As Israel’s war in Gaza continues to drag on and reaches a critical intersection, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu faces those decisions and is under fire from different directions. The Israeli leader is confronted with a complicated array of challenges, and he will have to decide whether the army will continue to push forward in its war on Hamas against international protest or will make way for a ceasefire deal with Hamas that will see the release of hostages and an end to hostilities. While the public awaits, Netanyahu has been fending off criticism that he is avoiding discussing long-term strategy to protect his own political survival.
On Wednesday, Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant convened a press conference warning Netanyahu, saying he would oppose Israeli military rule in the Gaza Strip, hinting the Israeli premier was heading in that direction. Gallant said his attempts to discuss Israel’s war strategy have failed.
“Since October, I have been raising this issue consistently in the cabinet and have received no response,” he said. “Unfortunately, this issue was not raised for debate, and worse, an alternative was not raised for replacement. Indecision is, in essence, a decision that leads to a dangerous course that promotes the idea of Israeli military and civilian governance in Gaza. This is a negative and dangerous option for… Israel.”
The comments were a direct challenge from within the Netanyahu coalition during wartime, during which Israeli politicians, especially within the government, attempted to portray unity. From within the right-wing government, there were calls to fire Gallant, claiming he was acting against government and Israeli interests. From the opposition, the defense minister received support for telling what they saw as the truth about the situation.
The longer Israel’s war on the Hamas terrorist organization in Gaza continues, the more Netanyahu finds facing disapproval. Critiqued by his partners for not hitting at Hamas hard enough and by some for not settling the Gaza Strip, Netanyahu’s opponents, on the other hand, say his battle for political survival has clouded his judgment. They have accused him of sabotaging a deal to release 132 hostages.
Netanyahu has been in power for 16 years cumulatively, making him Israel’s longest-serving prime minister. Always a divisive figure, his supporters swear by his far-reaching abilities, and his opponents are often suspicious of his motives. His circle of adversaries has grown almost in tandem with his years in power.
Netanyahu has built-in trust issues with the public. But, objectively, the situation is very difficult and I am not sure a different leader would reach different outcomes. I do not blame him for this, but the issue of public trust and morale is very important, and this is why he should go home, not because he failed in managing the war.
“Netanyahu has built-in trust issues with the public,” said Dr. Ariel Picard, a Research Fellow and teacher at Shalom Hartman Institute in Jerusalem. “But, objectively, the situation is very difficult and I am not sure a different leader would reach different outcomes. I do not blame him for this, but the issue of public trust and morale is very important, and this is why he should go home, not because he failed in managing the war. Saying that is populist.”
Israel’s war on Hamas began after the terrorist organization perpetrated the largest single-day attack ever on the country. Approximately 1,200 Israelis were killed on Oct. 7, and thousands of others were injured. Two hundred fifty people were abducted. According to the Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry, the subsequent Israeli offensive has killed almost 35,000 Palestinians and injured over 75,000 Palestinians. In the wake of the attack on Israel, Israelis rallied behind Netanyahu, who vowed to topple Hamas and release all the hostages. Months later, Israel couldn’t be further from its goals. Hamas remains in power in Gaza, and its stubborn position in the hostage deal negotiations has led many Israelis to criticize the government for perhaps not putting enough pressure on the terrorist organization. Most of the criticism is directed at Netanyahu himself.
“There is almost a consensus that Netanyahu is not taking national interests into account, but rather his personal interests, taking a lot of steps that are not in favor of the state or of the public,” Miki Rosenthal, a former Israeli politician from the Labor party, told The Media Line. “This began before the war and continued throughout, including his treatment of the hostage deal. In the best-case scenario, he is not serving his own interests but only the interests of his political base.”
There is almost a consensus that Netanyahu is not taking national interests into account, but rather his personal interests, taking a lot of steps that are not in favor of the state or of the public. This began before the war and continued throughout, including his treatment of the hostage deal. In the best-case scenario, he is not serving his own interests but only the interests of his political base.
