Ehud Barak's Plot Against Israel

Inside the troubled mind of a bad guy

Ehud Barak is not only the former deputy head of the Air Force who was instrumental in scuttling the Lavi fighter jet project in 1987, making Israel more dependent on the United States.

Ehud Barak is not only the former Army Chief of Staff who fled the Tzeelim disaster in 1992 in a helicopter that could have been used to get some of the wounded to the hospital, earning himself the sobriquet “Ehud Barach” (Ehud fled).

Ehud Barak is not only the man who stated publicly in 1998 that “If I was [a Palestinian] at the right age, at some stage I would have entered one of the terror organizations and have fought from there.”

Ehud Barak is not only the former Prime Minister who unlaterally pulled out of Lebanon in 2000, leaving all of our allies in the South Lebanese Allies high and dry, and then later that year met with Yasser Arafat and offered him a Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria, including a capital in Jerusalem.

Ehud Barak is not only the man who visited Jeffrey Epstein some 30 times between 2013 and 2017, and put Harvey Weinstein in touch with the ex-spy group Black Cube in 2016, so that he could investigate the women who were accusing him of sexual assault.

Ehud Barak is not only the man who portrayed Israel’s Covid response as a coup attempt by Prime Minister Netanyahu in 2020 and explained his plans to bring down a future government, even at the cost of “The bodies of Jews that were killed by Jews, floating in the Yarkon River,” saying that in such a case, “I am more suitable and prepared than any other person in the country to take the wheel.”

Ehud Barak is not only the man who again threated bloody civil war against the prospect of judicial reform in 2023, saying “[The protest movement] will not stop. We will block this attempt on the life of Israel as a democracy and we will win this battle…It might take time, some people might lose their lives along the way.”

Ehud Barak is not only the “bravehearted stalwart” who fled Israel on October 9, two days after the Hamas atrocities on October 7.

Ehud Barak is continuing his plans to bring down the government, using the same techniques he was using prior to October 7. The other night, he was interviewed on a Twitter “Space”, the transcript of which can be found here. Because it’s in Hebrew, and because it’s important for all of us to be aware of his plotting, I translated the transcript into English. The three speakers are Ehud Barak, his interviewer Ziv, and a woman named Nava. The transcript starts in the middle of a sentence, with Barak speaking:

Ehud Barak:

…Ben Gvir and Smotrich, and in a situation of a complete lack of confidence in the prime minister, there is only one way to deal with such a situation in a democratic country, and that way is to go to elections. And therefore what is actually required is elections now.

From here, I want to back up a step to explain what the alternative is that the Americans are pressing us to decide. I have no doubt that an answer of “yes” should be chosen, but for the Americans, a small “yes” and a very big “but”. There were a lot of conditions, there were weak points. I also can't tell you with confidence that it will succeed, but there is no doubt that if you compare it to the slippery slope that they’re offering us, to go to the abyss with Ben Gvir and Smotrich, and Bibi dragged after them, answering "yes, but" to the Americans is preferable.

Americans see the following: Hamas will not control Gaza and will not threaten Israel, control of Gaza will pass to a renewed Palestinian Authority, a new body that will be established on the basis, of course, of the old Authority, but which will be established in such a way that it will be bound by all the agreements that the old Authority signed with Israel. The new Authority will control both Gaza and Judea and Samaria. The Egyptians will help them build a peacekeeping force and law enforcement mechanisms. The Saudis and the Emirates will finance the restoration, the infrastructure, and later on, all the things that are required by this entity that will have arisen under the renewed Authority that has needs in electricity, in energy, in desalinating water, things that need to be deeply institutionalized and built.

The Saudis will receive a defense alliance with America that will allow them guarantees similar to those that NATO countries have — for those who know what that means, I don't want to dive into it deeply — and Israel will be required in return to be ready at a later stage in this process to bring the renewed Authority to Gaza, to enter into a political process, the end goal of which is ultimately two states.

