124
submitted 1 year ago by barsoap@lemm.ee to c/world@lemmy.world

26m video interview. Blurb:

"Netanyahu is history, he's done," Ehud Olmert told DW. He called the current Israeli leaders "violent, messianic thugs" and said that long term, Palestinians must be able to "exercise their right to self-determination." The center-right politician and former prime minister added that there was no alternative to the two-state solution with the Palestinians. On the issue of the scores of Israelis taken hostage by Hamas, Olmert said there was "no basis for negotiation" with Hamas — since, in his view, the Islamist militant group was not interested in negotiations. Olmert also told host Tim Sebastian that he thought there was little likelihood of direct military action against Iran, even though Tehran had "coordinated" the attacks and that a derailment of a US-sponsored diplomatic and security accord between Israel and Saudi Arabia would serve Iran's interests.


Not sure whether this counts as "news" in the strict sense but I think it does in the loose sense also I wouldn't know where else to post it.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 4 points 1 year ago

Not sure why these are mutually exclusive.

[-] thrawn@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

Booting the head of state during wartime leads to some transitional difficulties

[-] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 18 points 1 year ago

Maybe. Hamas isn’t really an existential threat to Israel, it only appears so because of how horrifically Israeli security bungled this. The main activity of the military right now seems to be getting revenge by blowing up random buildings. Since it’s not clear how this makes Israel safer nor how Netanyahu is needed for that process anyway, I see no reason to delay his extremely long overdue removal from power.

[-] thrawn@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

It’s not really about Hamas being a real threat, I think it’s primarily PR. Changing the head of state like that causes uncertainty and chaos. Plus they’d probably want him to absorb maximum bad press that could otherwise be directed towards a successor.

For the people in power, keeping him there for now is ideal. Forcibly removing a head of state during wartime would cause obscene concern from how unusual it is, and some of them probably don’t even want him gone at all. Now if I was a potential successor I’d worry that he would somehow stay in power if the bad PR blew over, but pushing for his removal now is probably bad for your chances of seizing the seat.

This is of course from the perspective of opportunists in power. It’s rare for the people to override their wishes, especially in wartime where people typically rally around the head of state, so this is my thinking on why he’ll stay there. That said a handful of people really taking a stand could probably boot him.

Unlike scenarios aside I believe this time is better used establishing the narrative that he will be gone soon, with a definite end date or event. It’s almost impossible to get him out now, but it is possible to lay the groundwork that makes near-certain he’ll leave later.

[-] barsoap@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

There's about 520k people in uniform right now (360k of those reservists), they're not all sitting around at the Gaza wall but reinforcing all over the place so that e.g. Hezbollah doesn't get any funny ideas.

In short: Everyone's primary attention is to the outside right now. Once it's clear that they won't have to fight anyone else but Hamas and can relax a bit and can afford some internal sparks flying Netanyahu will be disposed of which could be in a couple of days. If they do have to fight it's going to take a bit longer as politicians first negotiate some kind of national unity replacement government.

[-] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 year ago

If people want to wait a few days until things are a little calmer then sure. But it’s going to take a lot longer than that to get rid of Hamas, if such a thing is even possible, so that’s what I’m responding to.

Personally I doubt he’ll be removed at all. Probably depends on how the media narrative evolves and how obvious security failures were.

this post was submitted on 12 Oct 2023
124 points (95.6% liked)

World News

38949 readers
1527 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS