Martin Raffel
Since that awful Oct. 7 day of grotesque atrocities perpetrated by Hamas, we have stood shoulder to shoulder with our Israeli brothers and sisters in their shock, their grief and their resolve to eradicate the evil lurking in hundreds of miles of Gaza’s tunnels.
We have prayed for the hostages. We have endorsed unequivocally Israel’s war of self-defense and explained that the gut-wrenching scenes of death and destruction in Gaza are primarily the product of Hamas’ callous use of its own civilians as human shields. And we have thanked President Biden, who, in the face of criticism at home and abroad for his resistance to calls for a cease-fire, has demonstrated unwavering support of Israel.
I believe the time is ripe to address the elephant in the room, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
After forming the most right-wing government in Israel’s history — populated with several extremist ministers in important roles, notably Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir — Netanyahu tore Israel’s society to shreds before 10/7 over a judicial reform plan that looked more like an anti-democratic coup than reform. Israeli security and intelligence officials warned that Israel’s enemies were paying attention and might try to take advantage of the country’s internal strife.
Others warned that Netanyahu’s longstanding policy of strengthening Hamas by allowing it to receive massive funding from Qatar, while at the same time undercutting the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, was both politically counterproductive and downright dangerous. We may never know whether 10/7 was the realization of those warnings, an attempt to sidetrack Israeli-Saudi normalization or a combination of factors.
What we do know is that the Netanyahu government and the IDF were woefully unprepared for the surprise attack and excruciatingly slow to respond. Moreover, the government hardly functioned in the weeks after the attack. Volunteers, mostly drawn from the ranks of protesters against the judicial coup, have provided much-needed services to traumatized evacuees from southern Israeli communities and IDF reservists. Reportedly, Israelis are seething with rage and want a reckoning for these failures. But they also have decided that the reckoning must come only after the war.
The IDF has performed with great valor. Hundreds of its soldiers have been killed and thousands wounded in almost impossible urban warfare conditions. We are told that Israel has entered stage three of the battle with low intensity and more targeted operations, which could drag on for many months, if not years. Understandably many Israelis remain emotionally frozen in the trauma of 10/7 as though time has stood still.
Yet, decision-makers outside Israel from many countries, especially the United States, can’t afford to be frozen. They have been thinking and talking about the “day after”— presumably, the day after Hamas no longer poses a threat. The consensus of those decision-makers is that Gaza’s reconstruction and future governance, assuming it will begin in the northern part of the Gaza Strip where the danger from Hamas has essentially been eliminated, must be led by a reformed, less corrupt, and more effective Palestinian Authority.
The U.S., the Arab states, including Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states, and the international community would provide much-needed financial support. Gaza reconstruction will cost billions of dollars. There is a caveat. The Biden administration and Arab states insist that this promising post-war scenario, which includes the prospect of further normalization with Israel, can only be achieved in the framework of at least incremental steps toward a demilitarized Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza.
Netanyahu discounts a post-war role for the PA and, for many years, has rejected the possibility of Palestinian statehood. In fact, that’s the centerpiece of his political/security platform and his government’s coalition agreement. For most Israelis, even before 10/7, the idea of Palestinian statehood seemed beyond the pale. Afterward, even more so. I totally understand Israelis’ frustration and bitterness. Looking at the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, most Israelis legitimately believe that while they were prepared for a historic compromise, Palestinian leaders were not.
That said, there is an objective reality that underpins the logic of the position articulated by Biden and our Arab allies. Between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea live roughly equal numbers of Jews and Palestinians who aspire to national self-determination. We Jews have our state. The Palestinians — I would argue in large measure due to the failure of their own leadership — don’t have theirs.
Israelis can look backward and conclude, based on past Palestinian rejectionism, that there is no hope for a resolution of the conflict. Or they can look forward and perhaps conclude that the post-war approach proposed by Biden and the Arab states may finally hold potential for a more secure and peaceful future.
A historical precedent might be instructive. The 1973 Yom Kippur War also caused deep trauma to Israeli society. Only four years later, Anwar Sadat’s visit to Jerusalem made Israelis believers in the possibility of peace with Egypt. Prime Minister Menachem Begin took advantage of this opening to subsequently reach an agreement with Egypt, which has stood the test of time over decades.
But, unlike Menachem Begin, I don’t see Netanyahu as the kind of leader capable of seizing an opportunity that might emerge from the 10/7 trauma. Rather Israel needs a centrist government that is open to exploring a different way forward in a post-Hamas Gaza.
If Netanyahu does not resign sooner rather than later, my hope is that hundreds of thousands of Israeli citizens will take to the streets, once again, this time to demand new elections. Then, the Israeli people would have the chance to choose either the path laid out by Biden and the Arab states, or Bibi’s.
Maybe large demonstrations won’t be necessary. War cabinet minister and former IDF Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot, whose son was killed in the war, has called for elections in the coming months to renew public trust in the government. His voice should carry significant political weight.
Martin J. Raffel, until his retirement in 2014, served as the lead Israel and international affairs professional at the Jewish Council for Public Affairs.