Netanyahu Says October 7 Investigation Must Examine Oslo Accords and Gaza Disengagements, Not Just Security Failures
Israel’s political system moved a step closer this week toward establishing a new investigative body to probe the failures surrounding the Hamas assault of October 7, 2023, after a ministerial panel endorsed controversial legislation redefining how such a commission would be formed.
The bill, a private proposal sponsored by Likud MK Ariel Kallner, passed the Ministerial Committee for Legislation on Monday and is slated for a preliminary vote in the Knesset plenum on Wednesday. Unlike a traditional state commission of inquiry, whose members are appointed by the president of the Supreme Court, the proposed framework would place the power of selection in the hands of the Knesset.
Under the bill’s provisions, commissioners would be approved by a supermajority of at least 80 lawmakers. Should the opposition refuse to cooperate, the coalition and opposition would each be entitled to appoint an equal number of members. If the opposition fully boycotts the process, however, the authority to select the entire panel would fall to the Knesset speaker, Likud MK Amir Ohana.
At the committee meeting earlier in the day, Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu laid out what he believes the scope of any investigation into October 7 must include. According to a government source, Netanyahu argued that the inquiry cannot be confined to immediate operational failures but must examine decisions and developments stretching back decades, “from Oslo, through to the [Gaza] Disengagement, and up to [reserve duty] refusal.”
His reference to “refusal” alluded to threats made in 2023 by some opponents of the government’s judicial overhaul, who said they would stop reporting for IDF reserve service in protest.
In a video statement released later Monday, Netanyahu defended the idea of a specially constituted commission, saying that a catastrophe on the scale of October 7 demands an exceptional mechanism. He compared the proposal to the special US commission formed after the September 11, 2001, attacks.
“No one then complained about political bias, and I must say that its conclusions received broad legitimacy precisely for this reason. That is exactly what we are doing,” he said.
Netanyahu insisted that alternatives would lack broad public confidence. “The government could have established a governmental review committee, whose entire composition would be determined solely by the government,” he said, adding that such a body would only be trusted by part of the public. He then rejected an opposition-backed model in which appointments would be made exclusively by Supreme Court President Yitzhak Amit, arguing it would similarly enjoy the confidence of only a narrow segment of society.
“I say to the opposition: Go ahead — bring whatever experts you want, ask whatever questions you want, investigate whomever you want — including me,” the prime minister said. “All issues will be examined, without exception. The political, the security, the intelligence, the legal — everything.”
Despite those assurances, polling consistently shows broad public support for a classic state commission of inquiry, whether appointed solely by Amit or jointly with his conservative deputy, Noam Sohlberg — options Netanyahu has firmly ruled out.
The proposal drew internal criticism even within the coalition. Ze’ev Elkin, a minister in the Finance Ministry, was the lone vote against the bill in the ministerial committee. Elkin warned that the clause empowering the Knesset speaker to appoint commissioners in the event of an opposition boycott would effectively turn the panel into a government-appointed body, something already permitted under existing law.
Opposition figures responded with sharp denunciations, accusing the government of trying to avoid accountability for the October 7 failures. Opposition Leader Yair Lapid said the initiative was designed to “bury the truth” and deceive the public.
“Those directly responsible for the disaster will appoint a cover-up commission whose sole purpose is to clear them of guilt. It will not help them. They are guilty,” Lapid said. He went on to call the proposed body “a death certificate for the truth,” warning that political control would allow testimony to be distorted, evidence undermined, and the public misled.
Democrats party chairman Yair Golan echoed that criticism, describing the effort as “a pathetic attempt to engineer a political investigation” and saying it amounted to an admission of guilt.
Netanyahu’s comments about Oslo and the Gaza disengagement also revived scrutiny of his own past record. As finance minister under Ariel Sharon, he voted repeatedly in favor of measures advancing the 2005 withdrawal from Gaza, before resigning days ahead of its implementation in protest. And while he opposed the Oslo Accords before their signing, he did not move to dismantle them during his terms as prime minister, later endorsing and partially implementing further agreements such as the Hebron Protocol and the Wye River Memorandum.
{Matzav.com}
