Aroused On The Period

cons

בס"ד
A current cons

Translated from Hebrew by Meir Ben-Hayoun

Interview of Major General Moshe Yéelon Laurd by Amnon Katz and Gilad appeared in the Israeli weekly Makor Rishon's Friday, October 3, 2008. Arrived at the top of the pyramid military IDF Moshe Yéelon was appointed Chief of Staff of the IDF in 2002. Its mandate has not been not renewed for a further year in 2005, three months before Israel's disengagement from the Gaza Strip. (Audios since 1948, all the chiefs of Staff were treated to an extra year, with the exception of David Eleazar forced to resign after the publication of the findings of the Agranat Commission - Eleazar died of cardiac arrest a few months after the war Yom Kippur).

"There are amazing people in all units state, but there are also some who threaten, who lowered, who resign before their moral duty, which deviate from the straight path. " In his new book, Moshe Yéelon virulently critical process of political decision-making when he was head of Military Intelligence and head of the General Staff of the IDF, not without omitting to mention names. According to him, Rabin would have stopped the Oslo process had he not been assassinated. According Yéelon, the "Farm Forum" (audios with reference to the entourage of Prime Minister Sharon is bringing periodically at the farm belonging to the latter sycamores) tried to impose to appoint to key positions of incapacitated persons in exchange for his continued as Chief of Staff for another year. Enter politics? "I will vote when we announce new elections," he replies.

Moshe (Boggy) Yéelon began writing his new book "A long and short route" computer. When he realized that his thinking was done to the rhythm of writing, he began to write in pencil on sheets of draft, more conventional method better suited to that member of Kibbutz Groff (audios kibbutz in southern Arava few kilometers north of Eilat) floor of Israeli traditional sandals called "biblical". The interview was held at his request, early in the morning. In his modest office of the Shalem Center, the atmosphere is friendly, in keeping with the pastoral environment of Katamon neighborhood of Jerusalem that can be seen from the windows. On his table work, two thick volumes are open, and beside a large glass of water and a cup of coffee. Yéelon income civilian life, the top button of his shirt open, he welcomes us unceremoniously. Its very simple attitude for a man like him, does nothing to guess its rich military past. Above a collection of various journals, sits his recent book "a long and short route."

Yéelon recounts the last fifteen years he has been exposed closely to the processes of decision making at the highest level in Israel. Since he was appointed Commander of IDF forces in Judea and Samaria in 1992, then as chief of Military Intelligence, Deputy Chief of Staff, and then, finally, Chief of Staff from 2002 - 2005. It is a very worrying picture that emerges from the underlying processes of decision making that produced the events that we know. " Analyses from me that I was extremely painful" he writes in the introduction to his book. "I thought I should share this to the people of Israel, or more exactly with those for whom the Zionist enterprise is of paramount importance and that the existence of a Jewish national home is imperative." And he continues : "I felt a deep uneasiness, when I realized during my last years in the service of the army, that the findings that I had not have done it their rightful place in Israeli public debate - debate strongly influenced by the interests of elites and ruling circles of the Israeli society, and culture of the rating and spin. "

My awareness

"The direct cause of degradation of the strategic status of Israel against the Palestinians was the unfortunate decision, shocking and inexplicable Disengagement of the Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. In my case, I have no doubt that Sharon's decision proceeded from unstated considerations. When he found himself in trouble after police investigations which he had suffered. While he was also distressed at its policy consecutive decline in popularity, Sharon decided to "turn the table" and to initiate a dramatic move in total contradiction with its design and with his political vision. " (Page 157)

Mr. Yéelon, the picture that emerges from your book is that of a total decay of power in Israel, when people arrive incompetent and corrupt at the top. May have described this phenomenon as "capital-to-media"?

"It's not just that. That's all that our society has projected into disarray, or even beyond, the last fifteen years.

You mean the Israeli society or the elites?

"In society in general, too, because it is strongly influenced by public debate. Israeli society is subject to the politicians who he erected golden calves and deluding or in their own words, sell him "the hope for peace"

So, who do you turn?

