• Published 00:00 22.02.07
  • Latest update 00:00 22.02.07

The Winograd test

The basic premise of the Winograd Committee rests on faulty ground in trying to bypass the legal system and free the government from the fear of the judiciary.

By Ari Shavit

The Winograd Committee is a panel under suspicion. It was founded on flawed ethics: Its interrogators have been appointed by those they are interrogating. The basic premise of the committee rests on faulty ground in trying to bypass the legal system and free the government from the fear of the judiciary.

The Winograd Committee was established in a scandalous manner. Its members were not chosen for their qualifications, but for their perceived convenience for the establishment. Eliyahu Winograd, Ruth Gavison, Yehezkel Dror, Menachem Einan and Haim Nadal were handpicked by a shrewd prime minister, who wanted them to exonerate him from the responsibility for Israel's failure in a war he both started and managed.

There is no doubt about it: If an inquiry committee were formed to investigate the Winograd Committee, it would find that it was born in sin. It would find that it completely lacks moral authority. The fact that the committee chose to conduct all its debates behind closed doors has eroded its credibility even further.

The committee members took upon themselves a horrifying responsibility when they accepted this problematic mission. They neutralized the protest movements and ensured the continued existence of a blundering government for another crucial year. By closing the committee's doors to the public they prevented Israeli society from seeing its leaders' blunders and inexplicably granted them an alibi.

Apparently the Winograd Committee's already problematic structure was aggravated as a result of Daniel Friedmann's appointment as justice minister. By appointing Friedmann, Olmert's government adopted Professor Gavison's judiciary agenda. Gavison is the brightest and most critical among the Winograd Committee's members.

However, as of last week, Gavison and Olmert have been acting like members of the same party. Gavison is not only Olmert's favorite candidate for the Supreme Court, she is his intellectual guru. When she makes a decision in Olmert's case within the Winograd Committee's framework, Gavison won't be able to ignore the fact that she is sealing the fate of her partner in the struggle for the Supreme Court's image.

The significance of these accumulated facts is grave. At the present critical moment, when Israel needs a new normative beginning, we have a national inquiry being conducted by a panel whose own value system is rickety.

The committee's members are good, decent Israelis. Their Zionist patriotism is unquestionable. However, the manipulative use to which the current cynical government has put them, alongside their beliefs and values, may prove to be their stumbling block. Unless Winograd and his friends are very, very careful, their work will not provide an answer to the Israeli crisis - it may actually worsen it.

This is how the horror scenario could unfold: The Winograd Committee decides to adopt Dan Halutz's philosophy and refrain from chopping heads. Since the committee is already suspected of bias, the public is outraged. However, since the committee's dubious acquittal enables Olmert and Peretz to remain in office, Israel does not reach a catharsis and fails to open a new chapter in its history.

Professors Gavison and Dror's complicated texts are stored in the Prime Minister's Office in Givat Ram. The logistic and strategic comments of generals Einan and Nadal are recorded in the General Staff's elegant offices in the Kirya (Military Headquarters). Judge Winograd's educational statements get one day's glory on the front page. But the last chance to repair Israel is missed. The last chance to put Israel on a new course goes down the drain.

Personal conclusions are not the be all and end all. They are a necessary condition, not a sufficient one. Removing Olmert and Peretz from the government will not cure the ills of Israeli society, the Israeli army and the Israeli state. But without ousting Olmert and Peretz from the government there is no chance of bringing about the change in values Israel needs so much. Without ousting them there is no chance of realizing the desperately needed revolution in government. Without ousting them there is no chance of rehabilitating the IDF and renewing its deterrence power.

Therefore, if the members of the Winograd Committee are lenient with those who appointed them, they will not be exonerated. The public will rise up against them and history will denounce them. Whatever its opinion on the failures of the last war, the panel will be responsible for Israel's failures in the next war.

  • Print Page
  • Send to a friend
  • Share
  • Text Size +|-
 
 
TalkBacks

Why Facebook Connect?

Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.

Add a comment

Add your reply

  • 11. 0 0
    Shavit the Thunderer
    • Paul Usiskin
    • 22.02.07
    • 21:46

    Shavit thunders: The Winograd Committee is flawed from the outset and will serve only he who appointed it - Olmert. Olmert is flawed. He must go. The nation needs a new horizon. Israel needs a new leader. QED? Except who exactly is the new leader with the new horizon? Bibi? Gaydamek? Anyone around who is Clean of Hand and Pure of Heart? The thunder rolls on, but answer came there none.

