Eisenkot attacks Netanyahu: He leads us from one failure to another, and alleged victories are mere illusions

Reserve General and former commander of the occupation army, Gadi Eisenkot, launched sharp criticism against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, accusing him of selling illusions to the Israeli public. Eisenkot clarified that Netanyahu constantly speaks of triumphant military victories, while the reality on the ground proves that none of the strategic goals set at the beginning of the confrontations have been achieved.

Eisenkot pointed out in radio statements that Israel is now experiencing a state of imposed ceasefire, both in the Gaza Strip and in the confrontation with Iran. He expressed deep concern about the repercussions of this failure on the Lebanese front, calling on Netanyahu to resign immediately due to his inability to decisively win battles and translate supposed military achievements into political gains.

Regarding the evaluation of the war's outcomes, Eisenkot identified two basic criteria: the first is the extent to which declared goals are achieved, and the second is the improvement of Israel's strategic situation. He affirmed that failure was the government's ally in both criteria, as goals were not achieved, and Israel's international standing declined, especially in the United States, which began to view Israeli policies with suspicion.

Eisenkot conveyed warnings described as 'red flags' issued by the current army commander, cautioning against the risk of the military institution collapsing due to increasing burdens and a severe shortage of manpower. He considered that continuing the war without a political horizon drains the army's capabilities and places it before unprecedented existential challenges in its history.

The former commander touched upon what he described as the 'complete subservience' to the American administration, considering that Israel lost its independence in decision-making from the first days of the war. He explained that young people in America, including Jewish groups, have become strongly opposed to Israeli policies, which threatens the most important strategic alliance for the Hebrew state.

Regarding the Iranian file, Eisenkot described the retention of 440 kilograms of 60% enriched uranium by Tehran as a grave strategic failure. He warned that the Revolutionary Guard's control over the levers of power in Iran increases the likelihood of a rush towards nuclear weapons, which represents a direct threat that cannot be overlooked.

Eisenkot criticized the absence of a clear strategy in dealing with multiple fronts, noting that the current fighting contradicts the classical security doctrine based on rapid decisive action. He stressed that the failure to decisively win the battle in 'little Gaza' after two years of fierce fighting reflects the extent of the confusion experienced by the political and military leadership.

In a related context, Eisenkot attacked the composition of the current 'cabinet,' describing its members as 'empty and eccentric leaders' who do not realize the magnitude of the risks. He considered that the Talmudic and populist designations given to military operations, such as 'eternal darkness,' are merely attempts to cover up field and political failures.

Regarding the situation in northern occupied Palestine, he indicated that settlers there feel complete neglect and loss of security, despite repeated government promises. He criticized the management of the fight against Hezbollah, affirming that the party is conducting a successful guerrilla war while the government is unable to translate the army's tactical successes into a stable political reality.

For its part, Haaretz newspaper launched a similar attack in its editorial, criticizing the use of historical and religious terms to justify military failure. The newspaper affirmed that there is widespread disregard within Israel for the massacres committed in Lebanon and Gaza, where the focus is only on calculations of material and political profit and loss.

In contrast, Minister Ze'ev Elkin tried to defend the government's performance, claiming that Israel had achieved significant gains in southern Lebanon by establishing a security zone. Elkin claimed that removing residents from border areas up to the Litani River gives the army effective control and the ability to protect northern residents in the future.

However, Eisenkot responded to these claims by emphasizing that 'the proof of the pudding is in the eating,' and that the absence of a clear mechanism to end the war will make any tactical achievement merely a long-term attrition. He stressed the need for an alternative leadership capable of aligning goals with actual capabilities, away from empty promises.

Eisenkot also pointed out that a comparison between the Second Lebanon War in 2006 and the current situation shows a significant contradiction in Netanyahu's own positions. While Netanyahu then demanded the government's overthrow due to its failure to achieve decisive victory, today he clings to power despite the repetition of the same failures, and in a deeper and more dangerous way.

Eisenkot concluded his remarks by emphasizing that Israel needs to restore its moral and strategic balance, warning that continuing the current approach will lead to dire consequences. He considered that restoring deterrence is not achieved through resonant speeches, but through courageous decisions that place the state's interest above narrow political interests.

Netanyahu tells Israelis about triumphant victories while they see the war's goals not being achieved, and Israeli decision-making is no longer in its hands but in Washington's.