Beyond Netanyahu: Why Europeans need an all-of-Israel approach

Nearly one year on, the Hamas-led 7 October attacks continue to rock Israeli society and politics. On Saturday, thousands gathered in Tel Aviv and towns across the country as part of weekly anti-government protests, calling for an immediate ceasefire deal to end the war in Gaza and for the release of Israeli hostages held by Hamas.

At the centre of their frustration is Binyamin Netanyahu – the nation’s longest serving and increasingly illiberal prime minister. While the veteran leader has long cultivated an image of himself as “Mr Security”, many Israelis blame him for not preventing the surprise Hamas-led offensive and for failing to free all the Israeli hostages. As domestic pressure on Netanyahu builds, European and US diplomats should use their political and military leverage to press the embattled prime minister to commit to a long overdue ceasefire in Gaza and halt escalatory attacks on Hizbullah.

But Israel’s problems run deeper than Netanyahu. His ability to remain in office reflects the weakness of the country’s political opposition and an Israeli public opinion that remains unwilling to support lasting peace with Palestinians. Europeans therefore need to make clear to all Israelis that the cost of continued intransigence and conflict will be deepening international isolation.

Netanyahu’s obstructionism

Netanyahu has repeatedly vowed to eliminate Hamas and free all Israeli hostages. But these objectives remain elusive – and to many observers and a growing number of Israelis, mutually incompatible. After 11 months, the Israeli army’s incursion into Gaza has killed at least 40,000 Palestinians, most of them civilians. And while Israel has killed thousands of Hamas militants, the Islamist group continues to regenerate its ranks by exploiting widespread popular anger at Israeli actions.

Meanwhile, Israeli hostages have continued to die and Israeli authorities believe only 70 of them may still be alive. Although 105 were released as part of a temporary ceasefire deal in November, Netanyahu has prioritised military action to release the remainder. So far, however, Israeli security forces have only rescued eight hostages while far more have been killed as a result of Israel’s continued campaign of military force.

Many Israelis accuse Netanyahu of obstructing months of mediation efforts led by the United States, Qatar, and Egypt to reach a deal that would lead to the release of the remaining hostages. Those involved in the ceasefire efforts, including from the Israeli negotiating team, have accused the Israeli prime minister of deliberately torpedoing talks whenever a deal appears near, such as by vowing to resume fighting once Hamas releases the hostages, and assassinating Hamas’s leader Ismail Haniyeh, with whom Israel had been negotiating. More recently, Netanyahu introduced new last-minute conditions, demanding a permanent Israeli presence in the so-called Philadelphi and Netzarim corridors – a well-known non-starter for Hamas which continues to demand a full Israeli withdrawal from Gaza.

In private, US officials grumble about Netanyahu’s obstructionism. But in public, the Biden administration prefers to blame Hamas even though the group accepted a US ceasefire proposal presented by President Joe Biden at the end of May. The threat of a wider war between Israel and Hizbullah over the summer led the US to redouble its efforts to develop a bridging proposal between the two sides. But without any US willingness to publicly confront Netanyahu and use real leverage – such as halting or limiting the supply of US weapons that Israel needs for its military campaign – the Israeli prime minister has continued to stymie negotiations.

A widely held view in Israel is that Netanyahu, who is currently on trial for corruption and fraud, has calculated that his political (and personal) future depends on prolonging the Gaza conflict. Although his coalition has suffered several defections, most notably the departure of National Unity party leader Benny Gantz, it still retains a governing majority with 64 out of 120 Knesset seats. A ceasefire would risk collapsing his government given the fervent refusal of his far-right coalition partners to strike a deal with Hamas.

As Netanyahu works to prevent further defections, government members have exploited the Israeli prime minister’s political vulnerability to advance their own ideological agendas. This includes far-right members of the government such as national security minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and finance minister Bezalel Smotrich who are pushing Israel’s de jure annexation of the West Bank. Since 7 October, the Israeli government has sped up settlement construction in the West Bank to cement a “Greater Israel” that would be fatal to any hopes of a viable post-conflict political solution with Palestinians. It also includes the possibility of reviving a judicial reform package pushed by justice minister Yariv Levin to curtail the power of Israel’s judiciary – a move that could provide Netanyahu with an exit strategy from his legal woes. A first attempt at this last year triggered widespread anti-government protests.

While domestic opposition to Netanyahu is growing, he is one of politics’ great survivors. As he has done in the past, the Israeli prime minister will try to weather the current political storm until his domestic position improves sufficiently to call fresh elections. For this, he has until October 2026. And Netanyahu still has cards to play to prolong his time in office – including potentially launching a ground operation against Hizbullah in Lebanon, which could temporarily mobilise Israelis behind him. A stunning attack against Hizbullah over the past few days, attributed to Israel, which blew up thousands of pagers and walkie-talkies in the hands of the group’s members, will provide Netanyahu a political boost and may be a prelude to a broader Israeli offensive.  

It’s bigger than the government

More importantly, however, despite growing public anger with the government, the opposition has wholly failed to offer a viable alternative vision. Even if an opposition party came to power, Israel’s strategic position is unlikely to be dramatically altered. While Netanyahu’s departure could open the possibility of a ceasefire agreement in Gaza and perhaps a less confrontational approach towards the Palestinian Authority, no major Israeli Jewish political party is currently advocating for a two-state solution or an end to Israel’s illegal settlement project.

Europeans should avoid the temptation to see Netanyahu and his far-right ministers as the only source of Israeli resistance to a durable peace process. The country’s decades’ long and intensifying occupation of Palestinian territory has long enjoyed support across Israel’s political spectrum.

However, European diplomats can and should be doing more to increase pressure on Netanyahu to stop blocking ceasefire negotiations by calling out his obstructionism. European governments like Germany that provide political cover and arms supplies must condition their support, working with the US to use the leverage they wield to more forcefully press for a long overdue ceasefire.

As they work to end the war in Gaza, the European Union and European states must also focus on ending Israel’s occupation – as called for by the International Court of Justice. This should extend to directly challenging Israeli opposition leaders over their own rejection of Palestinian self-determination and pursuing stepped up engagement with the Israeli civil society, political parties, and military establishment that call for a new diplomatic track. Supporting international accountability mechanisms, including looming International Criminal Court arrest warrants, is equally important and needs to be accompanied by more decisive action against Israeli settlements and human rights violations such as banning settlement trade and sanctioning organisations that fund settlement expansion.

With Israel so far unwilling to change course, EU members should urgently review the EU’s association agreement with Israel, as advocated by Ireland and Spain, which could see the country lose access to preferential trade tariffs, EU funding instruments, and research grants. While it is becoming increasingly easy to blame Netanyahu, this conflict will only end when the Israeli public itself feels the cost of entrenching a one-state reality of perpetual occupation and inequality.