Jan. 12, 2013 (TSR) – Israel’s former prime minister, Ehud Olmert, has accused the current prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, of wasting almost NIS 11 billions of shekels ($3bn) preparing for a futile war plans on Iran based on “security delirium” and “adventurous fantasies”.

Speaking in a television interview on Israel’s Channel 2, Olmert said: “In the last two years, 11bn shekels [$2.9bn] were spent on operations which were not and will not be carried out. These figures go well beyond the multi-year budgets. We were told that 2012 was the decisive year. They managed to scare the entire world, but nothing was done in the end,” charged Olmert, referring to Netanyahu’s war rhetoric and hallucination against Iran’s civilian nuclear program during the past months.

He further stated that there is a surplus in Israel’s military and defense budget that should be cut to its huge surplus in recent years, but no one is addressing this issue because of the upcoming election this month.

Expected to be re-elected later this month, Netanyahu once again pledged that Iran would be top of his agenda if he was re-elected as Israel’s Prime Minister.

Olmert chose to shoot down Netanyahu’s yet again Iran hallucination by backing earlier statements made by Yuval Diskin, former head of Israel’s Shin Bet security services, concerning the irresponsible conduct of Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak. He said the statements made thus far matched similar reports he heard.

Netanyahu and Barak held sensitive discussions in a dismissive atmosphere while smoking cigars and consuming alcohol. Diskin accused Netanyahu of spending the money on “harebrained adventures that haven’t, and won’t, come to fruition”.

“Should Diskin have spoken about this? First of all, I’m pleased that he did not discuss any operational matter. However, in issues such as this, it was his duty to bring it up. If someone like Diskin, who has shown great responsibility in all his years in the system, considers that people should know how fateful discussions are conducted, then it was crucial,”said Olmert.

He also said, “Israel has at times threatened to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities based on the unfounded allegation that Iran’s nuclear energy program has been diverted towards the production of an atomic bomb.”

Iran rejects the allegations against its nuclear energy activities, arguing that as a committed signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), it has the right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.

Tehran has strongly condemned the “provocative and unjustifiable” war rhetoric by the Israeli regime’s officials, saying the Islamic Republic will give a firm response to any aggression.

Olmert also stated that the stalled peace process with the Palestinians should be the central issue being debated in the current election campaign and that the candidates were not addressing the issue.

He criticized Labor leader Shelly Yacimovich specifically, stating that she had once been a supporter of the Hadash party, which supports withdrawing to the 1967 lines, but now was a “supporter of the settlers.”

The former prime minister stated that as long as the peace process remained stalled, Israel’s situation would become increasingly difficult, the country would become further isolated and ties with the US would become increasingly strained.

Olmert reiterated his support for Shaul Mofaz in the current elections, stating that he had never left Kadima.

As for the Harpaz affair, which has surfaced again following publication of the State Comptroller’s report last week, he laid responsibility on Barak. Olmert, Israel’s prime minister at the time of Lt. Gen. (ret.) Gabi Ashkenazi’s tenure as IDF chief of staff, with Barak as defense minister, said he would not discuss events that took place 4-5 years ago. However, he was willing to say that “it’s clear that responsibility for the consequences of the affair lies with only one person – the one in charge of the system.”

“The attempt to conduct a campaign against the chief of staff was undignified. The head of the system managed to quarrel with everyone and pit people against each other. The head of the system is Defense Minister Barak. No committee is required to sort this out. He conducted his own personal commission of inquiry and removed himself from the political arena since he knew what the outcome would be.”

Olmert reiterated his support for Shaul Mofaz and said that “Mofaz was elected to head Kadima since the party had been shattered,” referring to the period under Tzipi Livni’s leadership. He called for placing the political agenda at the center of the election campaign. “As long as there are no negotiations with the Palestinians, Israel is, and will continue to be in a difficult situation. We can smell the fumes mentioned by Diskin. We see the situation in the Territories. None of the candidates talks about it except Kadima. When things finally erupt, when we are isolated, when the U.S. administration will draw their conclusions in face of Israel’s defiant policies, it will be too late to repair the terrible damage caused to Israel by the present government.”