"I appeal to the general public which is in principle the sovereign. The people who elect their representatives and who does what the media wants to offer him. I am also talking to myself. In the book, I describe the process of my awareness of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I come from a household that supported the idea of territorial compromise. The party workers of Eretz Israel, Kiryat Haim (proletarian suburbs north of Haifa), the daily Davar (daily working of the Zionist left), the movement "Hanoar Haoved VeHaLomed" (Zionist youth movement on the left). When the Oslo accords were signed, I was in favor. I considered them an opportunity to achieve peace and security. I'm sincerely. When I took office as Commander of Military Intelligence and I started to see things a little closer, I grabbed it there was a trap and we face is veiled not to see. Apparently, we discussed the solution to the conflict and de facto, we evaded the question of what the real problem.
"When you look closely at why such a thing happens, then yes, this is the trinity capital-to-media" and all this corruption. Fortunately, today we'll take care a little more than during the end of my tenure as Chief of Staff. When I asked what kept me from sleep a wink the night as Chief of Staff, they imagined that I would answer "the bomb Iranian ". I answered: "corruption." It is important to understand what enables elite "capital-to-media" to party and to mislead the public. "

Or maybe these elites have faith in it and have not yet realized as you? Ask the question differently. You say in your book that if Rabin had not been assassinated, he would have rejected the confrontation at a later date. You expect that at some point or another, it would have ruled on the matter and that Israel is engaging in a confrontation with the Palestinians?

"Absolutely. Returning for a moment with the principles of Western thought which is that every problem has a solution. That is why it is easy to manipulate Israeli society and to affirm that the solution is at hand and everything to do at the moment, these are compromises: it disengages the Gaza Strip and it will be quiet - we withdraw from Judea and Samaria, and we cut the grass under the feet of Palestinian demands. In fact, with withdrawals in recent years, since the withdrawal from southern Lebanon and the Gaza Strip, we see that the extremists what I call Islamic 'Jihad' has increased. All this talk makes the public swallow this lie huge golden calf and vain hopes, has succeeded in his business. In my book, I address the citizen that has fed him for lies he carefully observes the reality as I saw it. Of course, I hope it will have an impact on politics and the media. They are not even about all corrupt - but first, I address the confused Israeli citizen. "

Could you point the finger to the event that triggered this in your awareness?

"It was a long process, but one could say that it happened when I was commander of military intelligence. I diagnosed a marked discrepancy between the claims of the media and what I read in the intelligence reports. This distorted pushed me to wonder about the peace process. When the Oslo accords were signed, I was commander of the training complex Tséelim, I was not yet exposed to sources of information except what we were willing to tell the media. "

What do you mean by "distortion"?

"In my book, I relate a conversation with Prime Minister Rabin in August 1995, two months after taking office with military intelligence. It was a fortnightly meeting, routine between Prime Minister and the Chief Intelligence. It exchanging assessments, information and there is updates. So I exposed the head of government Rabin my strategic assessment. I told him: "Mr. Prime Minister, I am in the duty to inform you about the discrepancy between the way that Arafat is presented to us, as a leader determined to reach a territorial compromise in the 1967 borders and that I see on the ground in his rhetoric for internal use in the content of Palestinian media - and worst - in the school curriculum under its exclusive control. After Oslo, I would have expected that the Palestinian education system to recognize the State of Israel as a Jewish state. This is not what happens. It Just the opposite. There is denial of increasingly radical of any link between the Jewish People and the Land of Israel. There are no sacred sites for Jews throughout the country. The State of Israel does not appear at all on their maps. Acre, Jaffa and Haifa are for them Palestinian port cities and Tel Aviv is a colony. "

What was the reaction of Rabin?