I think that this American proposal, and all of this under American sponsorship and increased cooperation between these countries, if this alternative had been found or was on the agenda — and this is a year and a half I think — that the progress that Bennett or Lapid Prime Minister, it would have been accepted as a huge blessing; as a huge progress in the right directions.

Today it is more difficult to convey this, but when you have to compare it to the other practical possibility, the only such one — to go with Ben Gvir and Smotrich — there is no doubt that this is the right way. And therefore if you ask me where I would go, that is where I would go. It is clear that many things need to be clarified. We had to make sure that, within this construction of the relationship between the renewed Authority that operates in Gaza in the civil spheres and Israel's security needs, there would be an answer to our security needs, both the obvious ones we have known about all along, and those that were born as a result of what happened on the 7th of October.

It's not clear yet if it will take off at all. I'll give an example, the Americans say this proposal won't be on the table forever; that it's on the table for the next two or three months. Why? Because it is weakly related to the Saudis, in order to make an America-Saudi alliance that will give the Saudis the same type of protection that NATO gives, that is, with one of the countries attacked treated as though both were attacked. The so-called executive order of the president is not enough for that. It’s not an executive order of the government, it's a joint decision of the American nation. It has to go to Congress and it has to pass by a supermajority, a majority greater than 50%. I think sixty senators, maybe sixty-five. So that to pass it you need 15 senators from the Republicans, and there is no way that after April or May it will be possible to pass such a thing in an American election year, when Trump or whoever heads the Republicans will probably say, "We are not giving Biden any wins."

Therefore, for all these reasons there is a very short time. So we have a short time to determine the matter of the hostages in a positive way so that we don't receive them in coffins. We have a short time to answer the Americans, and are we going there? We have a short time to free Netanyahu and the country from this stranglehold of Ben Gvir and Smotrich, and the only way is through the elections.

And now I want to say a few words to you about elections, and maybe I can also repeat: Elections in the State of Israel are not like they are in Britain, which decides that within 28 days there will elections. In the State of Israel it takes 100 days, 110 days, it might be possible to reduce it to 90. Therefore, if you want to have elections before the summer, before the elections in the United States, then the elections have to be in June. In June there are two suitable dates, the fourth and eighteenth of June, which are actually 100 and 110 days from the end of February. March, April, May, three months and 12 days. Therefore, if a decision is not made to hold elections by the end of March, at most by the first ten days of April — say until Pesach — then we will not have elections at this time.

Now apparently, I'm sure a large part of those who are listening to us are saying, “What does it matter? We’re already hearing calls.” And Yair Lapid called for the determination of an agreed date for the elections from within the state camp. I noticed Matan Kahana, it's possible that Hili Tropper may also have said “Why don't we make an agreed date for the elections?" Miki Zohar spoke a few days ago about an agreed date for the elections at the beginning of the 2025. True, the day after that, he corrected himself and said no, no it's not that; it should be a year after the war, but that’s not important, we will take him at face value from the first statement.

I want to draw your attention to the fact that elections in a year or so are a lifeline for Netanyahu. All that Netanyahu needs, to continue leading us to this coup d'état, which is continuing, btw, the investigations in the areas of legislation are continuing — I do not want to get into this whole story at all, not to the Harel machine that continues to work, not to the promiscuous budget that passed and not to the hubbub about the conscription law and the strange behavior of some of the ultra-Orthodox ministers.

We cannot afford to allow ourselves to let this government that is not able to make a decision even where to conduct the war, is not even able to hold a discussion about what is wanted the day after the war, to lead us for another year. And therefore, the urgency is to make the elections immediately, and I think it should. The same main topic, also the main topic I'm starting to discuss.

Nava:

Dear Ehud, first of all, I have no choice but to agree that elections are needed immediately and it's not just me, it’s in all the polls, we see it. Over eighty percent of the general public is interested in replacing the current government. But I want to go back one step for a moment and ask what are the possibilities that you see going to the elections, because the fact that we all understand that there is an urgent need, even to go to the elections is great. But how can this happen? What is the plan for it?

