Israeli leader censured on Lebanon war

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert resisted mounting calls for his resignation Monday after a government-appointed panel concluded that he was responsible for a “serious failure” of judgment that sent the army unprepared into last summer’s inconclusive war in Lebanon.

A long-awaited interim report on the government’s conduct of the war said Olmert had rushed into it “without a second thought” and with no detailed plan or realistic goals. It was equally scathing toward Defense Minister Amir Peretz, saying his inexperience “impaired Israel’s ability” in the conflict.

The unexpectedly harsh censure stopped short of calling for either man to step down. But it cast doubt on the longevity of their 13-month-old coalition government.

“It would not be correct to resign, and I have no intention of resigning,” a weary-looking Olmert said later in a terse recorded statement televised nationwide. He said he would “act to correct all that needs fixing, thoroughly and fast,” and would convene a special Cabinet session Wednesday.

Olmert and Peretz have been deeply unpopular since the war, which was a psychological defeat for Israelis. It erupted July 12 after Hezbollah guerrillas killed eight Israeli soldiers and captured two others in a cross-border raid.

In 34 days of fighting, the army failed for the first time in its history to vanquish an Arab foe. It was unable to retrieve the captured soldiers, destroy Hezbollah or prevent the group from firing thousands of rockets into Israel. Israel’s bombardment of civilian targets in retaliation was strongly condemned by the international community.

Olmert’s government has clung to its majority in parliament since the war with a bunker-like mentality. Members fear making any risky move that might precipitate calls from legislators for new elections. Polls say a vote now would be won by former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s conservative Likud Party.

Calls for Olmert’s and Peretz’s resignations rose Monday from inside the ruling alliance, echoing a public outcry. Today, Eitan Cabel of Peretz’s Labor Party, a minister without portfolio, said he was quitting.

A protest movement -- led by a former general, military reservists who fought in Lebanon and parents of soldiers killed in the war -- is organizing a rally around the slogan “You have failed; go home.” It is to take place Thursday in Tel Aviv.

A few dozen demonstrators gathered outside Olmert’s residence in Jerusalem on Monday, urging him to step down. Among them was Motti Ashkenazi, whose solitary protest grew into the movement that brought down the government of Golda Meir after the costly Israeli victory in the 1973 Arab-Israeli war.

“What you see here is only the beginning,” Ashkenazi said Monday night.

Ophir Pines-Paz, a member of parliament from the Labor Party, said the protest movement would grow if Olmert and Peretz clung to office. “This government does not have a single drop of public faith,” he said.

Yuval Steinitz, a Likud lawmaker, predicted that the ruling coalition would break apart, leading to a parliamentary vote to oust the government.

The newspaper Haaretz quoted an unnamed official of the prime minister’s Kadima party as saying that 15 of its 29 members of parliament favored ousting Olmert, but not before the committee delivered its full report on the war this summer.

Under that scenario, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, who makes no secret of her leadership aspirations, would be his most likely replacement from within the party.

The 171-page interim report caps a six-month inquiry of the government’s decision to go to war. The five-member committee, appointed by Olmert and led by retired Judge Eliyahu Winograd, said Olmert was primarily responsible for the decision. The report also singles out Peretz and the then-army chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz, who resigned in January.

“If any one of them had acted better ... the outcome of the campaign would have been different and better,” Winograd said in a televised reading of the report’s conclusions.

The prime minister, he said, “made up his mind hastily, despite the fact that no detailed military plan was submitted to him and without asking for one. His decision was made without close study of the complex features of the Lebanon front and of the military, political and diplomatic options available to Israel.”

Olmert’s declared aims in going to war, to free the two soldiers and crush Hezbollah, were “overly ambitious and impossible to achieve” and were not adjusted after that became clear, the judge said.

“All these add up to a serious failure in exercising judgment, responsibility and prudence,” Winograd said.

The report faults Olmert and Peretz, a former union leader, for failing to compensate for their lack of security experience by consulting with experts outside the armed forces. It says Halutz acted impulsively, misrepresented the army’s readiness to his superiors and suppressed dissenting opinions.

