Yediot Aharonot maintains that "Netanyahu and Barak\’s problem is not the Government, but rather the defense establishment. If they
really want to attack… they need to convince the heads of the security establishment that the defense benefits outweigh the danger and the damage. Their problem is not Dichter; it is Gantz, Pardo, Kochavi, Eshel, Shaffer and others. With or without Dichter, it’s still two against one hundred."
Ma\’ariv remarks that "The attack in the Sinai last week led to a degree of cooperation between Israel and Egypt. But certain rights groups do not like it." The author emphasizes that "When the smuggling industry along the Egyptian border finances the terrorism industry, it is not only Israel\’s right to stop the infiltrators – it is its obligation."
Yisrael Hayom avers to "Who really pulls the strings in Egypt," and notes that "The Supreme Guide of the Muslim Brotherhood, Dr. Muhammad Badie, describes the month of Ramadan as a month of victories," and that the Brotherhood\’s leadership praises Morsi "on the ousting of the military elite and views this as a victory." The author suggests that "What seems to someone watching from the side to be security coordination or cooperation between Egypt and Israel is liable to turn into a serious military nuisance for Israel."
The Jerusalem Post relates to escalating bread prices, and calls on the government to “heed public anger over the rising costs of bread,” and to consider “removing tariffs on imported products, such as olive oil, in an attempt to reduce domestic olive oil prices.” The editor maintains that the government “should find a better way to support the Israeli consumer than the current price-control system, which has proved inefficient and ineffective, and provides the poor with mostly inedible bread.”
Haaretz asserts that from the moment Justice Minister Yaakov Neeman joined the government, he has “endeavored to undermine the standing of the attorney general and the state prosecution.” The editor finds it difficult to comprehend “how a person who built his career on giving legal opinions could seek to detract from the quality of cabinet resolutions by preventing the examination of their legal aspects,” and adds: “In Neeman\’s case, however, there is an obvious explanation: He views his mission as curtailing the rule of law. This mission must be thwarted.”
[Nahum Barnea, Ben Dror Yemini and Liad Porat wrote today’s articles in Yediot Aharonot, Ma\’ariv and Yisrael Hayom, respectively.]