Barak:

Look, getting to the elections is also a combination of many things together, but the truth is, that if I look at the mileage that the protest got, that brought us to a situation where the government is quite weakened, but then a war broke out, a war we are all working together — there are really revelations inspiring manifestations of solidarity and unity inspiration on the battlefield — but this should not solve the real problem that we have here, that the bottleneck in the ability to get the country back on track starts with the delusional combination of Netanyahu with Ben Gvir and Smotrich.

I still remember Netanyahu in this election campaign in which he became prime minister. He publicly announced to the public that Ben Gvir would not be a minister in the government. He refused to take a picture with him. And when they brought him up, why wouldn’t he say that, because there are things that shouldn’t happen. But today he really looks held like their prisoner.

Our problem is like this. Demonstrations alone will not bring it. Surveys that show he has completely lost confidence will not lead to this on their own either. Billboards, too, there's a really exciting campaign today. “You are at the top, you are to blame”, something like that, but mainly the videos that accompany or point out will not lead to that alone.

Removing a government from office is a process that happens ultimately inside the Knesset in a technical, legal, political process. I sometimes liken it to a game on the field. We play from the inside. We want to score a goal. There are four goals: in one we play American football, in the second, we play soccer, in the third, ice hockey, and in the fourth, cricket, let's say, and we have to distinguish, from the field, where and by which approver an opportunity is created to score, run there to score the goals according to the rules of the game where this goal is played.

And what is the analogy? The analogy is that there are several ways in which the government can fall politically. One possibility is that Ben Gvir and Smotrich get fed up. They recognize that Bibi is being dragged or pushed away for whatever reason, and they come to the conclusion that he can no longer provide them with what they need, which is absolute backing for the settlements, for any riot that will happen in Judea and Samaria, for any whim that comes to their mind or vision that they see at night, and he will be dragged there. In the end, they will get fed up because they will see that he is not able to deliver, and they’ll decide to leave the government. This is one option in which we go to elections.

A second option is that one of the parties, let's say the ultra-Orthodox parties, they already understand that the reason why they stuck with Netanyahu cannot be realized. They joined his government in exchange for his commitment to deliver two laws to them, one law that completely frees them from conscription and a second law that prevents the court from interfering with the first law. It is clear that he can no longer do that. And therefore they have second thoughts today.

They all remember today, it also came up in the news, that there was an old law at the time that was not as perfect as the law that Bibi promised them, but it is, I would say, considered by some of the ultra-Orthodox leaders to be not bad. This is the law that Eisenkot and Gantz proposed to them, which says that everyone enlists, including the Arabs, but not only for the IDF. The IDF chooses those it needs. All those it does not need go to other things, maybe national service, public service, Zaka, there are all kinds of other activities. And of course the soldiers, let's say that this national service takes nine months, so even the soldiers who do enlist after nine months begin to receive the average salary in the economy. Not pocket money but a salary.

They proposed this idea and it's in the air. Even before the 7th of October, I was following a little about the general sense among the ultra-Orthodox. Some of the opinion makers there claimed, “We can’t get too close to Netanyahu. He won’t be there forever, and we can see that the fact that we are at the forefront of the effort, if you remember the protest in Bnei Brak, for the protest against Netanyahu, makes us the main ones responsible for everything that is not good in the country in the eyes of the secularists. And at some point, the secular stream will get into power again and they will not forget it.”

All the more so, now that it’s clear that Netanyahu is also responsible for the most serious failure in the history of the state, there can certainly be a certain possibility one of these parties loses patience and says he won't bring it to us, he will eventually fall, we shouldn't stick with him at the end of the journey and jump with him into an empty pool, and they may also decide to go to the elections.

So the first, let’s say, is American football, and the second is our soccer. There’s a third possibility. Which is within the Likud itself. People tend to think that there can be a constructive no-confidence with 5 Likud members, which will change it from 64 to 59, and say that they join, and we'll have sixty-one against the government.

