Is the government responsible for the destruction of Netiv Ha’avot?
The Netanyahu-Bennett government is responsible for the destruction of Netiv Ha’avot in Gush Etzion. It is the government that sent in the bulldozers to destroy the homes there – not the High Court, not the Left and not the media.
But the High Court decided that Netiv Ha’avot must be destroyed. What would you have done if you were in power?
Jerusalem’s Mayor Barkat was also ordered by the High Court, in no uncertain terms, to immediately destroy Beit Yonatan in East Jerusalem. Barkat agreed. But he noted that he has hundreds of court orders to destroy Arab homes and that he would now begin to fulfill all of those orders in the order that they were given. Beit Yonatan is still a thriving Jewish home in Jerusalem.
You’re saying they could have easily avoided this destruction? Are you saying they wanted it to happen?
Not at all. But politicians make different calculations than leaders. Please answer these questions:
On a scale of 0 to 10, what political price is Naftali Bennett going to pay for the detstruction of Netiv Ha’avot?
What political price would Bennett have paid if he had threatened that if one tractor goes up to Netiv Ha’avot, he will resign from the government?
He may have paid a very steep price.
Right. Netanyahu may possibly have brought a different party into the coalition. Perhaps Lapid, or Labor. Who knows? And this is your answer. We do not have leaders on the Right. We have politicians on the Right. We do not have a vision on the Right. We do not have a leader who says, “The entire Land of Israel is ours, including Gaza, including Hebron”. All we have is leaders who make political calculations. That is the entire story. The destruction of Jewish homes in the Land of Israel has become nothing more than a sectoral demonstration that concerns no one else.
You are always so convincing.
You know, I am speaking from the depths of my heart. You are speaking to someone who, for the last 25 years, has been trying to put the religious Zionist public into the national leadership. I opened the gate to this public to leadership on a national level, but it did not want to enter. Now I am working with a broader public. The root of the problem is that if you are not willing to lead, you will necessarily be led. And you cannot control the direction.