About

Thoughtful debate elevates us all. In For Heaven’s Sake, Donniel Hartman and Yossi Klein Halevi revive the Jewish art of constructive discussion on topics related to political and social trends in Israel, Israel-Diaspora relations, and the future of Zionism in Israel and on the global stage.

The podcast draws its name from the concept of machloket l’shem shemayim, “disagreeing for the sake of heaven” and is part of the Institute’s iEngage Project.

Crossroads Transcript

Note: This is a lightly edited transcript of a conversation, please excuse any errors.

Donniel: Hi friends, this is Donniel Hartman and Yossi Klein Halevi from the Shalom Hartman Institute. And this is our podcast, For Heaven’s Sake, a special edition which is now going on for 431 days, Israel at War.

And even though it doesn’t always feel like it, we’re still at war. Yesterday, seven soldiers were killed. And in 430 days, our hostages have not yet returned. But despite the feeling that everything is the same and we’re still stuck in this ongoing war, we’re calling today’s podcast Crossroads. Because Yossi and I, as we were talking, feel that we’re at a critical reflection point or crossroads really in central things that have been happening to Israel over the last year, but not only over the last year, over the last two years. And where we’re going to go and how these things play out are going to have tremendous significance for the future of our country.

On the immediate sense, Syria, one of our, not only our most dangerous enemy, but the vehicle through which Iran armed Hezbollah, and a primary source of the instability in our area, the Assad regime has fallen apart. And a new reality is there, there’s a crossroads there. That’s a crossroad that could be of great hope. And every article in every journal in the world is speaking about the tremendous hit that the Iranian master plan took. But it also might be the beginning of a new dangerous chapter. What that means, there’s both certainty and happiness simultaneously.

We’re at a crossroads in Gaza. There’s conversation in a more intense way about the return of many of the hostages, or the hostages. And it feels like something else is in the air. Things are coming together, both from the governments. I hear Netanyahu speaking differently, I sense it. Hamas is speaking differently, in no small measure, because of all the changes and victory, in many ways, that our army has provided us.

But with that, there’s going to be a huge crossroads in dealing with Gaza because a hostage deal is going to entail some ceasefire, whether permanent or temporary, and what’s temporary could become permanent. Remember in Lebanon, it’s also a ceasefire. And it’s going to be, we’re going to have to talk about, what do we want to do in Gaza? We’re at a crossroads of having to talk about these questions.

We’re at a crossroads on, in many ways, on the attack on Israel’s judiciary, which started two years ago. And as Yossi, you spoke on this podcast, and many have argued that one of the major purposes of the judicial reform was to put in place a Supreme Court and attorney generals who would cancel Netanyahu’s trials. Today, Netanyahu is on trial. He’s standing on trial. And so in many ways, the system held, but we’re at a crossroads because it hasn’t been resolved. Hasn’t been resolved. There’s attacks on the judiciary precisely because of the trial, because Netanyahu was forced to testify and the delays were taken. There’s just, we’re at a crossroads or maybe a boiling point.

This is such a, you know, I don’t want to use the word interesting because that’s a curse, but there’s so much on the table now. Gaza, the future of Gaza, settling Gaza, withdrawing from Gaza, hostages, the end of the war. Lebanon has changed, Syria has changed, Iran and now the jizdishia reform. I just want to open up that I feel we’re entering into a crossroads. And I want to talk about later on whether Israeli society is prepared, are even thinking about this. But just, this reality is important to state. What’s your take on this reality? Is it similar, Yossi? Do you feel differently? What are your emphases at this moment?

Yossi: You know, before we get to unpacking the crossroads, and you’re right, this can go wrong in many ways. The upheaval in Syria, the situation in Gaza and the hostages, the ongoing march of the judicial legislation, nothing has stopped. But before we get to the complications, I feel this need for a change. To be optimistic.

Donniel: One second, could we stop for a moment?

Yossi: You want to savor the moment.

Donniel: I want to savor it. It’s like, I’ve been waiting. I’ve felt like I’ve had to carry this. It’s so welcome. Well, welcome, Yossi.

Yossi: This is it. Now, yes, yes, and now I’m cautioning you. Hold off on the pessimism for a moment and the complications, the complications, the complications. And let’s just savor this extraordinary moment.

Donniel: No, there was no pessimism, I’m just reflective.