This is not true. This is due to too superficial a familiarity with the law that describes the process of constructive non-confidence. The law says like this. It's not enough to have a list of 61 MKs and one of them says he’ll agree to be Prime Minister, and they all want him. We also need to bring the list of ministers, the list of ministers must have coalition negotiations in addition, so it is also impossible to hide the preparations, and this is something that comes out and is also not an easy thing, and we have to succeed in doing it. But the third thing is that we have to also bring pages one and two the action plan of the government that will be formed as a result of the constructive no-confidence.

We are in a time of war. A government like that, if it is established during the war, needs to write, among other things, what the goals of the war are, and in the goals of the war, it'll be written to dismantle the ruling and military ability of Hamas. I'll tell you without having ever discussed this with Mansour Abbas, I don’t think he will be able to sign it. Even though he is an extraordinary leader in the independence and fortitude which he shows is extraordinary, but he will not be able to sign something like this. The bottom line is that 5 or 6 MKs is not enough; we will need 11 Likud members who join the constructive no-confidence initiative.

From time to time thoughts arise that we automatically have one, and it is not stable, and I don't think we really have 11 like that.

The fourth goal through which such a thing can happen is through the legal gate. Recently, there were two very important decisions on the reasonableness criterion, and then, to a certain extent, also on the immunity. Even though we did not like the answer, there were important decisions of the court, of Bagatz, including the file of Stein who came in, who is considered a conservative and stated that the moral foundation for the State of Israel for all things that are not written should be decided. So what did he mean? Not what did the legislator mean, but what did the founders of the state mean? So the Declaration of Independence is the correct guide.

There are a few other things. There are things that happen with the budget and things that happen with other issues, the legal system in decisions that are not similar to the 11-0 decision three years ago, but rather to the brave decisions of the last months. It can also open an opening that leads to elections.

After I've described this whole thing, I'm saying this. None of these things will happen alone. Only a combination of them can make it happen. But anyone who is interested in the mechanics of elections should also think about the next thing. Like in squash, for those of you who know the game, you watch the ball, get to know and know and know the other player. There can certainly be a situation in which, as soon as one of the Haredi parties or the "nice couple" of the messianics, one of them decides that he's going to elections, the Knesset members’ survival instinct awakens. They realize that 40 percent of Knesset members do not return in the next Knesset in every election. This election it will be fifty percent. In Likud, it will be even sixty percent. And then the instinct will wake up that says “Why should we leave the game if we can, by using what's called constructive no-confidence, stay theoretically for another 2 or two and a half years, or practically speaking, another year.” And then the will to go to constructive no-confidence may wake up.

We can’t build on that, because at the moment, it doesn’t exist.

And then I ask myself the real question: So why is there actually passivity? How can it be that after the most serious failure in the foundation of the state, and the longest war since the War of Independence, and the total loss of confidence in Netanyahu, and important achievements but we are far from the goals, how is it that the public in Israel does not stand up and replace its government? What are we? We will become a community of millions who, like people struck with Stockholm Syndrome, who fall in love with the one who oppresses us and leads us to the abyss? No.

When I ask myself, I say the most immediate point, and what we lack here is an opposition. Anyone who shuts their eyes and tries to evaluate what would happen if the 7th of October had happened during the terms of Bennett or Lapid or Gantz, if he had been Prime Minister, what would Netanyahu have done in order to bring about the government falling? He would have set the metaphorical state on fire. Let’s say maybe not only metaphorically.

I don’t see — I sometimes say in public speeches, or in articles I write, I say that they should do it. If our opposition would have done a quarter of what Netanyahu would have done with similar circumstances, the government would fall. I talk to many people, not in forums like this, but face to face with people. Sometimes one person or two people who are valuable people with influence in their field. And such people, when they come to war and politics, get hesitant. They say, “I want to think like the common citizen, and I am trying to convince them that we need to get off the sofas and overturn the tables and change the government to make elections. This is our country in the end; it is not the government's. The government serves us, and not the other way around. We are not subjects, we are citizens.”

