Benjamin Netanyahu might fancy himself a modern-day Churchill, invoking the legacy of the wartime leader who defied the Nazis with every media appearance. But the contrast with reality couldn't be more pronounced. While Netanyahu presents himself as Israel’s indispensable protector amid the Middle Eastern chaos, his actions have consistently eroded the nation’s security rather than fortifying it.
It’s highly probable that history will judge Netanyahu as Israel’s worst prime minister. His recent obsession with achieving a so-called "total victory" over Hamas seems less about genuine strategic success and more about securing a prominent place in the annals of Jewish history. Even if he achieves this “total” victory, it will not erase the verdict. The shadow of October 7 and the pervasive corruption scandals will ensure that his legacy remains tainted.
Unlike Churchill, who demonstrated courage and strategic insight in uniting his country against the Nazi threat, Netanyahu has failed to address the security challenges facing Israel. Despite repeated warnings from defense officials, he has not only misjudged the imminent dangers but also deepened internal divisions through manipulative tactics concerning the war and the plight of Israeli hostages in Gaza.
Since Netanyahu returned to power, he has miscalculated the Israeli public. By simultaneously assaulting liberal Israelis on multiple fronts – from seeking to diminish democracy to augmenting ultra-Orthodox military dodging, indulging political corruption, ignoring security threats, and tolerating political violence – this government left large numbers of Israelis feeling disenfranchised and desperate even before the war. Since the start of the war, Netanyahu's juggling act between the demands of his far-right coalition, Gallant, and the Biden administration has only heightened that feeling of despair among many Israelis. The hostages are not home, the war rages on with no political plan and Israel's displaced remain far from any reality of rebuilding their homes and lives.
A Churchill is able to make decisions and act decisively when confronted with dramatic challenges. Netanyahu, by contrast, has spent years excelling in hesitation and procrastination – some would call it cowardice – which he has skillfully managed to present to his supporters as judiciousness and wisdom. Netanyahu repeatedly delayed the ground invasion of Gaza and vetoed the defense minister's (who he now seeks to remove) October 12 proposal to launch a massive preemptive strike on Hezbollah. He acted similarly in previous conflicts with Hamas. No world leader did more to bring international attention to the threat of a nuclear Islamic Republic. He solemnly vowed that the Jewish state would never allow a regime that promotes Holocaust denial and is committed to Israel's destruction to acquire nuclear weapons. And yet, throughout his tenure as prime minister, he has repeatedly deferred action on the Ayatollahs. Today, our deterrence against the regime has greatly weakened, as demonstrated by their bold missile attacks, and their nuclear program now seems on the verge of completion. He hesitated, delayed, and delayed again. "Irresolution" could well be Netanyahu's middle name.
Churchill, throughout his long career, was no stranger to controversy. He made decisions – like the Gallipoli campaign in World War I and his response to the 1926 general strike – that drew fierce opposition. Yet, despite these missteps, he remained a figure of admiration among the British public, and in 1940, he unified his nation around a grim but noble cause. Netanyahu, by contrast, has spent his career perfecting a different art – incitement and division. He has incited against liberals, against Yitzhak Rabin, against secular Israelis, and the left ("They have forgotten what it is to be Jews"). He even exploited tensions between Mizrahim and Ashkenazim. His modus operandi has been consistent: incite and divide, incite and divide. Churchill was able to effectively mobilize his people and muster external support for Britain in its grimmest hour. He succeeded in consolidating the Anglo-American alliance. Netanyahu, by contrast, has managed to subvert the special relationship between the Jewish state and the leader of the Free World.
Former Likud prime minister Yitzhak Shamir once labeled Netanyahu an "angel of sabotage," a title that seems increasingly apt. Today, Netanyahu and his allies are busy inciting against Israel's defense establishment – the heads of the IDF, Mossad, and Shin Bet – as well as the families of hostages in Gaza. Just a year ago, he was busy inciting against the judiciary and law enforcement, all in pursuit of his personal goals: staying in power and staying out of jail.
It’s often said that journalism serves as the first draft of history, with more thorough analysis to follow. If the current reports hold any truth, Netanyahu will go down in history as the prime minister who weakened Israel while empowering its enemies. According to what has already been revealed, he funneled money to Hamas through Qatar, allowed Hamas, Hezbollah, and Tehran the quiet they needed to build up their forces, reduced the IDF's ground capabilities, and – most damningly – misread and misled the military and intelligence services about Hamas’ true intentions, all while insisting that “Hamas has been deterred.”
Whether Netanyahu realizes it or not – and perhaps he does, which would explain his political moves during the war – his defiance against overwhelming political odds is nearing its end. Israel's longest-serving prime minister, who was reelected in 2022 despite being on trial for corruption, and who was once hailed even by his critics as a political magician, is out of tricks. While his fall may not be immediate, his coalition of ultra-nationalists, religious zealots, and corrupt politicians has lost any moral claim to lead Israel, even among growing segments of his own base.
I’m confident that when the history of this war is written, Netanyahu will be held chiefly responsible for both the intelligence failure and the IDF’s inadequate performance on October 7 and beyond – much like Neville Chamberlain was blamed for the defeats in Norway and France at the outset of World War II.
For Israel to be in a position 11 months into the war where Hamas is still able to use the hostages as leverage to demand today what they demanded on October 8 – namely, a return to the status quo of October 6 – is a grave indictment of the failure to successfully execute the campaign. I can’t say whether Netanyahu, as Nehemia Shtrasler often claims, is “the most despicable figure in Jewish history.” But there is no doubt he will be remembered as the most corrupt and incompetent of Israel’s prime ministers.
- Samuel J. Hyde is a fellow at The Jewish People Policy Institute