" I have to remember that These remarks were made while in the background there were explosions bus home, something Arafat could have prevented but did nothing. I say this with full knowledge of things. De facto, Hamas had defied him and had not hesitated to "go inside". One of the most famous was when Arafat was captured four senior Hamas officials and shaved half his mustache and beard. So that it infringed their honor. In codes of Arab culture, it is considered more serious than death. Throughout the process, successive U.S. secretaries of State, Warren Christopher, Madeleine Albright and Colin Powell were anxious to know why Arafat was not fighting terrorism : Was it a matter of will or could. During my presentation to the Prime Minister, Warren Christopher (audios Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in the first term of the Clinton administration) asked me the question again. I told him clearly: "This is due to the unwillingness of Arafat." Yet Arafat did nothing to fear from Hamas. He even sometimes enforces its activists. "

At this stage of the interview, the tone calm and monotone Yéelon rises. One feels that he suffers to this day. We remind him that Madeleine Albright asserted that "Arafat is one hundred percent effort, but what it does not collect one hundred percent success." This remark seems to confirm his statements. "It is true that she said that after the attack on the cafe 'Apropo' in Tel Aviv in 1997. It is naive American who puts me out of me. However, it is also true that we dispense Israeli Arafat from all liability. In fact, it meant: "we will make peace as if there is no terrorism?" Washed and the Palestinian leader of any responsibility he handles terrorism. And in fact, I know from my position as commander Intelligence that is deeply involved in terrorism. "

"So back to work meeting with Rabin. After having exposed this distortion on Arafat so-called peace partner, but in reality conductor of terrorism on the ground, he asked me: "Good! What do you suggest we do? "I replied," of a strictly military point of view, we must stop the Oslo process and stop sweeping problems under the rug. "In retrospect, it was found to sweep problems under the carpet and non-application of agreements by Palestinians had begun as soon as Arafat arrived in Gaza in May 1994, where he had hidden in his car on terrorist Mohamad Amarin we had banned the entry into the country, as well as RPG-style weapons that were prohibited insert - still according to the Oslo accords. It was also found when I was still the commander of the base Tséelim, the army demanded the strict application of agreements and political leadership was responding: "we do not assume any state crisis at the moment. " And so we closed our eyes to transgression after transgression. That's why I told Rabin that he was freezing the Oslo process to understand that Arafat had to clean his house. "

And what was the response of Rabin?

He said: "You're right, but what? The Palestinian Authority is on the verge of electing its President. I will present their ultimatum immediately after their election" . As we recall, Rabin was assassinated in November 1995 and after, it was only management "I-me-largely unpolished. This is where my awareness began. But I have to confess that I regret a lot of things. At a meeting of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence to the Knesset in 1994, I was surprised by the unpreparedness member Benny Begin (audios son of the late Menachem Begin, then-Likud MK) I quote the speech Arafat that year in Johannesburg (Arafat compared the Oslo agreements of the treaty that the Prophet Muhammad Houdaybeh signed while he was in a state of inferiority to the tribe Koreish, while having intention of infringing upon that would end in a strong position. AL and GK). At the height of the festival in Oslo before the assassination of Rabin, well before the pretexts of "who killed the peace?" This quote took me by surprise, me, commander of military intelligence. I was in a rage against the people of my services. How this quotation was able to escape all that was available for all? "

At this point, you criticize the head of Shabak (audios Department of Homeland Security) at the time, Ami Ayalon and you say it would, somehow swept under the table the report Strategic Analysis of the research section of its service.

I would first say that I was forced to name names in my book. This is not a personal problem to such and such, but the spread of this syndrome to become an epidemic. It is in a state system that drives straight into a clear political objective and which evades analysis of military intelligence. Within military intelligence, then there was people like Yaakov Amidror who was head of the department Research, then Amos Gilad (later chief of HQ-political strategic estimate) and Yossi Copperwasser. To my satisfaction, even during the Second Lebanon War, the commander of the department "Search" explained Yossi Baïditz openly analysis. They are honest people who do not hesitate to put cards on the table and expose their analysis without fear. Political leadership may accept or reject their vision of things. It is quite legitimate for political leaders reject the analysis of military intelligence because they have set a definite goal. In any case the "captain" may itself affect on reality and wanting to turn - but what I criticize is the tendency to ignore our information and analysis. Even within the military intelligence service, was arrived at to avoid the information not to displease the political system because it had taken a clear policy path, not to deviate in any way. "

One moment, you would like to say that military intelligence service, some people have deliberately ignored some type of information?