Yossi: This is an extraordinary moment because of a convergence of both the way in which the external threat along our borders has unraveled this week. And the way that democracy has, Israeli democracy, has at least for now been vindicated.

Now, you began by speaking about the last two years. And what we’ve experienced in really the worst two years of Israel’s history were two scenarios, two glimpses into what the unraveling of Israel would look like. For the year leading up to October 7th, we experience the internal unraveling of Israeli solidarity, faith of so many Israelis in the decency of the country, in our democratic foundations. And then comes October 7th, and we experience a glimpse into what the physical unraveling of Israel would look like. The external unraveling. No borders, no army, civilians left to their own devices against thousands of terrorists pouring across the borders. And this last year has really been an attempt to get our bearings. This week, from my point of view, we saw the first real turning point on both of these fronts.

Now, in Syria, the collapse of the Assad regime is the end of the siege that Iran succeeded in surrounding Israel with over the last years. This was an historic strategic victory of Iran over Israel. And that siege has now unraveled. Now we’re looking at an unraveling on their side.

And also, you know, looking at what’s happened in Syria, you have a dictator who’s overthrown by a jihadist movement, and the world is justifiably celebrating this, but look at the internal dynamics. Look at where so many of our neighbors are at in terms of how they govern themselves. And here, for all of the anguish, justified anguish and struggle over the future of Israeli democracy. Our prime minister was forced to take the stand and testify in a corruption trial that he did everything possible to try to prevent. And in many ways, October 7th was a direct result of Netanyahu’s attempt to prevent the trial because the whole judicial assault was an attempt, as you put it, to try to create a different environment that would cancel the trial. And it was that year that led up to our vulnerability and led in many ways to October 7th.

So what we’re looking at today, and I will join you soon in unpacking the problematics of this, but for this moment with Netanyahu being forced to testify, with the Syrian threat, for all practical purposes, demolished. I mean, what we’ve been doing in the last few days in Syria is extraordinary. We’ve destroyed Syria’s military capability. And so, this is a moment where I feel, and I realize this now in retrospect, this is the first time in two years that I feel I can breathe a little bit. And so, you know, it’s not quite a celebration, but breathing is its own joy.

Donniel: Wow. Breathing is a good thing. Breathing is a good thing. And I appreciate it. For you, the first issue is always Iran, and the second and the third issue has always been…

Yossi: And then the fourth, fifth, and sixth, this is Israeli democracy.

Donniel: Six, Israeli democracy. And while the Iranian nuclear threat hasn’t been mitigated, and it’s possible that it’s even, again, this is beyond my pay grade. But it’s still there. The non-nuclear may intensify.

Yossi: And it may intensify. They may try to make a run for the nuclear threshold now.

Donniel: Right, and the nature of nuclear weapons, again, I’ve always felt, these are the weapons that no one ever uses. And the whole Iranian strategy was to develop a way to destroy Israel over 50 years without having to resort to nuclear weapons. And that whole card, that attempt has been completely unraveled. They developed a phenomenal strategy, both with our military ability and also some luck. Even though Netanyahu took credit for the Islamic jihadists’ overtaking of Syria, that’s quite an interesting stretch, by the way.

Yossi: Yeah, it wasn’t our soldiers, wasn’t the army, it wasn’t the Mossad. It was just him, was him and Sara, really. What a team.

Donniel: It was like, don’t know what exactly he… what a team. But somehow, no, no, but like somehow that this… There was… It’s fortuitous. This is a moment, it’s true, that one element of that, the danger has been removed. And, you know, and if we think about it, the people in the North could maybe go home with more comfort. Because even though we spoke about the fact that Hezbollah has still the ability to attack, the fact that they can’t rearm themselves with that immediacy and…

Yossi: Because the Iranian route through Syria is blocked.

Donniel: That was the primary place. We’re not the center of their problem right now, as one of my colleagues said. Is Iran going to be—I asked this person who was extremely knowledgeable—how dangerous is Syria going to be right now? And his assessment was, you know, they have so many problems they have to deal with now. But the fact also that Israel was able to destroy so much of their weaponry, because we weren’t fighting an army. They were all—they were stationary. We also, I understand, took out their Navy. It’s just been a remarkable shift.

