Ministers to vote on bill to streamline Security Cabinet's work
MK Ofer Shelah's bill proposes Cabinet members would dedicate half a day per week to study materials for Cabinet discussions, as well as to appoint an advisor for Cabinet members; while Cabinet members openly support such legislation, Netanyahu opposes the proposal.
The proposal was formulated in light of the state comptroller's findings on the Cabinet's decision-making process during the 2006 Second Lebanon War, the 2010 Mavi Marmara raid, and the 2014 Operation Protective Edge.
The new legislation determines Security Cabinet members would be required to dedicate half a day per week to study the materials for upcoming discussions. The bill also proposes to appoint a special advisor to Cabinet members as well as to increase Knesset supervision of the government's work.
In addition, the prime minister will be required to appoint a new national security advisor no more than four months after the end of the previous advisor's term.
MK Ofer Shelah (Yesh Adit), who proposed the legislation, said he was concerned by the diminishing number of security officials advising the prime minister.
He gave as an example Article 6 of Basic Law: The Government, which determines the foreign minister must be one of the Security Cabinet's regular members. At present, however, Israel has no foreign minister, and the ministry's director-general does not attend Cabinet discussions. As a result, the Foreign Ministry has no representative at Cabinet discussions to raise diplomatic issues. Furthermore, the ministry's authorities have been split between five different ministries that do not always coordinate their efforts, which also undermines diplomatic work.
Amidror committee examines cabinet work
A year ago, former national security advisor Yaakov Amidror was tasked with leading a committee to examine the Security Cabinet's work. Its conclusions, submitted half a year ago, have yet to be implemented.
Shelah claims the fact the Security Cabinet's authorities and responsibilities are not enshrined in legislation leads to uncertainty regarding what information the prime minister is required to provide the Cabinet with, which issues require the Security Cabinet's approval, and when it must be convened.
These issues came up in the state comptroller's report on Operation Protective Edge, which emphasized the need to clearly define the Security Cabinet's authorities and responsibilities.
"There is no policy, no coordination, no definition—the Security Cabinet does not function as the commander-in-chief," Shelah said.
He pointed to several key positions that are currently vacant, including the national security advisor, a post that has been officially filled since its former occupant, Yossi Cohen, was appointed the director of the Mossad in December 2015. The acting national security advisor, Yaakov Nagel, has recently left and was replaced by yet another temporary position holder, Eitan Ben-David.
Furthermore, Shelah says the intelligence minister does not have any supervision or control powers over Israel's different intelligence agencies. Both previous intelligence minister Yuval Steinitz and the current position holder Yisrael Katz have publicly stated such authorities are needed.
"The prime minister has been delaying addressing these failings for three years. This has led to bad decisions and to the spilling of blood during Operation Protective Edge," Shelah accused. "It took Netanyahu almost two years to establish the Amidror committee, and even that was only for the media after the release of the first draft of the state comptroller report. The committee's work lasted six months. It took another six months for Netanyahu to give a general and meaningless order to implement its conclusions. Three years after we have been exposed to the problematic way in which Netanyahu manages the most important of state affairs, nothing has changed for the better in the Cabinet's work."
Shelah says even though Security Cabinet members support his bill and have openly said so, "the coalition voted against it at the prime minister's command. The conclusion is inevitable: Netanyahu simply does not want to fix the decision-making process."