"I think yes. It happens. We're actually in a system whose political leadership is located above one of us has already decided which direction to take, so there is no temptation to say that what some ears want to hear. "

You mean there lack of professionalism?

"Lack of professional integrity! It happens. Fortunately, this was not the case for all and specifically at the top of the system. As for Ami Ayalon, in my book I describe some events that I felt that his professional analysis was largely the result of design policy (it is from the same political crucible than mine) - despite the fact that within the Service, things were perceived in a diametrically opposite.
The most striking example was the "green light", one year after the attacks in February-March 1996. A year after Hamas had taken the strategic decision to stop suicide bombings. On the night of 9 March AU10, Arafat had met all the senior leaders of terrorist organizations. Towards the end of the meeting, everyone, including Razi Djebali, the commander of the Palestinian police had seized Arafat wanted a wave of attacks. It is important understand that there is no clear and explicit order "will make me the attacks." Besides, I would like to cite the book by Professor Yigal Eilam: "The executors of orders", which explains why even in Hitler, there was no explicit order to implement the "final solution". But there were so-called "state of mind of the commander." Everyone knows exactly what Arafat wants. Even in September 2000, there was no clear order to break the new intifada, but Marwan Berghoutti knew very well that Arafat wanted. There is a book of Arafat aide, Mamdouh Nofel, explaining very how well the president of the PA has initiated and led the Palestinian terror war.
So, going back to March 1997, the day after the meeting with Arafat, is engaged momentum after which Hamas carries out attacks. The first attack took place eleven days later at the Cafe Apropo (audios in Tel Aviv). Then, on 1 April, the Islamic Jihad attack in Kfar Darom, which fortunately failed attack made no victim. Razi Djebali (audios then leader of the Palestinian police) recruited two teams controlled by two police colonels, one of Shechem (Nablus) and the other from Tulkarem. First Team has executed an attack against Rabbi Eliakim Levanon, Rabbi of Elon Moreh settlement at the crossroads 'Asqarim'. On the way to perpetuate a second attack in the Har bracha, this team of terrorists has been intercepted by our forces. At this stage it appeared that whoever had sent the colonel was under the direct orders of Djebali. And that was above Djebali? No other Arafat in person! And here, we downplayed the thing for the sweep of hand. From there I came to the conclusion, as head of military intelligence, that Arafat had given the green light for attacks. To my great regret, Ami Ayalon, the head of Shabak argued the opposite. "

It is not pleasant to say this, but every child in first grade in the settlements of Judea, Samaria and Gaza knew a priori what you have discovered much later as commander of Military Intelligence. Did they see reality as it was?

"It is important to understand that there is an essential component that escapes the eyes of the intelligence chief, is the Israeli side. For example, the political leadership in Israel can and is entitled to say that she goes to a "New Middle East". It is a question of approach, vision of the world. A leader can also declare: "It is true, it is reality as you perceive as intelligence chief, but I'll change." So it is a bit simplistic to say that a child has understood the settlements. It is very important, leadership in Israel who takes the initiative to actively engage transitions rather than passively.
other hand, it's true, I am sorry I was mistaken. I should have put a lot of exclamation points earlier. I started to put them only as from October 4, 2000 at the meeting (Ehud) Barak, Arafat and Madeleine Albright in Paris. Already in 1999, when I was commander of the Central Region, I found that Arafat would open hostilities in September 2000, he was making preparations. And yet, while we were debating about what Arafat wanted to achieve by initiating this war. Did he intend to get a Palestinian state with 1967 borders without receiving willingly on a silver platter but through fire and blood for what he believed be honored Palestinian Arab? Or did he simply not reach a compromise based on the principle of two states for two peoples? In my view, this internal debate has taken so late that October 4, 2000 in Paris, where Arafat Debina of a proposed cease-fire. I understood that the die was cast, that everything was just a house of cards and in fact he applied the "strategy of stages" well known.
However, even after I put exclamation points and the professional leadership of the army had decided that it was Arafat who had decided to call this terrible war, I found myself in the cabinet where I replied: 'What are you saying? What do you do if Arafat a strategist. It's a poor guy who controls nothing. We need to strengthen its leadership. "So imagine what you feel Arafat? He opened the war has given the green light to terrorist attacks. He knows that we know and despite that, he sees the Israeli political leadership treat with respect as a partner for peace. None of this made him an effect of weakness on our part. "

