Jerusalem
–
When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu meets President Donald Trump at the White House on Monday, they will discuss the Middle East that has undergone radical change.
The US president says there is a likely contract to end the war in Gaza. But what’s on offer is politically problematic for Netanyahu. And just as much as the region has changed, so has Netanyahu. The dramatic changes in his approach make it even more difficult to predict what will come next.
For two years, Israeli jets and special forces took on bold missions, once unable to accuse the target, and Netanyahu is scared that the regional capitals from Doha to Tehran and Damascus will rebuild the Middle East after the attacks in Israel on October 7, 2023.
At the UN General Assembly last week, Netanyahu proudly promoted Israeli military operations.
“We smacked Houthis, crushing most of Hamas’ terrorist machines, crippling Hezbollah, taking out most of its leaders and many of its weapons, destroying the armaments of Syrian Assad.
“Israel has repulsed from its darkest day to achieve one of the most spectacular military revivals in history.”
The daily tally of Israel’s war in Gaza reflects another aspect of the same story.
For years, Netanyahu’s approach to war has been characterized by a brief conflict and confinement conflict, particularly in Gaza. For example, the 2012 defense pillar operation lasted only eight days. The current Gaza War marks the two longest two years in Israel’s history.
When he returned to power in 2009, Netanyahu declared that one of his goals was to eliminate Hamas. In fact, despite his rhetoric, the security policy of the longest serving Prime Minister in Israel is widely seen as cautious and relatively restrained, and made it seem that he can’t make a critical move, even if he’s ward’d be a political rival. His long-standing big stories turned into small decisions.
Then came on October 7th.
Two days after the Hamas-led attack killed more than 1,200 Israelis, Netanyahu promised that Israelis “will change the Middle East.” This time he meant that.
Analysts who were once paying attention are working on a new reality. Netanyahu once eschewed long wars and ground operations, recognising the costs and political capital that led to indecisive conclusions and stalemates. Now he pursues them – often against the advice of his own military.
Israeli Defense Force Chief of Staff Major Eyal Zamir has firmly opposed the latest decision to take over Gaza city and questioned the high-risk operation targeting the leadership of Hamas in Qatar. However, Netanyahu ignored his warning.
“From the start of the war, through the latest decisions involving Iran and Qatar, all of these stages have always had people in their rooms who opposed, hesitated, he, or raised a reservation of some other kind,” Netanyahu said at a press conference earlier this month. “It’s completely fine. That’s their role. They have to give their opinion, but in the end, some people decide that it’s a cabinet.”
This transformation raises fundamental questions. As the White House meeting approaches, even more importantly. Has Netanyahu really changed?
Since October 7, Netanyahu “was a completely different person, experienced internal evolution and replaced his risk-averse tendencies with a much more aggressive and adventurous security approach,” said Mazal Maurem, author of the Netanyahu Code biographies.
The breakdown in security on October 7th served as a “wake-up call,” Mualem said.
“He wouldn’t admit it, but (he) got caught up in a complete strategic blindness. The lesson he portrayed was that he had to free himself from the security facility that he had always scared him with warnings about victims in invasions on the ground,” she added. “This was constant along with the official jittegaists in Israel, and for many years he resisted paying the massive prices of the war. October 7th changed him and changed it.”
As Israel’s longest-serving leader, Netanyahu is always known to have been driven, at least in part, by the fear of his government collapsed, elections, polls opposed to him. And now the fear of his ongoing corruption trial.
That anxiety kept him from making any major, drastic changes. Instead, he allowed Israel’s economy to hum, praised the list of growth in countries that wanted part of Israel’s high-tech and arms industries.
Anshel Pfeffer, an economist Israeli correspondent and author of Bibi: The Turbulent Life and Time of Benjamin Netanyahu, says that even if it is effective, the motivational factors have not changed at all.
“Netanyahu is always and still very risky. He is afraid of change and clinging to the status quo,” he said. “He usually avoids both war and diplomatic breakthroughs. Even the Abraham agreement was forced upon him by the Trump administration, and the Gaza War was forced by Hamas.
Pfeffer says Netanyahu is still ruled by fear.
His far-right allies Itamar Ben Gwil and Bezarel Smotrich oppose negotiations with Hamas and seek a permanent occupation of Gaza, and their threat to overthrow the government if the war cuts down Netanyahu’s strategic decision-making early. Trump’s proposal is said to recognize his desire for a Palestinian state.
Still, acknowledging the changes in optics, Pfeffer said Netanyahu “is at the moment in time that he is in a fear of judgment on history and will not be remembered as a champion of Churchill and Israel. He is desperate for the epic achievement of rewriting history.
“But the moment hasn’t come.”
Pfeffer relaxes Netanyahu by saying, “a hopeless gambler and putting a tip in a different place every time, hoping to solidify his place in history.” He concludes that Netanyahu is a complex creature. “Maybe every theory holds the truth. He hates risk, fears a ceasefire, no less than a very careful man who has turned into a war, a hostage of his coalition, and a hopeless gambler.”
Whether it’s a genuine strategic evolution or a survival instinct, Netanyahu’s transformation from a careful manager to a local gambler remains incomplete.
Military operations on multiple fronts may have restored some of Israel’s deterrence, but they have yet to give them a decisive victory that they hope to rehabilitate his legacy or secure his political future.
Israel has been heavily eroding its public support for the war, which was initially overwhelmed. Israel’s international legitimacy is similarly declining amid the wave of sanctions threats and international perceptions of the Palestinian state.
The future of Netanyahu’s new, bold playbook remains unknown ahead of his meeting with Trump at the White House. So far, the Trump administration has done little to curb Israel’s military efforts and has supported Netanyahu’s continued Gaza War.
However, support is keen and sometimes surprisingly limited. In June, Trump supported Israel’s Iranian strike during the 12-day attack, and after Israel announced the end of hostilities, he had already forced the fighters to turn back towards the attack. The president’s mercury nature means he can oppose Israel’s next move shortly after he has supported the last one.
Trump’s recent cheerful remarks about the impending contract to end the battle may indicate that Netanyahu can soon be forced to embrace the new status quo – halting the prime minister’s bid to build legacy through the prime minister’s military invasion, and instead forces him to stand up to political calculations.