And then what does a person say to me, sometimes older than you and with many rights? He says “Look Ehud, or Barak if he doesn't know it with a relative, if you're convinced, I'm convinced, but you're not the only one. I look at the whole picture," is what he says. He says “What do I, the common citizen, know that Gantz does not know? That Eisenkot does not know? That the President of the State does not know? That Yair Lapid does not know? That Lieberman does not know? So long as all these people are silent, so I the common citizen am inferring from this that even though you are very convinced that we need to act immediately, and by the end of March there should be elections, I am convinced that the time has not yet come."

And I draw the converse from this. That what we lack is that these people will stand up, and when they say tell the people, "Look, polls show that sixty percent of the supporters of Gantz and the state camp expect him to stay in the government." And I say it's the chicken and the egg. What do they say? Ask them what they think first. Say what our leaders want? Our leaders broadcast by their behavior that they want him to stay in the government. Who are we to say that they shouldn't stay in the government?

What we lack is a decision by Gantz and Eisenkot to do the thing. The thing that's usually done by the the camp of at least of the [Me'erechim] and of mine. I don't know how many of you are in our camp, others have come to hear the enemy, but our camp, most of those in it believe that they need to simply leave the government. I tell you in my opinion, and I shared part of their past as officers, I went through the path they went through, and they were even under my command for many years. They acted truly with a deep sense of responsibility. They came in, I remember them saying, “You told us all the time that if there's a war and you're in charge, they'll be the first to run to the cockpits. Those who refuse to be the first and the special units will immediately run to the cockpits to take the belt. And the [Shaybi] people will run to their keyboards, and that is what happened as well.”

The equivalent of this and of people like Gantz and Eisenkot who are even more anxious for the state then they are politically opposed to Bibi, they felt it was the real equivalent of the thing that must be done immediately. Enter the state of war to ensure that at least there were two responsible adults who would prevent adventures that could be dangerous. And I think they are right about this.

After much thought, I came to the conclusion that it is wrong to demand that they leave the government, even now. They entered when the IDF was about to enter Gaza with fifty thousand fighters, well, and now there are only ten thousand so what then? Will someone like Gantz or Eisenkot leave the government, with the strange decisions that can be made there when there aren't two figures like them? Will they leave now because there are only ten thousand soldiers? Is the possibility of getting involved with the Hezbollah not on the agenda? That the possibility of violent outbreaks with weapons in Judea and Samaria isn't on the agenda? That the situation with the Houthis, with the Shiite militias can't get worse? That we aren't going to find ourselves in a regional war of attrition? That’s the time to leave? I think that the reasons for the thought should be treated with respect, and I accept that they should not leave the government. But since, as I described before, there is an intolerable situation, there are decisions which have to be made. Netanyahu is displaying neither the desire nor the ability to make them. Not when it comes to "the day after", not in the direction we're going, towards the Americans, or knuckling under to Smotrich and Ben Gvir. And if you like, I can speak afterwards on Bibi's alternatives, because he's hinted at them, and neither of them is practical. And they need to go forward, in my opinion, and say to the public, to describe to the public what I've described just now. And to say, “There's no choice. A state that wants to survive doesn't slide down a slope with a government is has no confidence in, in a changing reality, and can bring us into collision with everything around us, and knuckling under to a pair of lunatics.”

It is necessary to decide in a single electoral decision to call on all members of the Knesset, to all heads of parties, to address the public, and demand from every citizen and every body in the country, from the Histadrut, from the Bar Association, from the youth movements, from the secular preparatory schools, from the doctors, from the protest organizations, from the black flags, Achim LaNeshek, from every party in the country, from [?] women, to come forward and demand immediately to decide on elections in this session, to hold them at the beginning of June.

And the continuation of this should be that they leave the floor. That they don't participate in the opposition, don't participate in the discussions in this circus in which the government passes whatever occurs to it. Everything that occurs to Levin or Rotman or whoever it is usually passes, and proclaim...