Were you aware that this war would last as long? Why Operation 'Defensive Shield' was initiated after a year and a half wave of terrible attacks against Israeli civilians?

"It is precisely this point that I had a very harsh criticism against the political leadership. On a number of points were the same people. I also harshly critical of Shimon Peres on this point. He was the leader of this line of saying that Arafat should be strengthened since September 2000. Those who pursue the policy that led Taba negotiations (audios in October 2000, at the beginning of hostilities and attacks), and Peres was also the people around Barak. Even after the bombing of the Dolphinarium (audios in June 2001, bombing that caused many victims in this night club in Tel Aviv), during a government meeting, we discussed the possibility initiate military action spread. Whoever has this operation was prevented Peres with the help of German Foreign Minister, Joschka Fischer, who was then in Israel. Israel had asked
Arafat to summon to appear before television cameras and call for the cessation of terrorist attacks. Therefore, Peres had persuaded the government not to engage in military action. The decision was not to identify Arafat as an enemy when he controlled and supported terrorism. We therefore expected that Arafat presented himself on live television the same evening at scheduled time to proclaim a cease-fire. Meanwhile, Miguel Moratinos (audios statesman English, European Union envoy to the Middle East) was at home. They are both appeared before the cameras Moratinos and only spoke when Arafat was at his side and did not utter a word. What does this mean for the Palestinian public? Arafat continued to support terrorism!
Only after the bombing at the Park Hotel in Netanya (ndtl: the bombing the deadliest 30 victims who made the evening of the Passover Seder in March 2002) Peres Arafat called it an enemy. What had changed in the meantime? At Arafat, nothing. The only difference, I regret to say, were the hundreds of victims of the attacks that had added. And even if Peres had voted in favor of Operation Defensive Shield, instead of exploiting his prestige on the international stage to denounce Arafat as one who has deceived his world, he only minimize the role of the latter. And so until today. After all these failures, we do not condemn the Palestinians so clear. I realize you can not change at all while the approach of the people who were made to swallow the lies of peace and hope. "

In fact, what you're saying is that everything is just playing politics? Prime Minister ministers, the director of Shin Bet?

There are excellent people in all units of state, but there are undoubtedly people who come down, which compromises, which deviate from the straight path. In absolute numbers, the State staff that I ordered, I can say that there were two or three people like this, a total of twenty four, which in my opinion, crossed the line in getting into bed with politicians or journalists. The problem starts with the corrupt political system: that is where we find these people because with them we can "steal horses. "There are not a majority, but the decay they generate is dangerous and it spreads."

Is Dan Halutz has suffered such a process in contact with politicians?

"I am speaking generally. When I reached the rank of brigadier general, I grasped that the temptations are very strong for a superior officer. They can come from two directions. First, by binding politicians, because ultimately it is they who decide who will be promoted or not will not, who will become Chief of Staff. Second temptation to bind media people. You give them classified information and then they write flattering things about you. If you stick to withholding officer, then you wrote about things that are not very flattering. That is why I believe that senior officers should observe an "ethics of the high command." "Tell your professional opinion fearlessly, but does not stick to that. You were not elected and are not part of the executive. Do not criticize a government decision publicly after she was shot." We do not have that kind of thing when wearing the uniform. Despite my opposition to the disengagement, I've never publicly exposed. "

Despite your very hard and very critical, even as you reach the top of the pyramid. It turns out we can do differently?

