Likud Ministers Clash With Ofer Vinter Over War Strategy
Senior Likud ministers have intensified their public dispute with Ofer Vinter, chairman of the Am Israel party, following his criticism of the government's conduct of the war in Gaza. Minister Israel Katz accused Vinter of being "out of touch" and presenting "distorted" criticism, asserting that significant progress has been made in Gaza, including the destruction of tunnels and the surrounding of remaining Hamas strongholds, all within the framework of a ceasefire that led to the release of hostages.
Katz further stated that Vinter's critique mirrors that of former officials with "outdated security concepts" who ignore achievements in Iran, Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria to attack the government. He suggested that Israel does not need more of this type of discourse, especially considering future scenarios.
Minister Eli Cohen urged Vinter to withdraw from the political race and instead reach an agreement with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for a role in the next government. Cohen cited Vinter's polling numbers, suggesting he does not attract votes from outside the right-wing bloc and may not pass the electoral threshold, potentially jeopardizing the national camp.
Vinter responded to Katz, acknowledging achievements but stating there has been no decisive victory or voluntary emigration from Gaza. He criticized the government for failing to grant him the necessary authority for the migration administration he was offered and for continuing to allow supplies into Gaza while Hamas remains a threat. Vinter questioned why Hamas has not been eliminated after the October 7th attacks.
The dispute comes after Prime Minister Netanyahu reportedly decided to "go after Vinter's head," with concerns within Likud that Vinter might eventually align with Avigdor Lieberman. The article also touches upon a separate, sharp exchange between Likud and the Otzma Yehudit party regarding reports of a reconciliation talk between Netanyahu and Itamar Ben-Gvir, with both parties trading accusations.
The same event, reported separately by each outlet. Open a few to compare what different newsrooms emphasize — and what they leave out.
Not the same event — other stories that share this one’s people, places, or theme: background, reactions, and follow-ups.