Yoav Limor's interview with the head of the Research Division in Military Intelligence, Brig. Gen. Dror Shalom, was in-depth and interesting – and surprising. As I read it, it seemed as if it was an interview with the "opposition" in the division, an official in charge of oversight of information and whose job – ever since the Research Division was established following the Yom Kippur War – has been to present an alternative picture to that which is offered to the cabinet to the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee.
A few days before the interview ran, I met with someone very familiar with the Palestinian issue, who does not spare Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas the rod. His message was clear: "If you don't want peace with the Palestinians, and all you want is to drag out time to avoid dividing the country, keep criticizing the Palestinian president. But if you don't want Israel to become an apartheid state, and you want to reach a peace agreement with the other side without tossing the keys over the fence, like you did in Gaza – start negotiating with Abu Mazen [Abbas] because he's the only one who can sign a deal with you."
Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter
Brig. Gen. Shalom has reached a similar conclusion. He said that the relations between Israel and the PA, the attempt to uphold day-to-day life and improve the economic situation, and especially effective security coordination with the Palestinian security services depend to a large extent on Abbas. All of that depends greatly on PA President Mahmoud Abbas," Shalom says. A lot of people in Israel see him as an inciter, but he is key to the quiet that has been in effect since 2006. … I find it hard to imagine anyone who would present more moderate or pragmatic positions than Abbas. We need to take that into consideration."
Shalom says as clearly as possible that another war in Gaza will bring no benefit to Israel, and Israel would not be stronger as a result of one. All that would happen is that the end of the war, we'd be exactly where we are now, and there would be talks about a truce with Hamas.
When it comes to Iran, Shalom stresses, on one hand, the fact that Iran is Israel's main enemy – one that faces us on a few fronts – but on the other that Iran is still two years away from a nuclear bomb. He admits that the movement on the 2015 nuclear deal demanded that the division allocate resources to the Iranian issue and that he is "definitely less at ease."
He also says that the three main security messages the Netanyahu governments have sent are 1) the US withdrawal from the nuclear deal was a coup for Israeli policy, and efforts to cancel the bad deal should continue; 2) Mahmoud Abbas is no partner for peace, and the Palestinian Authority lives under the steerage of the IDF, with security coordination benefitting the Palestinians, while being marginal to Israel; and 3) Israel has no choice other than to go to war in Gaza to topple Hamas (it was the attorney general who axed an attack on Gaza just before the last election).
Shalom challenges all three of these positions, in as clear a manner as possible. It's no intellectual exercise in presenting the opposite viewpoint – and it sounds as if he's voicing the IDF's real worldview.
The next government will have to read what he says carefully. The new ministers, if they bring different opinions to the cabinet table, will have to be careful not to become part of the "the guys." They can lean on the most senior official in charge of situation assessments in the security establishment and ignore the mantras about consensus. They can present other opinions: for example, that the JCPOA is advantageous to Israel, and canceling it would only do us harm; that anyone who wants peace will launch talks with Mahmoud Abbas immediately; and that a war in Gaza would be a mistake.