"Sure. What I mean is that the officers' actions speak for themselves. "

On the other hand, you say you have been selected to be chief of staff because the "Farm Forum" did not know how you take?

"If I read the card then, the 'forum closed down really did not want me as Chief of Staff. There was even talk in the media. In my opinion, if Dan Halutz did not bed with the 'forum closed down, Gaby Ashkenazy was appointed chief of staff after me. It does not alter the fact that Halutz was an excellent commander in chief of the Air Force. "

Gaby Ashkenazy did a crony of person in politics?

"Here! You see, we can achieve peaks without being "pulled strings". Everyone is not "pulled strings". But I mention this because, what? At one time "the wicked have prevailed." It was one of my confrontations with the "Farm Forum", that is to say one of the subforums of "forum of the farm" who took care of these things: Ariel Sharon His son Omri and Master Dov Weissglass, others much less. "

Eyal Arad was not involved in the appointments?

"No, he was responsible for marketing the disengagement plan and other proposals of the same ilk. The decision of disengagement has been taken in this forum and not in a professional forum. "
's appointment Qarad (audios named Super Intendant General of Police on August 1, 2004 .... And forced to resign following the conclusions of the Commission on Organized Crime Zeiler on 1 May 2007) was a red light on what would happen within the General Staff?

"I would not go into details of the appointment of Qarad, especially since he is not guilty of his own appointment. In my opinion, he was not involved in this complicity. The entire top of the police was then beheaded. And there is no doubt that this was a warning about the appointments to the General Staff of the IDF.

a minute, you mean also the minister of internal security at the time, Tzachi Hanegbi?

"Absolutely! He was the minister of internal security and he was in cahoots with Omri Sharon. "

Now, how do you see the Sharon Era? A bygone period of darkness or a way to manage the affairs state that endures?

"In the army, there are two phenomena that would completely reverse - bullying and relationships between old and new recruits. These phenomena, I rate them in what I call "delinquent subculture". The policy of the military is very clear on this: bullying is prohibited and shall not create a situation where, in companies of veterans, new recruits become the servants of the oldest. But what? The heart of man that sometimes such phenomena arise. There are always bad instincts that persist. In the context of corruption, there is constant struggle between "good" and "wicked". I feel like the culmination of the struggle against corruption in office was when I was chief of staff at the time of Sharon. "

Sharon, he was the head of a "delinquent subculture"?

"We all remember the corruption. These investigations were never completed. Things for which I suspect unstated considerations, including the decision the disengagement. But before that, the question on Jericho and the casino and the issue of energy. I felt something very smelly in all this, especially for things about me. I sensed that the considerations were irrelevant, but I could not provide evidence. For this, when I hung up the uniform, I was more worried today, because the legal system today, despite attempts to weaken it, responded. The prosecution, police and even the public are now aware of this problem. "

Lately you also mentioned that the policy of Israel in Gaza would be influenced by considerations regarding the relationship with the British Gas company.

"Absolutely, I sent several questions about Israeli policy in Gaza, even if not related to British Gas. Also on Israeli policy on the subject of agreements with British Gas. "

You refer to the interference of Martin Schlaff? (Audios billionaire Austrian Jew, a partner of the casino in Jericho, close to Israeli figures and leading Palestinian and linked to British Gas)

long as there was that Martin Schlaff. In what concerns to speak in military jargon, there is no doubt that stormed the office of Prime Minister. Since the assassination of Rabin, we have seen figures from Office of the Prime Minister who have joined him. The first was Shimon Sheva (audios Chief of Staff Rabin). Then came the turn of Avigdor Lieberman Netanyahu when he left to join Schlaff for business and Dov Weissglass Sharon returned home when he was the lawyer's interests Schlaff for everything concerning Casino Austria. In 2003, as Chief of Staff, I discovered that there had been some irregularities in the considerations put Jericho in Abu Mazen. Not the decision itself, which was taken in a professional, but the manner with which this award was made and the locations to deploy checkpoints. I asked these questions and have caused an uproar. Ultimately, my stance has been adopted. But we can not escape the impression that in this process, something was not right. "

Pending good platform

With your permission, some "politicking". Would you be willing to take on your responsibilities and policy functions at a national level?