A response to the interview by Likud-Beiteynu stated that Olmert, “who was convicted of a felony who carried out the unilateral withdrawal that brought Hamas to power, failed in conducting the second Lebanon war and offered irresponsible concessions to the Palestinians, is the last person who should be preaching to Prime Minister Netanyahu, who has strengthened Israel’s security in face of global unrest, and who conducted recent Gaza operation Pillar of Defense responsibly and judiciously.”

The Harpaz Affair for dummies: What’s it all about?

Israel’s defense establishment has been in over its head during the last two weeks. Not with Iran, believe it or not, but with a bloody battle between Defense Minister Ehud Barak, and former Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi.

The materials published over the last few days have been especially juicy:

Barak explains to the State Comptroller that one general is kowtowing, and describes another as slightly naive.Ashkenazi’s former assistant and other associates discuss ways to break into the e-mail of Barak’s own chief of staff.

This petty back-and-forth has kept the media very busy.

Now Israel has a small Watergate of our own, complete with confidential records, transcripts of private discussions, central witnesses switching sides, and deleted recordings.

What is all the fuss about? Here is the “Harpaz Affair” – a concise guide for beginners.

How did it start?

Barak and Ashkenazi came into conflict over Operation Cast Lead, which took place in Gaza in early 2009. Basically, it was a conflict over credit: Who was deserving of public praise for the operation’s success, and the restoration of IDF honor following the Second Lebanon War?

Later, Ashkenazi and Barak quarreled over General Yoav Galant. Barak wanted to name Galant as Ashkenazi’s successor. Ashkenazi, who despises Galant, preferred that General Gadi Eizenkot replace him as IDF Chief of Staff.

Thus the Harpaz document was born. A document surfaced, detailing false plans among the Barak camp to launch a mudslinging campaign against Askhenazi.

A police investigation ensued, and the counterfeiter was identified as Lt. Col. Boaz Harpaz, a reserve officer and associate of Ashkenazi.

Afterwards, the State Comptroller also began looking into the matter. The Comptroller is of the opinion that Ashkenazi’s assistant, Colonel Erez Weiner, impelled Harpaz to collect incriminating information about Barak, Galant, and others – and that Ashkenazi had at least partial knowledge of this. Askenazi and Weiner deny these claims, of course.

Why do they hate each other so much?

Barak, who is not especially cherished by the public, suspected Ashkenazi of building himself up as a political alternative to Barak, at the former’s expense. Barak proceeded to put Ashkenazi through a series of petty, public humiliations. Ashkenazi, who seems to suffer from a case of heightened sensitivity over his personal honor, took offense.

Then, it really became personal: Recordings reveal that Ashkenazi’s associates were digging through Barak’s personal affairs, hoping to collect incriminating information about him. Now, Ashkenazi is accusing Barak of obsessing over him. Barak accuses Ashkenazi of sabotage and subterfuge. It’s safe to assume they’re both right.

Why is it so important?

 Because Ashkenazi is probably going to enter politics, once his “cooling-off” period – required of all senior IDF officials before making such a move – ends in slightly more than a year; because the affair wastes quite a bit of time on the part of upper-echelon defense officials – time better spent on issues like Iran, Syria, and Hamas; because it sheds quite a bit of light on the behavior of people making life-and-death decisions that affect all of us; because this whole messy affair is hurting IDF morale.

If this is how the senior defense officials behave – why should the platoon commander do what he’s told?

How will it end?

State Comptroller Micha Lindenstrauss informed the High Court of Justice last week that he would make every effort to conclude his findings on the affair by the end of his term on July 3.

Despite his promise, there’s slim chance that Lindenstrauss will meet that deadline. It is safer to assume that the findings will be released by the time the next comptroller is already in office, toward the end of the summer.

In the meantime, the attorney general is refusing to renew the legal investigation into the affair, despite new and alarming evidence being provided by the Comptroller.

Ashkenazi, in any case, won’t accept the verdict. He knows that the final report could be destructive to his public career, and thus will attempt to slander the Comptroller’s position.

The bottom line: Barak will be hit with some fallout, but Ashkenazi will suffer a direct blow. The affair is expected to continue for many months after the release of the final report, with more and more transcripts, finger-pointing, and conspiracy theories finding their way into the newspapers.

Source: TSR, The Guardian, Haaretz, Jerusalem Post