How Israeli wolves in sheep's clothing are playing peacemakers in Gaza war

Since the outbreak of Israel's brutal war in Gaza on October 7, several prominent Western media outlets critical of the Israeli state have centred their focus on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his far-right government.

Their narratives consistently depict Netanyahu as the central figure of Israel's aggressive policies.

In this context, there have been attempts to elevate Benny Gantz, leader of the National Unity coalition, as the main opposition figure, framing him as a legitimate alternative to Netanyahu's leadership in Israel, as covered by outlets like The Guardian and The New York Times.

However, this positioning is loaded with hypocrisy. It’s important to remember that Gantz himself is a former chief of staff of the Israeli military and a member of the war cabinet until recently.

He infamously bragged during his 2019 election campaign about having sent parts of Gaza “back to the Stone Age” during the Israeli military’s 2014 assault on Gaza under his command, which left thousands of Palestinians dead.

His statements were prominently featured in a series of campaign videos aimed at bolstering his military credentials.

Figures like Gantz, who are currently showcased in Western media and even in Israeli outlets as part of the anti-Netanyahu camp, are often presented as key opposition voices.

Yet, their own pasts are deeply entangled with the same aggressive policies and actions they claim to oppose today, as each of them has played a role in the atrocities committed in Gaza and other parts of Palestine.

In Israeli leadership, there is no clear divide between the right and the left or the moderate and the radical, as both sides have been complicit in these crimes against humanity.

While these figures may criticise Netanyahu and his associates for their actions or point to their previous dealings with Palestinians, this does not make them more peaceful—it merely reflects their opportunism.

Their engagement with Palestinians has been motivated by political motivations, not a genuine commitment to peace.

From generals to 'peacemakers'

One of the most prominent figures in this category is Ehud Olmert, who served as Israel’s prime minister from 2006 to 2009.

Olmert is well-known for his harsh criticism of Netanyahu; he regularly appears in leading Israeli and international media outlets, where he gets a wide platform to voice his criticisms.

Despite his image as a "champion of democracy", it is crucial to remember that Olmert comes from Kadima, a centre-right party founded by Ariel Sharon, the mastermind behind the Sabra and Shatila massacres.

Kadima only distanced itself from Likud over the Gaza withdrawal, yet it maintained the same occupation policies.

In fact, it was Olmert who launched the 2008 Gaza War after abandoning peace talks mediated by Türkiye and was responsible for implementing the blockade that followed.

The 2006 Lebanon War, during which the infamous Dahiya Doctrine was first applied, also took place under Olmert's leadership.

Israel's refusal to acknowledge its failures in this conflict resulted in the deaths of numerous civilians, and Olmert bears significant responsibility for this outcome.

Or take Ehud Barak—the man now rallying against Netanyahu's extremism.

But this is the same Barak who orchestrated some of the most brutal military operations during his tenure, with policies that entrenched the occupation and inflicted immense suffering on Palestinians.

Yet now, he's somehow positioned as a voice of reason.

Criticising Netanyahu might be the trendy thing to do, but it certainly doesn’t wash away Barak’s own deep complicity in the very crises he pretends to stand against.

As Israeli army chief (1991-1995), prime minister (1999-2001) and defence minister (2007-2013), he played a central role in shaping Israel's occupation policies.

His current criticisms of Netanyahu ring hollow, and he is in no position to condemn the policies he once actively enforced.

Barak will be infamously remembered for his role during the Second Intifada, also known as the Al Aqsa Intifada, which erupted under his premiership. During this period, Israeli forces killed nearly 5,000 Palestinians, including close to 1,600 children and women.

In October 2000, during Barak's premiership, 13 Palestinian citizens of Israel were killed by Israeli forces during demonstrations. Despite the Or Commission concluding that there was "no justification for the deadly force," not a single officer was indicted for the killings.

Years later, when asked about the issue, Barak expressed no guilt, delivering his response with his usual smugness. This overconfidence echoes his approach at the 2000 Camp David talks, where his impatience and rush to conclude matters led Palestinian leadership to feel cornered.

They feared that key Oslo Accords issues were being hurried through, potentially trapping them in a flawed agreement—contributing to the collapse of the peace process and the escalation of violence.

Adding to the irony, Barak once served as defence minister under Netanyahu, the very man he now vehemently criticises. After his political comeback in 2005, he joined Ehud Olmert's cabinet in 2007 and continued in the Netanyahu government in 2009.

During his six-year tenure as defence minister, Israel waged two devastating wars on Gaza—between 2008-09 and in 2012—that resulted in the death of over 1,500 Palestinians.

"Israel must recognise the two-state idea because we are deteriorating toward a country with a Muslim majority, and this is the central threat to Israel," he even once said. That does not sound peaceful at all.

Hawks in the graveyard of doves

It's not just the living Israeli leaders who are praised for their supposed peace efforts; even some of the deceased are eulogised, with Yitzhak Rabin standing out.

Assassinated by a right-wing extremist in November 1995, Rabin is often remembered for his handshake with Arafat during the Oslo Accords, a moment celebrated by Western media.

Yet, many forget his harsher side, including his notorious "break their bones" policy during the First Intifada. His agreement with Arafat wasn’t solely driven by a desire for peace with the Palestinians but also aimed at balancing the rising tide of the Intifada and Hamas.

This approach allowed him to pressure Arafat to make more concessions.

And then there is Shimon Peres, now hailed as Israel’s greatest “dove of peace”.

In 2009, before then-PM and current Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s famous “One Minute” outburst at Davos, Peres had emphasised the importance of democracy while belittling Hamas's electoral victory in the 2007 free and fair election, saying, “Democracy is not a matter of elections; it is a matter of civilisation.”

He had downplayed the impact of the Gaza blockade, claiming there was no hunger in Gaza, echoing narratives that continue to be used in Israel’s Hasbara efforts today.

When examining those who, whether alive or deceased, right-wing or left-wing, have served in high-ranking roles within the Israeli state only to later attempt to rebrand themselves as peace advocates, one truth stands out.

The same Netanyahu who was met with standing ovations in Congress dozens of times could, in the future, find himself overthrown by a coup staged by the religious far-right, who would then proceed to bring the long-imagined State of Judea to fruition.

In that scenario, there is no guarantee that Netanyahu wouldn’t appear on screen parroting the same words as Olmert, Barak, or Peres.

Ultimately, it is not words that carve a legacy of peace but actions that endure through history.