There are two areas: leadership and education. On education, I'm already today. When the leadership, I suggest ideas for the entire political leadership in the book I wrote, in articles and in my lectures. I'm not naive. I am aware that the only way to influence it by the policy - the executive or legislative branches. We know that decisions are not taken or Shalem Center a particular research institute. The truth is that I am not keen to get into politics. From my past experience, I would not particularly relishes this area. Moreover, today, politics has a negative selection in the State of Israel, unlike the army, which selects the best units for prestige.

Could you clarify?

If, to succeed in politics you have to do with cronyism wealthiest tycoons and with the press, I have nothing to do with it. Never, I will cronyism with these elements.

You speak of Olmert? Livni? Barak?

"There is no question of any particular personality. A Prime Minister is the subject of many investigations, it is clear that there is corruption. All these investigations have to be as large as. How could he be linked in this way to big bucks? And with the press or any media controlled by large fortunes, which is not always compatible with the vital interests of the State of Israel? So the problem in all its severity. And thus, a political leader, instead of leading the destinies the country, it is he who is led by the nose. So the current political system promotes people linked to large fortunes. I know very well that I will have to pay for something that I am there, that these words will attract lightning, but I have nothing to do. What concerns me is the State of Israel and I am ready to give my life for him. I'm still ready to leap and make the assault on our country.
If I reach the conclusion that there is no satisfactory political platform, I'm not ready to play by the rules in force, then perhaps it is better than I stay outside and I limit myself to only provide recommendations? "

For now, you do not disqualify the possibility to make your entry into politics?

"If I find the right platform, where I would not be satisfied to be a player again, but where I could influence, well then, we may consider this a positive event."

You talk about the Likud?

"I outlined the range of my dilemmas. It is enough. "

When will you decide?

"It is clear that when the next election will be announced, I must say. Certainly not before. "

Do Is not it strange that just a political party which is not that your pot, you want as you see the join?

"It's strange and not strange to me at the same time. Meanwhile, in my political crucible, it ignores me royally. It did point me weird because I know what's going on there. Professor Amnon Rubinstein of Shinui party, left politician, said Recently in an interview to the question: "What do you get it? Have you moved right?" He replied "Not at all! I stayed where I have always been, but everyone has moved to port.

Could you build a new political framework?

"I really do not want to address this issue."

Are you in contact and mutual counsel together, you with your policies?

"I try to avoid that. When you contact me to know my views, the response is that I will not talk politics until I decided to enter politics and if we want to know my positions as a former professional soldier, I am ready to expose them. "

Some people say that you are full of bitterness because your appointment as Chief of Staff has not been renewed for another year and therefore you spit fire and lightning on the establishment. For these people, your book is proof.

"The reactions to my comments are Pavlovian, in order to disqualify me. Firstly, I am not put to beg For the fourth year in the same way that I have begged one to be appointed Chief of Staff and I've never formed a pressure group. I presented things clearly: "If you want me, I'm here. If you do not want me, I what to do." It's the same sentence I repeat since I got into the professional army and I said even when I was Chief of Staff. I finished my third year for what I am and what I said and all this with complete lucidity. "
It became more acute in early 2005 when I gave my opinion on the Disengagement and also on the appointments that I describe as an integral part of the corruption process. I said while I make no appointment as I do not know if I'm Chief of Staff for the following year. This has been a source of conflict when they tried to pressure me to name some well-connected people in exchange for a fourth year as Chief of Staff. I stopped it with all my weight. The confrontation was inevitable. If I had been compromised, or if I had "stolen horse" by ignoring these harmful aspects, would I have faced no problems. I returned in conflict with Prime Minister Sharon. It was he who led it, despite the influence of other people because his health began to decline. "

In your book you write that you thought then submit your resignation, but you've given up for fear that this is perceived as an attempt to overthrow military. Is there a time when even a Chief of Staff to resign?

