Gideon Levy throws so much chaff in the air that everybody looks the same, and if not following a radical change as Levy suggests then nothing will be different. This is a mistake. Distinctions should be made so that even small improvements could be planned. First, what complaints does Levy have against Barak, that he invented assassinations? Barak used to be in a commando unit while soldier, and assassinated a few terrorists himself (including Munich massacre personnel), but he did not turn this into policy while PM. Example In 1996, Under Peres and before Barak, "the engineer" Ayash was assassinated in Gaza. The two Defense Ministers before Peretz, Ben-Eliezer and Mofaz (both under Sharon) were equal failures as Peretz, using only force, and more force. And since these two are both ministers in the Lebanon war government, and the only high military people there, they also bear responsibility for the policy of war itself. They and Peretz are equal failures. What distinguishes Peretz as a failure is that he was supposed to be different, to rely more on diplomacy. He didn?t. Once the Qassams started flying in Sderot (before the Lebanon war) his answer was force, not talks, even though Israel has caused the crisis by assassinating a Hamas official during a hudna. And in Lebanon we saw more of the same, plus military ignorance and ineptitude. Peretz has to go even if Olmert stays. (Olmert should go too; he is a danger to the State.) Changing a Prime Minister is a major event, causing the fall of the government and perhaps leading to new elections. Changing a DM is simpler. Given that an ignorant and incompetent like Olmert is PM, the country needs somebody really qualified at the Defense Department. Barak will be best; he has military knowledge as well as a strategic vision.
U.S. asks Uzbekistan to join anti-ISIS coalition (Reuters)
from the article: Peretz: no better, no worse