Meanwhile, Prime Minister Netanyahu has been heavily criticized in op-ed columns by former prime ministers Ehud Barak and Ehud Olmert, who said that Netanyahu does not represent the majority of Israelis and that his invitation to address parliament next month should be rescinded, and Olmert said he agrees.
Olmert blasted Netanyahu at a session I moderated at the Aspen Ideas Festival on Wednesday, accusing him of “arrogance” for failing to predict the Hamas attack on October 7. He bluntly stated: “At this point, the gains are not worth the costs of continuing the war.”
Netanyahu’s coalition government has also been shaken internally this week from two angles: the Israeli Supreme Court ruled that ultra-Orthodox Jews should not be exempt from military service, a view that is supported and opposed by some in Netanyahu’s government, and Gallant has pushed ahead with a post-war Gaza transition plan informally described as “the next day,” which Netanyahu does not support.
The resolution of the arms shipment dispute between the U.S. and Israel was important because Gallant overcame the political uproar caused by the prime minister, who claimed in a June 18 video that the U.S. was deliberately delaying major arms shipments. He also announced delays for a 2,000-pound bomb that President Biden fears could harm Palestinian civilians. Gallant and U.S. officials this week reviewed the delivery of major arms shipments, from ammunition to tanks and F-35 fighter jet engines.
After those talks, a senior administration official told reporters he thanked Gallant for his “professional approach to all issues related to the Israeli-U.S. security partnership.” The official said he had “confirmed the transfer of munitions and military systems to Israel” apart from the 2,000-pound bombs.
The least visible but perhaps most important topic Gallant discussed during his visit was a detailed plan for Gaza’s postwar transition, a plan that will move forward even as Hamas continues to reject proposals for a ceasefire and hostage release that the administration has been pushing for months.
The Gaza transition that Gallant discussed in Washington would be overseen by a steering committee led by the United States and moderate Arab partners. An international force (likely to include forces from Egypt, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates and Morocco) would oversee security, while U.S. forces would provide command and control and logistics from outside Gaza, probably from Egypt. Gradually, Palestinian forces would assume responsibility for security in the area.
Gallant and U.S. officials agree that the Palestinian security forces should be trained under an existing security assistance program to the Palestinian Authority, led by Lt. Gen. Michael Fenzel, the Jerusalem-based security coordinator between Israel and the Authority. Gallant here echoes the judgment of Israeli defense officials, even though Netanyahu has publicly rejected the Palestinian Authority’s role in the postwar Gaza Strip.
U.S. officials told me they support the tenets of Gallant’s plan but that moderate Arab governments will not back it unless the Palestinian Authority is directly involved and Arab countries recognize its legitimacy. They also warned that moderate Arab countries want what Saudi Arabia calls a “political horizon” toward an eventual Palestinian state, but that Gallant and most Israelis will not support it.
The Gaza transition plan would be implemented in stages, starting in northern Gaza and expanding to the south as conditions improve. Gallant envisions an expanded “safe zone” that would eventually encompass all 24 Gaza governorates. Biden administration officials support the idea but are skeptical that these “ink spots” of safety could be expanded quickly.
These plans are based on the assumption that Hamas is weak enough as a military force to launch a major offensive, which Israeli military leaders believe is close to being accomplished. But a U.S. official told me that a “Hamas-like” force is now guarding some of the distribution of humanitarian aid in northern Gaza. The force is referred to by humanitarian groups as the “de facto authority,” or DFA, the official said.
Gallant also spoke about the Biden administration’s efforts to avert a war between Israel and Lebanon. Brett McGurk and Amos Hochstein, the National Security Council’s top Middle East officials, are finalizing a ceasefire agreement with Lebanon that officials say could be implemented as soon as a ceasefire in Gaza is achieved. The Lebanese deal calls for Hezbollah’s Radwan forces to withdraw north, roughly parallel to the Litani River, and for Israel to agree to border adjustments that Hezbollah has long demanded.
“Everything is in place” to end the war in Gaza and avoid one in Lebanon, a U.S. official told me. The only uncertainties are Israel and the two leaders of Hamas, Netanyahu and Yehya Sinwar, who may choose to die underground rather than compromise, hiding in a network of tunnels.
But Netanyahu sees growing political pressure to move toward an end to Gaza. His ploy to blame President Biden for major delays in arms deliveries appeared to fail this week, and his political opponents are rallying together. Netanyahu has always been an agile, shape-shifting politician. His options for political survival are narrowing.
