounting international disgust with our country).
It is really hard to convey how insulated the Israeli mind is, especially during the last year, from any hard evidence that we commit unjustified, unprovoked crimes on a massive scale.
With respect to “resistance,” there is a handful of very small, dedicated groups of activists, practicing so-called “protective presence” in threatened communities in the Jordan valley and South Hebron hills. Their success is real but limited. As to new settlements—I haven’t heard a voice of protest across the entire political spectrum. It’s totally normalized.
C. J. Polychroniou: What is the status of the investigation on the October 7 attacks? The first Israeli military report that was released in early July did not shed much light into the probe other than to say that the military was unprepared for what took place on that date although there are reliable reports that Israel knew of a Hamas’s attack plan over a year ago. But isn’t it true, as was recently reported in The Jerusalem Post, that IDF investigations are never intended to reveal the truth?
Idan Landau: Investigative committees are the ritualistic epilogue of wars in Israel. They reveal a jaw-dropping culture of negligence, arrogance, and typical Israeli dilettantism; they publish tomes full of vital recommendations; and nothing is ever done with them. This culture of self-assurance and lack of real interest in self-improvement is not specific to the army but it is accentuated there. I suspect that decades of fanatical reliance on military force have elevated the myth of “deterrence” to such levels that it is largely immune to evidential refutation. So even though we may see the separate dots of failure, nobody dares to connect them. We’ll see some local, operational “lessons” being drawn and possibly implemented, but the overall complacency (and underestimation of our enemies’ capabilities) will not change much. Keep in mind that there was a thorough investigation after the second Lebanon war (the Vinograd committee). In 2008, the committee published a very critical report on the military conceptions and political decision-making that led to that disastrous failure, and yet, we’ve seen them all over again on Oct. 7.
C. J. Polychroniou: It’s safe to say, as you noted earlier, that the release of the hostages has not been among Netanyahu’s objectives. Yet his popularity has rebounded since the Lebanon attacks and the latest survey found that if elections were held today his Likud Party would win. How do we explain the natural alliance that has been formed between the Israeli right, the messianic lunatics and the ultra-nationalists which essentially work together to prevent the possibility of Israel becoming (again) a liberal democracy?
Idan Landau: Well, you sort of said it yourself—it’s a collaboration that benefits all the parties involved. The far-right extremists advance their “Arabrein” vision of greater Israel; the promoters of the judicial reform get blanket support for their takeover of the judicial system; meanwhile the military industries and their satellites, a huge and ever-growing portion of Israeli economy, enjoy an endless boost; and the ultra-orthodox parties get more and more privileges in education, housing, taxation, etc. Every party in Netanyahu’s coalition, every single member of it, has a lot to lose from its demise, so they all cling to it no matter how terrible the crimes that it commits. The graver the crimes, the greater the price they will face, so obviously, the greater their devotion to its survival. Ultimately, and contrary to many analysts in the West, I don’t think Netanyahu is solely power-driven and only seeks refuge from his trials. I believe he shares the fundamental principles that guide the more outspoken Smotrich—Jewish supremacy, total control over the West Bank, brutal oppression of any Palestinian political leadership. So it’s a natural alliance.
Israel will not necessarily destroy itself, but it may well destroy everything that many people held dear and beautiful in it.
Why does the public keep supporting a government that clearly destroys our lives? Years of racist indoctrination, fueled by constant fear-mongering and demonization of any possible reconciliation with Arab enemies. Compared to those threats—some of which are real but not nearly as existential and fatal as the propaganda machine would have us believe—certain liberal or democratic rights seem like a luxury that are worth sacrificing. Especially if those who suffer the sacrifice happen to be Arabs.
C. J. Polychroniou: Peace has disappeared from Israeli political culture. Why is that?
Idan Landau: This is a natural outcome of all these processes. In addition, there is no real opposition in the Knesset. Outside of the Arab parties, no Jewish party dares to talk about peace. A thorough system of indoctrination has defamed the concept to the level of some despicable conspiracy by Hamas-loving lefties to sell the country to its worst enemies. This is what “peace” has come to mean in the discourse that is constantly nourished by Channel 14 (Israel’s Fox news) and other such outlets. The sad truth is that most Israelis were born into a hopeless political climate where peace is not an option. And it is very hard to imagine a future that was never even presented to you as an option.
Change and hope can only come from the West—the very same West that planted Israel in the Middle East out of colonial interests...
C. J. Polychroniou: In an op-ed that appeared in Haaretz on September 15, iconic Israeli journalist and author Gideon Levy posed a challenge to his fellow citizens by stating that “we live in a genocidal reality” and then asked whether Israelis should continue “living in a country that lives on blood.” Is Israel self-destructing?
Idan Landau: I will not venture any prophecies, but Israel has surely gone far enough beyond the semblance of a liberal democracy, and this, I believe, will not change in my lifetime (as I hinted, younger generations are even more militaristic, more despaired, more fanatical). Israel will not necessarily destroy itself, but it may well destroy everything that many people held dear and beautiful in it. It will persist as a paranoid modern-day Sparta, with ultra-Orthodox, intolerant and persecutional internal regime. Change and hope can only come from the West—the very same West that planted Israel in the Middle East out of colonial interests, armed and backed it throughout its military adventures for decades, acquiesced in its illegal expansion, and now faces the catastrophic, global repercussions of its commitment to endless war. Israel will not save itself; it has already surrendered to its worst self.
