A long day of silence had passed from the moment US President Donald Trump revealed his "deal of the century" Jan. 28 until Chairman of the Blue and White party Benny Gantz responded to it by declaring that it reflects the basic principles of his party. Gantz called the plan a “historic opportunity” to reshape the boundaries of the State of Israel for generations to come. He then went on to explain that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will be unable to implement the plan because of the indictment looming over him. That is why it will be up to Blue and White to implement it. Gantz’s remarks reflect the views of the senior Blue and White party leadership. They think that the plan “meets all of our security concerns and creates an opportunity for a different approach to the conflict,” as No. 2 party member Yair Lapid put it.
The problem facing the Blue and White party is that the deal of the century is identified more with Netanyahu than it is even with Trump. One month before the third round of the March 2 election against Netanyahu, it is incumbent upon them to find a way to embrace the Trump plan and Trump himself, while at the same time removing Netanyahu from the equation. It is not at all sure that this is possible. What can be said with the utmost confidence is that after three years of headlines and hot air, the elusive deal of the century, which once looked like it would never be reached, came as a big surprise. It is a formative event in Israel’s political debate, changing agendas from top to bottom. It officially announces that the era of Oslo — the years in which debate centered on support or opposition to a two-state solution — is now over.