Peretz was taken to task for failing to determine the army’s readiness, to seek or examine operational plans, or to demand discussion of strategic options.

The Cabinet relied too heavily on the army’s recommendations, failed to press for alternative courses of action and “voted for a vague decision without understanding its nature and implications,” the report says.

The conflict claimed the lives of 158 Israelis -- 119 soldiers and 39 civilians -- according to Israeli officials. More than 1,000 Lebanese, mostly civilians, are believed to have died in the fighting before a United Nations-brokered cease-fire took hold.

Olmert has said the war improved Israel’s security by banishing Hezbollah from its frontier strongholds and by boosting a U.N. peacekeeping force in southern Lebanon.

Monday’s interim report deals with the period leading up to the conflict and its early days. The full report will deal with the rest of the war.

The committee urged the government to implement several reforms to avoid another ill-considered rush to war. It called for more orderly decision-making procedures on urgent security matters and the creation of a crisis-management center in the prime minister’s office.

The panel has no authority to order removal of officials, nor did it recommend any ousters. A footnote of the report laments that Israel’s political culture tends to demand removal of officials who err rather than allow them to learn from mistakes and govern more wisely.

Olmert’s supporters seized on that language to defend his insistence on staying.

“Either we stop everything, go to elections and show the whole world that we are cracking under a crisis, or stand up with due responsibility and dedicate ourselves to mending that which needs to be fixed,” Vice Premier Shimon Peres told Israel Radio.

Peretz also declined to step down immediately. He has said he wants to be moved to a different Cabinet post. The report is likely to hurt him this month as he seeks reelection as head of the left-leaning Labor Party, and defeat would force him from the government, analysts said.

Olmert’s strategists launched a counteroffensive to spread blame for the war. They began distributing leaflets quoting what many Israeli politicians and journalists, now critical of Olmert, said in support of the war while it was being fought.

“It’s easy to speak in hindsight,” Lior Horev, an advisor to Olmert, told Israel Radio, noting that parliament overwhelmingly approved of going to war. “When these decisions took place, there was sweeping support. The failure is widespread.”

Even so, 69% of the people polled by Israel Radio after the report was made public said Olmert should resign.

Some analysts said the dump-Olmert movement might have trouble converting that sentiment into a change of government because no leader stands out as an overwhelmingly popular alternative.

“The findings of the report reflect the gut feeling of the Israeli public and the prevalent mood since last summer,” said Shlomo Avineri, a Hebrew University political scientist. “The fact that the public wants these leaders to go home is understandable. It reflects authentic pain. But who will come in their place?”

boudreaux@latimes.com

*

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX)

The 2006 Israeli-Hezbollah war

The conflict begins

Hezbollah militants from southern Lebanon kill eight Israeli soldiers and capture two others in a cross-border raid July 12.

Israel responds with airstrikes on Beirut’s airport, sending troops deep into southern Lebanon for the first time since withdrawing from that country in 2000.

Hezbollah militants begin a series of deadly rocket strikes into Israel that will continue for the duration of the conflict, striking as far south as Haifa, Israel’s third-largest city.

Israel blockades Lebanese ports and broadens its bombing of targets in Beirut and southern Lebanon. The war becomes more deadly.

As August begins, Israeli troops cross the Litani River, about 12 miles north of the Israeli-Lebanese border, and conduct raids in the Bekaa Valley, about 60 miles northeast.

Intense Hezbollah rocket barrages continue to strike northern Israel.

The United Nations Security Council approves a cease-fire resolution Aug. 11, and it takes effect three days later.

Israel lifts its sea and air blockades in early September. Full withdrawal is completed in October.

The toll

Israel reports 39 civilian deaths and 119 military deaths. Hezbollah says it lost about 250 militants. The Lebanese government reports 1,191 civilian deaths.

Sources: Times reports, U.S. State Department, Israeli Foreign Ministry