So Yossi, I want to give you your optimism. Being the, I embrace it. And it’s true and it’s also important. It’s been such a hard year. It’s not bad when—forget smiling—when we could breathe. And that’s clear. But, and what I want to do, the analysis is not to take away the optimism, I just want to understand. I want us to see what we’re facing. So on the one hand, there is optimism. And I think you’re right, in the street in Israel, there are some smiles. There’s a feeling, you know, of stuff, like we got a lot of stuff done, a lot of pieces have been taken off the table.

But there are now other pieces in this crossroads. And for me, there’s really three primary pieces, two are connected, and one is different. One, the two that are are the hostages and the war in Gaza. And the second one is judicial reform. And I want to start with, even though I think it applies to both, but I want to start, if I can, with Gaza. We’ve been continuing, you know, we are a country which loves the status quo. And once we get in a status quo, we think it’s self-evident and that’s what needs to be preserved. So we’ve entered into a status quo in this war.

See, war has never been a status quo in Israel. They’re short, they’re, we bring our soldiers home. We’ve gotten to a status quo of a continuous perpetual war. And we’ve gotten used to it. So now it’s less intense. Yesterday was a terrible day. But the numbers of soldiers who are being harmed every day is decreasing dramatically, in no small measure also because of the way Israel is pursuing the ends of the war. It’s not attacking on an ongoing basis. And most of what we needed to do in Jabalia has been completed for now, and we’re not picking the next Jabalia.

So in that event, we’re sort of getting used to it. And when you look at the polls, more more Israelis are even saying, yes, I’m willing, we should resettle Gaza, or military occupation of Gaza should continue.

Yossi: It’s still a minority though. It’s growing, you’re right, but it’s still a minority.

Donniel: I’m not sure, you see. The settlements are in the high 40 percent. The continued occupation, I’m not sure. But put it this way, it’s not an insignificant number. Israeli society, a large part of Israel is, okay, we could live with this now. You know, the number, this is feeling like, let’s make Gaza into Judea and Samaria. You know, so for some, Gaza being Judea and Samaria is the army having a presence and having intense moments of attacks whenever necessary.

For others, Judea and Samaria is promised land, let’s resettle. It’s sort of, let’s bring Gaza back into the Judea and Samaria equation and reverse the 2005. But this, we’re coming to a moment where the hostages aren’t going to come back if the status quo remains. So we might be able to keep our troops in control of the Philadelphi corridor, but there has to be a shift.

Again, I don’t see Hamas. They’re quite resilient. And even though, you know, Sinwar has been killed and Deif has been killed, they’re not folding. And they feel that they have a pressure on Israel with the hostages. And it’s true. That pressure is getting higher and higher and higher. And because we know that every day somebody’s, like they, you talked about breathing, they can’t breathe, and we know that, and the weight of their reality is sitting heavy on us.

So something’s going to happen, and I feel that there’s a process that’s going to come into play, and Israeli society has never talked about it. We’ve sort of been in status quo mode, but we haven’t talked about it, so what’s your future? Where do you want to go with this?

Yossi: So let’s look at the deep aversion to changing the status quo, which is so much a part of the Israeli psyche, as you pointed out. And to some extent, that’s understandable. At least on the Palestinian front, it’s a result of having seen one Israeli option after another blowing up in our faces.

First, it was the Oslo peace process, which ended in, well, I would actually take it, for me, I would take it back to the first Intifada of the 1980s, when the dream of greater Israel and security ended with the first Intifada. That was, for many of us in our generation, the first Intifada was the moment of deep disillusionment with the promises of the right to bring security.

The promise of the left to bring peace ended with the Second Intifada. Ariel Sharon came along in 2005 and said, you know what? The right has failed to bring security by holding onto the territories. The left has failed to bring peace by offering to withdraw from the territories. So I’m going to do a different approach, unilateral withdrawal. I’m not going to negotiate with the Palestinians. There’s no deal to be had with the Palestinian National Movement, they don’t accept our legitimacy. And so we are going to unilaterally redraw our own borders. And that was the root of the disengagement from Gaza, was a recognition of the failure of the right and the left. But then the disengagement failed too.

On October 7th, for I’d say most Israelis, was the end of the hope that we could ever disengage from Gaza. Gaza came right across the border.

