By the time you read these lines, another war with Iran may already have begun. US President Donald Trump has hinted this may occur after the midterms. My bet is that it hasn’t, at least not quite yet. But what amazes me is how readily the possibility is accepted, without anyone asking a basic question: Why, exactly?
Does anyone believe that, coincidentally, just as the polls close here and in the United States, serious new intelligence has suddenly emerged requiring another attack? Is there any indication that the results this time would be better than before?
Does anyone doubt that another strike on Iran would serve the ego of Trump and might also help Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who could once again claim that the country is facing a national emergency?
How many people here would rule out the possibility that, if another war breaks out, one of the considerations will be the hope of compelling the opposition to join Netanyahu in an emergency government? Such an arrangement, incidentally, would also create an incentive to prolong the war.
Nearly two decades of Netanyahu’s rule have profoundly distorted the consciousness of many Israelis. Exhibit A: If you asked whether Netanyahu would be willing to launch a deadly war because it served his political interests, I am convinced that most Israelis, perhaps 90%, would say yes. I have no professional poll to prove this, but my own sample is extensive.
And that majority would include many of his supporters. They’re fine with it. They like that he’s a crook. They think this kind of cunning somehow helps Israel, that the world respects it, that Arabs only understand this sort of thing – arguments of that nature.
The country’s genuinely difficult circumstances, combined with Netanyahu’s dominance over such a long period, have created a culture in which such behavior is considered normal.
I try to explain to people that it doesn’t have to be this way, and they look at me strangely.
This week I spoke with a 25-year-old combat officer who has done a great deal for Israel. He very much wants Netanyahu gone. Yet he is convinced that, given the election results, the least bad option is a unity government headed by Netanyahu.
It has to do with the Arab parties, because they aren’t Zionists. What about the ultra-Orthodox – are they Zionists? He has an answer: He doesn’t want them either. But Netanyahu is – through gritted teeth – acceptable.
I tried to convince him that he was vastly underestimating the damage Netanyahu causes. It stems not only from misguided policies and appalling coalition partners, but from an ingrained deviousness that is almost without parallel anywhere in the democratic world (except, perhaps, for his counterpart in the White House).
Netanyahu supported limiting prime ministers to two terms and called on Ehud Olmert to resign because police investigations might influence his decisions – yet he now clings to office like a madman even while standing trial. He promised to destroy Hamas, then invited Qatar to finance it because doing so weakened the Palestinian Authority. He agreed to a Palestinian state, and now treats the very idea as a catastrophe.
He praised the Supreme Court as an essential component of democracy and submitted a sworn declaration that he would not interfere with the judicial system so he could continue serving while on trial (“Of course not!” he feigned innocence on television), then tried to turn Israel into an elected dictatorship.
He called himself “Abu Yair” to ingratiate himself with Arabs – then cried out that “the Arabs are heading to the polls in droves.” He tried to form a government with Ra’am, then made life hell for Bennett and Lapid.
He whispered to Rabbi Kaduri that “the Left has forgotten what it means to be Jewish” – and never stops preaching unity whenever he loses. In 2009, he argued that what mattered was the parliamentary bloc’s majority (and he was right); today he claims that the largest party is what counts (an outright falsehood). It is exhausting.
The young man looked skeptical. He was eight years old when Netanyahu returned to office in 2009 – and he simply knows nothing else. He is cynical about politics in general.
I tried to explain what life looks like when a government is made up of good people and headed by an honest person. As a foreign correspondent, I spent many years in dozens of countries across five continents. I have seen governments of every kind, and I am not naive about politicians. But I know firsthand that decent, statesmanlike leadership is possible. It is not some imaginary utopia.
I told this young man that if one day we again had such a government, he would suddenly feel as though he were six-foot-three, had NIS 50 million in the bank, was the smartest person in the room, the most charming man in the universe, and every woman was interested in him. Life would be better. I’m not sure that was the most successful analogy, but it’s what came out.