"Of course! If an order is illegal, it is their duty to resign. On the other hand, if there is concern that a maneuver can cause serious injury to the State of Israel and that to resign to stop it, then we must do. If I felt that my resignation would be able to stop the disengagement, I would have resigned, without equivocation. However, I knew that my resignation would have made illegitimate, and rightly so to some extent, as if I was positioned as the number one insubordinate.
Such resignation could have an impact in a political system functioning, balanced and controlled. The media would have awakened and aroused deep public debate on decisions taken. But in the not very "sloppy" I described above, this would not have happened. Instead, they would have de-legitimized in the public square and I would have been thrown to the dustbin of history as the Chief of Staff who has attempted a coup without touching the whys and wherefores of the matter . For that reason, telling me that I should succeed in doing so to stop this process, I was not allowed to resign because he is a price to any undemocratic maneuver.

So today, You thank the Creator for not being one who was at the head of the military pyramid to implement the Disengagement?

"In my book, I wrote that night when I was informed that my term ended, I felt a great relief."

But if you had been renewed for a fourth year, you would have found to implement the disengagement in which you were so opposed?

"I'll have done my best, so as to cause the least damage possible to the people of Israel."

And what is your successor?

"I think so, at least in this respect the army. I consider that the link between senior officers of the army and the settlers did not prevent damage completely, but still managed to reduce the fracture. Look at the difference between the disengagement and the evacuation of Amona brutal ".

Many people believe that Amun was the consequence of the relative passivity of the evacuees in the implementation of the Disengagement.

"I do not think so. In my opinion, Amona, the execution of the evacuation was not good. If I had been in charge of the evacuation, I act differently, not as aggressively. "

Incidentally, there are many who argue that the failure of the Second Lebanon War resulted from the exclusive efforts devoted to the military disengagement.

"I do not accept this assertion. Disengagement of the injury was especially felt by soldiers and officers who were personally affected, especially in the public religious Zionism. However, during the Lebanon war, it was found that it is precisely this sector of the population who distinguished himself by acts of bravery and its share in lists of fallen soldiers is very important. It is an honor for the army because the IDF was able to take care of these young and did not allow the intrusion of politics in it.
For cons, the argument saying that the army too busy to disengagement has not had time to prepare as it should be the war in Lebanon is a big lie. The army was prepared for the second Lebanon war. We developed an operational plan for such a scenario since the Chief of Staff to the last soldiers. It is true that the army was overworked to the limit of its potential in various fronts, Gaza, Judea Samaria, Syria and Hezbollah. In all cases where soldiers have received orders not clear and confusing, the various units of conscripts and reservists, took over absolute on Hezbollah. The problem is that we have not operated according to the scenario that we set. We have not mobilized in time reservists and we did not deploy as necessary. It was a poor performance.
It is true that all sorts of people try to evade their responsibility and argue that it was the fault of their predecessors. But ultimately, it was a management catastrophic all combined with a lack of experience and arrogance.

In conclusion, you are now a 'concerned citizen'?

"I conclude my book with optimism. The advantage I have is that I know the younger generation. That's why I work in the field of youth education in high schools and youth movements. I know that some young people know nothing about our distant past and closer. And yet, we discover another youth involved and engaged in what's happening in the country. When Last Herzliya Conference, a study was published showing that nine out of ten Jews wish that the State of Israel is Jewish and independent and are willing to make sacrifices and even to die for it. Even within the kibbutz movement, I see these changes. In groff, the kibbutz where I live, I see a wave of change just like the one I lived. Therefore, I am optimistic. My personal opinion is that when young people come to the army, there is a crucible which transforms into a younger generation steeped in faith in the rightness of our cause, and with tremendous potential who expects nothing else that to achieve for the benefit of us all and for the State of Israel.