Donniel: You, Yossi, it’s very interesting if I could say, you’re presenting that there is, Israelis embrace the status quo because every option at resolving something has failed. Greater Israel has failed, peace has failed, disengagement has failed. Would you consider that what’s failed is a status quo has also failed?

Yossi: Yes! I think that October 7th is not so much the failure of disengagement. My understanding is that it’s the failure of the status quo. Look, October 7th is more complicated. It was, first of all, the failure of our army and government to overcome their arrogance and to take threats seriously. And that actually is also, that’s a result of the status quo. When you’re in the mindset of a status quo, you become lazy. And so October 7th really was an expression of the failure of the status quo in several ways.

Donniel: So that’s interesting, that laziness is part of what, you know, a week ago I spoke about warfulness, but there is a certain, we’re at a crossroads where we’re not gonna be lazy anymore, or we’re not gonna be allowed to be lazy, but I think we’re still being lazy, because where we’re being lazy is that we’re letting external forces force our hand instead of taking control.

So you’re right, for example, we’ve seen every option or solution fail, but so is the status quo. So why not try something else? Of course, we all know there’s no perfect solution. You want to say there is no perfect solution in Gaza. There is no perfect peace partner. It’s going to be a mess. But then we have to pick between imperfect solutions. And I feel that in Israel, when you’re offered imperfect solutions, we prefer not to choose. Instead of saying, the less imperfect, let’s try a political process.

See, the hostages are going to force, you know, Israel officially is not even negotiating with Hamas, because we don’t negotiate with the terrorist organization? Like, if you just look at it, we’re just, we’re like digging our head in the ground, digging a hole and just sort of letting processes continue. The hostages are sort of their own isolated engine of movement disconnected from the future of Gaza, even in the minds of many Israelis. Of course they want a hostage return, but are you ready to withdraw from Gaza? No. So there is no, they’re not even coherent.

And then somewhere along the line, like who knows, Trump is gonna, we want it, Biden couldn’t force us, but now maybe Trump, maybe Saudi Arabia. It’s like we’re,”startup nation” is becoming “status quo nation.” And it’s very strange.

Yossi: Or we’re a stagnant nation. And I agree with you about the need to overturn the status quo, but bear in mind, Donniel, that there’s a danger there. And the growing appeal of rebuilding settlements in Gaza is an Israeli response to the status quo. It’s Israelis saying, you know what, the status quo isn’t working. We need to be proactive.

Donniel: Fair enough, fair enough. That’s true. I accept that correction. That’s true.

Yossi: The other piece of it is that you said that there’s no perfect peace partner in Gaza. I mean, let’s rephrase that. There is no peace partner in Gaza. And the Palestinian Authority is a potential partner for arrangements, which is good enough, but it’s not a peace partner. We don’t have a peace partner now. We may, we may have a peace partner if the Saudis join the Abraham Accords, and then we have a regional framework for peace, but even then, I don’t believe that we can solve this problem bilaterally with the Palestinian leadership.

Donniel: Fair enough, fair enough. The word peace is a whole, it feels so utopian that, so I don’t have another word, call it a negotiating partner, call it a ceasefire partner. What’s the difference? I think we have a ceasefire partner, or part of our responsibility is to try to create it, and it’s so interesting, as I talk about this in Israel, or as I talk about it with Jews around the world, everybody knows.

I think are profoundly impacted by your observations beforehand. Like everything has failed. So we’ve gotten into the mode that everything, because everything has failed, everything will fail. And even the Saudi deal, again, one of my colleagues said to me, has a feeling that everybody likes the Saudis because somehow they’re gonna resolve the conflict for us. Like somebody, they’re gonna do it for us.

Yossi: And we don’t have to give them any territory.

Donniel: And we don’t have to give them territory. And if the Saudis come in, then maybe Ben-Gvir will leave. And it’s like somewhere along the line, but a serious conversation. And you’re right, that we see the rebuilding of settlements. For some people, the rebuilding of settlements is just to create a better status quo. For others, as you correctly said, it’s a different status quo. It’s active. It’s the greater Israel, larger story.

But I feel that part of what we need to do, and it’s here, your job as a journalist and as a teacher, my job as a teacher, our job is to start talking about and to start spelling out, talking more seriously about these plans.

Now, Netanyahu, like I know Dermer is a serious guy. I know he already has six plans. He has options. He’s thought through the next three years. You know, he has it all out.