I don't know how many of you saw a week ago, we saw in photos from Kerem Shalom the police drag some 30 of these tents, small light tents that some 130 people slept in in Kerem Shalom to prevent humanitarian aid from entering from there. Such a sit down strike should happen in the State of Israel around the Knesset. On the day that there were as a result of the reading of some consignation and the engagement of the opposition there will be 30 thousand people at a sit down strike around the Knesset, 8000 tents will have been there for a few weeks... and there are not many weeks left, there are still another like 4-5 weeks until the end of the session.

In my opinion, this thing means that one of the parties in the coalition will start the process, understand that it is going to fall apart, and you won't accept it as part of the coalition, the government will not last. This has happened in other countries.

People tell me, "But it won't happen. People won't do that". I tell them, I've said to a number of friends, I think that I said it once in some TV broadcast, if Gadi Eizenkot jumps up tomorrow on the table or on the piano and stands up high and says, Mi L'adonai Eilai, not in the religious sense of who is for God with me, but who is with me to fix the situation and to forcing elections immediately in the State of Israel, within 48-82 hours, there'll be half a million people, and it will be possible to start the sitdown strike around the Knesset.

If you ask me what needs to happen, that's what needs to happen. And anyone who says, But what if it doesn't work?, we have nothing to lose. The alternative is to sink into the Gazan mud, an expansion of this thing into a war of attrition, I hope no worse than a war of attrition with Hezbollah in the north, with other organizations, in particular Hamas, but also with other organizations in Judea and Samaria. Add in the Houtis and the militias that continue, and with wishful thinking of some of the players that it will also develop into a fight including with Iran that will lead them to the Americans.

This thing is against Israel's interests. We are on the way to a rift with the United States, or to a level of war of attrition. We're fundamentally jeopardizing the Abraham Accords. We will not accept the deal with Saudi Arabia which is an important breakthrough in normalization and we can find ourselves jeopardizing the peace agreements with Egypt and Jordan.

This thing must be stopped, and therefore we have nothing to lose. We will not be able to explain to ourselves in five years, a year or ten years or during the next war why we did not do this simple thing that I raised just now. It sounds complicated, but when you really think about it, it's something simple. It's citizens who understand that the country is led by someone with his head in the abyss. Who after he has already proven that he has already sunk the Titanic, is actually now seeking to captain a new ship. And he proves that this is exactly what he criticized, when he said the life of a nation is not a personal survival journey of a Prime Minister, and that is exactly what he is doing today. We did not have the strength to stand up and do what is necessary for us, not for some other nations. Not for the Palestinians nor for the Norwegians. For us. And I think this is what needs to be done.

Ziv:

Well, I would say that these are words like spurs, but in this case I won't use the cliche, but I will only say wow, Barak. Your words are like thunder rolling down from the mountain. I can tell you that many of our listeners ask to come up and talk to you here. I estimate that most if not all of them are fans of yours. You said before that they came to hear the enemy. I personally can't imagine how it's possible to see an enemy in a person who gave his life to the state in such an absolute and total way. But we don't characterize anyone who says to rise...

Barak:

But I have to correct you. It's not that people can't be a political enemy. Part of the behavior of the evil machine regarding me... I saw a study by Amir Amnir, by the son of Amir Amnir, Nimrod Nir, who is a researcher today in Jerusalem, who found that 20% of the adult population of Israel believes that Barak was involved in planning the events of the 7th of October. So I'm in good company [???] I guess about 20 percent of men also believe, but the fact is that there are people who see us as enemies and operate a poison machine in ways, some illegal, in order to slander and hurt anyone who doesn't think like them. It's an existing fact and it would be blindness to ignore it.

Ziv:

This is true as it may still be, I personally do not understand how the citizen who can just walk in and read about you and can see who you are and what you have done can see you as an enemy for any issue. But as I said, many wanted to come up, and we refuse all of them because of the timeframe, and we really appreciate that you gave us the time. This is why I also move to the short question stage. I know that Nava is already warming up here on the sidelines and is already dying to ask you the question, so over to you, Nava.

