Mr. Chairman: Attempts to taint FADC war report will fail

The Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee's report on the Second Lebanon War numbers 151 pages. The committee worked hard to complete it for over a year; hundreds of hours of discussions, tours and meetings were invested into it; all military investigations of IDF operations and government and cabinet meeting protocols were analyzed in preparation; dozens of officers and reservists were invited to the discussions to detail their takes and experiences during the battles.

The final result is a thoroughly detailed document that strives to describe the war from a balanced perspective. Not everything is dark, not everything is superficial, clear-cut and sensational. There were failures and there were achievements. There were incorrect decisions made and there were courageous rulings.

Not in vain was the document signed by all the committee members, 17 in total from 9 different political factions from the Coalition and the Opposition. Granted, many of them had remarks and reservations about certain conclusions appearing in the report. Nevertheless, the lion's share of the findings, the conclusions and the recommendations were agreed to by complete consensus.

:

- JPost Special report: The Second Lebanon War 

- MKs highlight IDF's failures in war

From the beginning, the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee was characterized by an official and responsible approach, as opposed to other parliamentarian committees. Most of its members are exposed to very sensitive information with regards to security matters, are aware of the reality on the ground and are part of many discussions and dilemmas that the general public does not get to delve into. Most of the members have extensive experience with difficult decision-making, with past wars, with covert operations where only luck and coincidence separated between overwhelming success and stinging failure. Six of the members served as ministers in different governments; eight members served extensively as senior officials in various security establishments.

This is probably the reason why the report generated such disappointment from among certain specific media personnel, mainly those who are frustrated with the fact that the prime minister, against all their predictions, continues to serve in his position.

Nevertheless, the report details piercing criticism of certain governmental decisions during the war, mainly its avoidance to call up reserves earlier in the war and the vast military ground operation deep in southern Lebanon. The report analyzes thoroughly the latter strategic error and clarifies that had the government given the order for such an operation at an earlier time, the barrage of Katyushas on the north would have lessened dramatically and it would have been possible to subdue the struggle and bring about the mental and operational collapse of Hizbullah.

However, to the critics, this was not satisfactory. To them, a matter-of-fact and reasoned report holds no weight. They prefer a report styled after a hosted TV show: reeking of malice, with lots of blood and gore. They worry that the 'Winograd Report' will take the same path as the one by the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee and will portray a complex picture while deviating from the role assigned to it by the opposition: to eject the prime minister voted in by most of the general population and who enjoys the support of the majority of MKs.

Their rage manifests itself mainly when the report dares to point out the war's achievements. It is a fact that since the cease fire in August 2006, for 16 months, Hizbullah has not dared fire a single bullet in the direction of Israel as it remembers the strength with which Israel responded to its previous provocation; the fact is that the war made possible the presence of 25,000 Lebanese soldiers and UNIFIL forces in southern Lebanon - an area that for decades was under the rigid control of Hizbullah. Successes? Achievements? Now? When Winograd is to issue its fatal verdict and place a guillotine in the city square?

I am convinced that the attempts to use slander against the Committee's report for political gain will not succeed. Just as the "protests" organized with political funding and media goading after the war and after the first Winograd report, dissipated as if they hadn't existed, it is also the fate of attempts to prevent an honest and serious public discussion on the lessons of the war.

The IDF is already well into the process of a vigorous and comprehensive rehabilitation; its soldiers are trained and armed with a drive that we have not seen in years; its officers are prepared for an optimal response in the face of any future threat. I believe that the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee's report will also contribute to improving the fitness and readiness of the military for the day of battle.