Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks at a press conference in Berlin on March 16, 2023. (Tobias Schwarz/AFP)
Prof. Sam Lehman-Wilzig – Netanyahu a Tragic Figure? Hardly!
In survey after survey, Israelis are voicing their opinion that PM Netanyahu is at least partly to blame for Israel’s Gaza mess and should resign – or at least call for new elections. Given his record-breaking, lengthy tenure, not to mention previous stints as prime minister (not very successful at first) and then finance minister (highly successful) – a question arises: is he a tragic figure, given his imminent inglorious demise?
The general definition of a tragic figure/hero is someone with a noble or virtuous character that ultimately meets a downfall, suffering, or defeat – usually because of extrinsic circumstances beyond their control, or something they unwittingly do (or don’t do), causing great harm to themselves and/or society. Thus, there are two central elements regarding such a tragic person: first, exemplary morality or character; second, action or policy that inadvertently undercuts the individual’s social or political position. Regarding Bibi, let’s take each in turn.
Regarding Netanyahu’s character, it is best to hear out those who knew him best, especially if they don’t have a personal or ideological axe to grind. Here are four such high-level Israeli politicians who worked with him as closely as possible.
When Netanyahu conquered the Likud Central Committee on the way to his first tenure as prime minister in the early 1990s, Defense Minister Moshe Arens – a Likud party pillar – told Bibi that “you win [in the Likud’s internal elections] but the country loses.” Lt. Gen. Amnon Lipkin-Shahak, who served as the IDF Chief of Staff during Netanyahu’s first term in office, opined later on that “Bibi is dangerous for Israel, internally and externally.” Then in 2000, after watching Netanyahu in his first term as prime minister, former PM Yitzhak Shamir (another Likud pillar from the get-go), called Bibi an “angel of destruction” (mal’akh khabala). And to round out the “compliments,” in the early 2000s PM Ariel Sharon noted that Netanyahu “gets panic-stricken and loses his composure” – here too, after watching Bibi’s behavior when he served as prime minister in the 1990s.
If all this is an indication of Netanyahu’s public actions, his private life is hardly any better. Married three times, at least once publicly admitting to an adulterous affair, he can hardly be considered a paragon of moral rectitude. Moreover, his ethical behavior is also highly problematic as evidenced by the revelations of his demanding and receiving 700,00 shekels ($200,000) worth of champagne and cigars from “friends,” at least one of whom allegedly needed a favor from him (for which he is now on trial). The value of the gifts is not in dispute – only the question of legal culpability, if any. Add to this Bibi’s constant demands that the public purse pay for “renovations” at his Caesarea villa (the latest: fixing the tiles in his swimming pool!), junkets abroad, and the public purse having to pay for security guards for his son living in Miami (where Bibi sent him) – one can categorically assert that an exemplar of virtue he certainly is not.
What about the other half of tragedy i.e., actions that unwittingly lead to disaster? Here too the picture is quite clear. PM Netanyahu’s calling card has always been “Mr. Security.” That’s hard to maintain after the Oct. 7 massacre. There are those who would like to place the blame for this disaster on Israel’s army along with the country’s intelligence agencies, and there is no doubt that on a tactical level they messed up big time (the heads of the IDF and Shabak admitted responsibility immediately after; the chief of Intelligence recently resigned). However, from a strategic standpoint, PM Netanyahu bears the brunt of blame.
First (but not foremost), because the individual leader at the top of any hierarchy is by definition responsible for what happens with, and to, the organization. Indeed, in the mid 2000s, after the Second Lebanon War, the leader of the Opposition in the Knesset – Benjamin Netanyahu – had this to say about PM Olmert to the Winograd Commission of Inquiry investigating the handling of that war: “The responsibility of the ship’s captain is the prime minister – not to be a passive factor but rather an active factor who determines policy….” Then a year later, after the Commission’s report was published, Netanyahu offered the following in the Knesset: “When the failure is so broad, what is necessary is changing the prime minister who failed.”
The second and related point is that the Hamas attack on Oct. 7 was a direct outgrowth of Prime Minister Netanyahu’s policy over the previous decade. In order to ensure that the two-state solution remained unviable, he consciously and consistently enabled Hamas to strengthen itself in Gaza as a counterweight to the weakened Palestinian Administration in the West Bank. The “conception” (in Israel it’s called: ha’konseptziah) was that Hamas would always be deterred from directly attacking Israel. Here and there a few missiles shot into Israel? For Bibi, a minor cost to ensure eternal, Israeli security control over the territory of Greater Israel. This gigantic strategic blunder (blind to the reality of what Hamas was willing to do with its renewed strength) is the basis of Israeli public opinion today that wants Bibi out of office at all costs.
And this isn’t the only serious blow to his reputation as “Mr. Security”. Encouraging then-President Trump to abrogate the treaty with Iran regarding its nuclear bomb development was another big mistake, as it allowed Iran to (currently) reach enough uranium-grade material to build several such bombs the minute it decides to do so. Add to that the ongoing mutual slaughter (organized gang warfare etc.) within Israel’s Arab sector, and Mr. Insecurity would be a far more appropriate appellation for Bibi.
The bottom line: given his lack of admirable character and willful, mistaken policy – PM Netanyahu cannot be considered a tragic figure by any means. But a tragedy there surely is: the Israel public’s blindness over the past three decades to their leader’s profound personal flaws and disastrous policymaking. The country has finally woken up – very late, but still better than never.