Earlier this week, Israel marked its 75th year of independence. It was a particularly somber holiday amid a war which has led to many losses. Other than a short video greeting released on the eve of the celebrations, Netanyahu evaded any public appearances customary for an Israeli premier on that day, breaking decades of tradition.
Netanyahu has been declining in the polls since the outbreak of the war. Many Israelis see him as responsible for Hamas’ surprise offensive. In his many years in power, he allowed for the strengthening of Hamas. While senior military and defense officials publicly took responsibility for their role in the failure to foresee and prevent the attack, Netanyahu has evaded doing so.
“In a normal situation, in a normal country, after such events, a general election would have been announced, but Israel has long departed from normalcy,” said Rosenthal, who was referring to the period before the war in which an attempt by the Netanyahu government to impose a controversial judicial reform engulfed the country in massive demonstrations, public discord and a major rift with some of its allies.
Netanyahu’s unfavorable polls have him clinging to power, even though his coalition still retains a solid majority in parliament. His main rival, former defense minister Benny Gantz, entered the government days after the war began in an attempt to project unity in the face of Israel’s enemies. Gantz has consistently led in the polls, making him a significant threat. Even if Gantz or Gallant, from Netanyahu’s own Likud party, were to resign, the government would still have a majority.
One of Netanyahu’s main arguments against elections has been that they cannot be held while Israel is at war.
When people feel they are under an existential threat, they don’t really want to go to elections. This government exists only because the public is very scared of having an election during a war.
“When people feel they are under an existential threat, they don’t really want to go to elections,” Picard told The Media Line. “This government exists only because the public is very scared of having an election during a war. This is understandable because the public doesn’t want its leadership to be preoccupied with politics and elections. But that is what is happening anyway, so gradually there is an understanding in the public that it is better to have a real election rather than make pretend, be stuck in election politics without a real election.”
The debate over a possible hostage deal, the fate of Gaza, and whether Israel will establish some sort of permanent control over the territory combines deep political issues together with insinuations about Netanyahu’s personal interests. The Israeli premier needs his far-right coalition members to remain in power. They, in return, demand a hardline approach towards Hamas, including very few concessions that will likely be needed for a hostage deal.
Hours before Gallant’s comments, Netanyahu had already said there was no point in talking about who would rule Gaza after Hamas until Hamas was removed from power.
There is no clear solution that Netanyahu is not choosing because of his political interests, and it is not clear that any other politician would act much differently. Any prime minister would be in a very difficult position under these conditions.
“Every politician has political considerations,” said Picard. “Netanyahu has a certain approach; it is not an unreasonable one. There is no clear solution that Netanyahu is not choosing because of his political interests, and it is not clear that any other politician would act much differently. Any prime minister would be in a very difficult position under these conditions.”
“There is a real argument in the public, with big questions facing Israel before even involving politics,” he added.
Netanyahu has been accused of elongating the war to avoid an election that will send him home. As Israeli soldiers continue to fall in battle, this is a harsh accusation.
As long as there is such mistrust between a wide portion of Israeli society and its leadership, Israel will not be able to manage the war properly, let alone win it.
“As long as there is such mistrust between a wide portion of Israeli society and its leadership, Israel will not be able to manage the war properly, let alone win it,” said Rosenthal. “A government which leads people to war, with a large part of the public that believes the reasons they are fighting are private, political considerations, is a government that will lose the war in any case.”
Master of the Israeli political stage, the polls may not necessarily reflect the result of the ballots. Netanyahu’s divisive persona continues to gnaw at the cohesion of Israeli society. Even war couldn’t mask those differences. This also makes it difficult to forecast the outcome of any future election. Writing off Netanyahu would not be wise.
“The social and political divisions in Israel are very complex,” Rosenthal said. “The divisions are not only on how to solve the conflict with the Palestinians, but there are dozens of other subdivisions regarding the future of the Jewish state, identity, and democrats. vs. liberals. War inevitably moves people more towards the right, but this can change. These processes take time.”