He looked at me with pity.
What has happened with Iran over the past two years illustrates the problem.
In June 2025, Israel went to war with Iran. Twelve days later, Trump ended it with a tweet, after the US struck nuclear facilities with bunker-busting bombs that only the Americans possess. Trump claimed that Iran’s nuclear program had been completely obliterated.
Netanyahu declared that Iran’s nuclear and missile capabilities had been set back “for generations.” For generations! Trump even claimed there was no longer any need for a nuclear agreement.
Then came the winter of 2026. The Iranian regime massacred protesters. Trump had boxed himself in with promises to the demonstrators, and when he hesitated to act, he faced fierce criticism.
Attempting to topple the ayatollahs
Netanyahu spotted an opportunity. After all, he was facing elections by October, and the polls predicted defeat. He also recognized that Trump was interested in the possibility of replacing the Iranian regime, and that if he pushed him in that direction and became a partner in the effort, perhaps it would deliver the miracle he needed.
I am willing to entertain the possibility that Netanyahu genuinely believed there was a chance of toppling the ayatollahs’ regime, and that if it succeeded, it would greatly benefit Israel, not just himself personally.
And so the war began on February 28. I was among the many who welcomed the killing of Khamenei and much of the Iranian leadership. But I wondered what the exit strategy was. I assumed there was probably a plan to engineer a coup following the weakening of the regime.
Perhaps CIA operatives, and maybe Mossad agents too, were already in Tehran, talking to elements within the military, and that within a few weeks we might see Iranian officers seizing television stations and announcing a new government.
Instead, we quickly discovered the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, which sent the world into a panic – because roughly one-fifth of the world’s traded oil and liquefied natural gas passes through it. Although this scenario had long been foreseeable, there appeared to be no convincing plan for dealing with it.
Trump stopped the war and has since been practically begging for an agreement that includes at least the nuclear issue – something he can present, even misleadingly, as better than Barack Obama’s nuclear deal, which he recklessly abandoned in 2018, with Netanyahu’s enthusiastic encouragement, of course.
Meanwhile, the Iranians demonstrated the enormous leverage they possess through their ability to threaten the Strait of Hormuz.
They also continue to use the Houthis, who threaten the region’s other maritime outlet through the Bab el-Mandeb Strait. And Netanyahu has been left with most of his ambitions unfulfilled: Hamas and Hezbollah have not been eliminated, the Houthis certainly haven’t, and the Iranian regime remains in place, more extreme than before.
It is difficult to believe anything that comes out of Netanyahu’s or Trump’s mouth, so we should listen only to assessments by Israeli and American intelligence agencies. From what can be understood, Iran’s nuclear program has been set back by at least months, perhaps years.
If there is now evidence that the Iranians are enriching uranium at an accelerated pace, or are once again approaching a military nuclear capability, we very much need to hear about it from credible sources before embarking on another war.
Otherwise, a new war, in which we will once again be sent to bomb shelters, and many Israelis (and others) will be killed, will amount to yet another reckless adventure. And it will be overshadowed by the grave suspicion that it was intended to help Netanyahu in coalition negotiations.
Netanyahu’s deviousness should have completely disqualified him from serving as prime minister of a country facing security challenges like Israel’s. Israelis need a leader about whom, if the public were asked what the chances were that he would start a war for political reasons, 90% would say there was no chance. I cannot prove it, but I have a strong impression that this would be the overwhelming response regarding Gadi Eisenkot.
The tensions with Iran are yet another reason why there is no time to waste. Eisenkot must turn the potential majority in the Knesset into reality and, one way or another, send Netanyahu home. The public deserves the confidence that if war breaks out, it is because there was no other choice. That the decision was made solely on the basis of the national interest, with no connection whatsoever to the prime minister’s political future.
Many people think this is utterly fanciful. They are wrong. It can happen. It is possible.
It is essential.