Yossi: I’m sure that none of them are any good, but we’ll…

Donniel: No, I’m not sure, but either way, but they’re not being presented to us. It’s like we’re, the country is sort of keeping us at this crossroads and I think something’s going to move. And so it’ll be interesting, it’ll be important. God willing, any one of the hostages will return, all the injured, the elderly, the women. Now they say also the Americans, that’s an interesting, it’s like, give me anybody, give us anybody. And I believe that process will change and then we’re going to have to see how Israeli society, it’s not going to be easy for us, how we begin to have to develop a new narrative of what we’re doing.

Yossi: Well, there’s another divide now in Israeli society between those who will grab onto any incremental achievement and those who want a comprehensive solution, total victory on the hostage front. And I’m in, today I’m in that camp.

I used to be in the camp of incremental, let’s make a series of arrangements, I think time has run out for the hostages. And my big worry is that if this government makes a partial hostage deal, which seems to be where it’s heading, that in itself will be God forbid a death sentence for those left behind.

Donniel: You know, in many ways, the adding of the American hostages to the initial concept of women, elderly, and the infirm is a way of saying, okay, Trump, this could be a new status quo. Again, it’s removing Trump’s pressure from the government.

Donniel: From the government and then we could sort of, and then again, instead of all of them, that will be the total victory picture, but it’s not the total victory.

Let’s talk just a little bit before we conclude about the crossroads of the judicial reform. Now you were right, it’s true. Whatever was tried, all the, derail the system, to change the environment, to change who’s the attorney general, to change, or to even get a Supreme Court to cancel the trial, or as the Supreme Court decided recently that Netanyahu has to testify. Three times a day he then went and said, me two times a day, three times, all this I can’t, he’s there. The attempt to overhaul and to politicize our judicial reform, the checks and balances are functioning.

But there’s huge pressure right now because Netanyahu is not speaking now about, just merely about, you know, there’s a group of liberal men controlling the Supreme Court, which was never true, by the way. But now he’s able to portray himself as the victim of, on the prime minister in one of the most dangerous times in Israel, three times a week, you couldn’t do it two times a week. You know, he had this horrific press conference in which he lashed out at the system, which is basically the system of law, the system of law portraying himself as the victim, his armies, it’s, you the just, you you have the just-no-Netanyahu and the just-yes-Netanyahu coalescing.

And part of what was remarkable last year, it wasn’t in the pre-October 7th, I mean, in the 2023 judicial discourse and debates, is that there was a debate about the nature of the country, democracy, the values we care about, human rights. And at this crossroads where the Supreme Court and the rule of law, is on the table and we have a whole slew of legislations coming up.

I’m feeling that there is no ideological debate. It’s all becoming tribal again. It’s just-no-Netanyahu and the just-Netanyahu. And I feel that when it’s presented that way, we again don’t have an ideology. We don’t have a pathway forward. It’s just whatever, whoever has more pressure. And right now, Netanyahu has more pressure because we’re not bringing people out into the streets. People come out in the streets when there’s ideology. So this crossroads is also interesting.

Yossi: I appreciate your frustration in the cheapening of Israeli discourse, but that doesn’t change the fact that so long as Netanyahu is prime minister, nothing can move forward, certainly not the kind of healthy discourse that you’re speaking about. Netanyahu is a stopgap, he’s a block on on Israeli creativity, on our ability to begin to heal. And he creates such bitterness and such divisiveness that it’s astonishing that here we are, we’re still talking about him 17 years into his reign. There is no precedent in the democratic world for a leader, a democratically elected leader to remain for 17 years.

If he once reflected the will of the people, and he certainly did, he lost that on October 7th, as every poll has shown since then. And so we’re at a point now, Donniel, where you’re right, it’s really come down once again to a referendum over Netanyahu, but that referendum has to be seen through.

Donniel: Right. The only place where I have a slight disagreement with you is that I go back to 2023, and even though Netanyahu really lowers the nature of political discourse to being all about it’s either me, Papa, or King Netanyahu, or insecurity. The reality was that we on the street took control not just of the issue, but of power, but we took control and elevated the conversation.

There were some who just were just-not-Netanyahu, but the demonstrations rose when we gave people a vision. And I’ve been speaking with a number of politicians in Israel and leaders of parties, and unfortunately they’re all following the Netanyahu playbook and they’re not looking at the success of the judicial reform.