  • 10. 0 0
    GO HAIFA
    • Dror
    • 22.02.07
    • 21:11

    apparently people in Haifa can spell better than the snobs of Ra'anananana neh neh neh neh neh neh.

  • 9. 0 0
    Good one Michael
    • Dror
    • 22.02.07
    • 21:08

    Unsecure shlomo?? where did you go to school?? their there shlomo don't be to humiliated, you were caught by your own patronizing attempt to seem cool and in charge. I know your kind, it is nearly over, the masses will rebel, Gaydamak is our man.

  • 8. 0 0
    Avi, All True, But Your Buddy Barak Also Has Responsibility
    • Tod Zuckerman
    • 22.02.07
    • 19:36

    Barak's disastrous tenure as PM began the deterent losing process - he ordered the sickening midnight withdrawal and accompanying betrayal of Israel's Lebanese allies - this fueled not just Hezbollah, but also the Palestinian terrorists. Barak compounded this strategic blunder by doing nothing when three IDF soldiers were kidnapped and killed . Has Barak even learned anything ? No - instead, he told reporters that,after Hezbollah's cross border attack, Israel's response should have been limited to two days of artillery shelling. Unbelievable. Finally, on an unrelated point, Avi seems to forget about Barak's pimping for international crook, Marc Rich.

  • 7. 0 0
    to shlomo
    • Michael
    • 22.02.07
    • 18:26

    it's "insecure", not "unsecure" - and what was your point?

  • 6. 0 0
    To Dror - only unsecure people yell & scream
    • Shlomo
    • 22.02.07
    • 14:10

    Dror - only unsecure people who have no convincing arguments turn to yelling and screaming (or they might have taken some stimulant..) Before you scream, learn how to spell: "their might be a violent revolution" ..."there might..

  • 5. 0 0
    Shaul Mofaz is directly responsible for IDF lack of preparedness
    • ARA
    • 22.02.07
    • 13:51

    Olmert and Peretz don't bear all the responsibility for the outcome of Lebanon War II. Our army's lack of 100% preparedness was directly caused by Shaul Mofaz, in his role as Minister of Defense in Ariel Sharon's government.

  • 4. 0 0
    Olmert's ulterior motive in Gabison and Freedman appt.
    • ARA
    • 22.02.07
    • 13:40

    Yishar coah for Ari Shavit's straight talking in "The Winograd Test." Especially for that insight regarding the appointment of Ruth Gabison, for whom an Olmert-protection verdict will guarantee an appointment to the Supreme Court, via the efforts of her friend, the new (cleverly Olmert-appointed) minister of justice (whatever that position is called...), Freedman. It appears to me that another party guilty of last summer's fiasco is Ariel Sharon, who apppointed unqualified Dan Halutz. Corrupt officials like Sharon (whom I used to support) and Olmert, who make decisions based on "keep the law off me" considerations are horrendous. Another type of lousy functionary is the columnists who are good buddies with the people they report on. One example of this type is at least one Maariv columnist who actually believes the words he hears in conversation with Abu Mazen. What can we do to get rid of Olmert and Peretz???

  • 3. 0 0
    I WILL YELL AND SCREAM!!
    • DROR
    • 22.02.07
    • 11:44

    In english and hebrew until I lose my voice. I hope thousands and hundreds of thousands join me. I believe spontaneous protests will erupt all around the country and their might be a violent revolution if olmert and peretz do not leave. We cannot have these bastards running the country in time of war once again. The people do not trust them and certainly do not like them. I am in India until april, when I come back there will be a fight, I am not running away to america, I will fight this false government until it collapses. Count on it.

  • 2. 0 0
    Headline headache
    • Shlomo
    • 22.02.07
    • 11:26

    The Online link to Ari Shavit's article titled "Lebanon war probe must lead to PM, Peretz ouster" leads to an article titled: "The Winograd test" Is this the same artcile? If so, Haaretz online screwed up by using two different headlines for the same article. If not the same, you screwed up by using the wrong link

  • 1. 0 0
    EVEN WITH A TANKER LOAD OF WHITEWASH
    • paul harris
    • 22.02.07
    • 11:25

    OLMERT PERETZ AND LIVNI HAVE TO GO !!