Nava:

Thank you very much, Ziv, the truth is, I could continue to listen and discuss with you for hours because it is fascinating, but the time is short, so I will move on to the special question. I'll reveal to the audience, to whoever doesn't know, that yesterday, our honored guest celebrated... I don'tnow if it is allowed to say the age but you celebrated a birthday, can I say how old?

Barak:

It's not some state secret that I started my eighty-third year yesterday.

Nava:

Amazing amazing. So this is a young and promising man.

Ziv:

United as if between forty

Nava:

Completely. If only people who are half your age could show the same level of sharpness, wisdom, courage, strength, determination, to many and I would say in particular in the current political system. So I wanted to address the subject of your birthday. I said at the beginning that your personal life cannot be separated from the life of the nation, literally all the landmarks of the State of Israel are somehow intertwined in your personal life, so I wanted to ask if there is any landmark that you are especially proud of that you remember especially, especially now in light of the truly multifaceted crisis that Israel is facing and some kind of goal for the near future, again, both in the personal aspect and in the political aspect, which go together.

Barak:

My life has been [??too much more loose enough things I've been through for something to measure??] that I can to take from them and that it, if you look at it, it made or set the directions, he will influence her too much [?]. There is a bit of "I have learned from all my teachers". I think I was lucky in part because of the fact that I got to the Sayeret Matkal as a young officer, at levels that allowed me from a very, very young age to become known to the people at the top and see how the decisions are made at the national level. As a second lieutenant I would sit with the Chief of Staff as a deputy every time with the defense minister and then at a very young age with the Prime Minister, with Begin, with Peres, with Rabin, and I just got to see the shape up close where decisions are made and I was able to identify the fact that in the end there are many important elements in leadership, but one of the most important in their eyes is to first of all have an internal compass that tells you what is right to do.

You also can't do without a little voice that tells you what the public things at that moment, because you can't go too far from the public. But in the end, leadership is tested by its ability not to correctly identify what the public wants at any given moment, but what is best for it. In his time, Ben Gurion put it very sharply. He said, "I don't know what the people want; I know what is right for them." And this ability to act according to what is right even if at that moment it will be opposed, and to lead the country according to what is right for the country not according to what is right for you or even not for your political survival, this should be something that guides us. And it seems relevant to me for these days that I call Gantz and Eisenkot to stay in the emergency government or this war cabinet and to stay in it and not to leave it, but to call from within the government to each and every one in the public, every person and every body, to do everything possible to bring about early elections in June. I say you should do this in the name of the fact that this is right for the State of Israel. And I really believe that these two people have arrived, they really believe and are trying to do what is right for the country, I am trying to wake up their eyes to the question of what is right now.

Ziv:

Commander, I’ve had the opportunity to host and talk to some great and great people here in Israel. I must admit that I have never been as excited as I have in the last hour, so I really thank you from the bottom of my heart, both for everything you've done for the personal lives of all of us here, for each and every one of us, for the state, and thank you especially for agreeing to come up here at this hour for me personally, you made my month, and all of my life.

Barak:

Thank you, I'm glad I succeeded, and for the last sentence, thank you to Nava, as you heard at the beginning.

Nava:

I heard the thanks. I accept it, and of course I thank you in return. It was fascinating and important and I hope your words will not fall on deaf ears. We will also make sure to convey the message to the right people, both in politics and in the general public. We all need, Israel needs leadership to lead the replacement of the current government and I hope everyone will do as much as they can to make it happen. So from your mouth to everyone who needs it, and again thank you very much for a fascinating [?].

Barak:

Thank you and thank you to everyone who made an effort and stayed until now on the Space.

Ziv:

They have another fascinating Space ahead of them I promise you and of course you are welcome to join us whenever you feel like it. We are here every [?]