Success of judicial reform shows that you can elevate the conversation and that you could bring,

Yossi: The success of the judicial reform debate.

Donniel: Of the judicial reform debate, right, or the demonstrations, the anti-judicial reform, thank you. And when you do so, people come into the streets not out of what they don’t want, not out of a negative, not out of a hatred, but because there’s something they want to fight for. And I would say that at this crossroads right now, that so many things are changing, that we have to find whether it’s in Gaza, whether it’s in judicial reform, that we can’t allow Netanyahu to lower the debate because that’s where he’s going to win.

I agree with you that at the end we’re going to need judicial, we’re going to need democratic transformation. Israelis are going to have to vote. And how they’re going to vote is going to be up to us. You can’t kvetch all the time because we do have a functioning democracy. Nobody’s stealing the elections. Nobody’s denying them. We’re voting. So the next time in the fall of 2026, we’re going to have our chance, but it’s when people think that…

Yossi: Too late, too late, Donniel, too late.

Donniel: Too bad. Doesn’t matter. I don’t want to ruin your optimism, but that’s when it is. But I just want to call at this crossroads for it’s our time. It’s your time, Yossi, as a writer. It’s our times as teachers. It’s our time for the Hartman Institute. Forget partisanship. It’s about your vision for Israel, your vision for Gaza. Let the conversation begin, and let’s take responsibility for that conversation. Last comment, Yossi.

Yossi: Yeah, I’ll give you an example of where I think that elements of the anti-government camp are losing the conversation. There’s a new billboard campaign from Peace Now saying, we will not die for Gaza settlements. And I hate that slogan.

Matan Kahana, member of Knesset close to Naftali Bennett, former pilot, religious Zionist, quite right-wing, gave an interview the other day where he said, you know, for me, Gaza is part of the land of Israel. I believe in settling Gaza. But to talk about settlements now, when we are in, when Israeli society is so torn and what that, we know what that will do to Israeli society. He said, I am calling on my fellow right-wingers to leave this issue aside.

Compare that language to Peace Now. And really where Peace Now will lead us is every camp in Israel is going to say, these are the issues that I’m not ready to die for. I’m not going to die for your cause, you’re not going to die for my cause. That’s the end of Israeli society. And so, when we talk about elevating the discourse, I offer Matan Kahana vs. Peace Now.

Donniel: Fair enough, again, that’s also not enough. It’s not enough to say, I’m for settling Gaza, but let’s not talk about this now. Really? Let’s talk about it now. Talk about it, but we’re at the crossroads now. Putting it, what you’re waiting for is, let’s not talk about it. We’ll talk about when? Tomorrow? Tomorrow is good.

Yossi: No, Donniel, the beauty of what Matan Kahane was saying is we’re not going to return to Gaza. He couldn’t quite bring himself, no, but he couldn’t bring himself to say it.

Donniel: See, I didn’t say that. That’s my point. I know that.

Yossi: But Donniel, what is he saying? If we don’t rebuild the settlements when we’re sitting in Gaza, you think we’re going to do it after we withdraw? He understands, and so it’s…

Donniel: I know, you know, I think that’s it. Fair enough. I’m gonna give you the last, since I said I’m gonna give you the last word, I’m gonna give you the last interpretation of Matan Kahana. Let’s leave it at that. If we both agree that he’s, that we shouldn’t, okay, let’s leave it there.

Yossi: It’s a, it’s a, no, you know what it is, Donniel, what we need is a generosity of spirit.

Donniel: That’s correct.

Yossi: We need to place, to place the cohesiveness of Israeli society above all of our partisan goals.

Donniel: Fair enough. But it’s not just, know, cohesiveness could be so mediocre. It’s not, you know, we have to talk about that for next time.

Yossi: So here we have a debate for next time. This is excellent.

Donniel: Like, it’s like, you know, okay, maybe I’m being so naive. Maybe cohesiveness should be, that’s high enough. Either way, Yossi, it’s a crossroads. Look, who knows where we’re gonna be next week.

Today is, Yossi, wonderful to be with you.

It’s still 431 days and may this week be a week where some breakthrough, some breakthrough on the hostages and some direction of the crossroads continues to reveal itself. Yossi, thank you very much.