Since its founding in 1948, Israel’s prime ministers have sought to depart legacies that will outlast them — some by battle, others by diplomacy, and some by historic blunders. David Ben-Gurion secured the state’s independence and constructed its foundational establishments. Golda Meir presided over a battle that price her workplace. Menachem Start signed peace with Egypt whereas increasing unlawful settlements. Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated for making an attempt to make peace with the Palestinians.
Every chief, in a roundabout way, left their mark. However none has dominated as lengthy – or as divisively – as Benjamin Netanyahu. And now, greater than ever, the query isn’t just what sort of legacy he needs to depart, however what legacy he’s truly creating.
In 2016, I argued that the Arab world had successfully topped Netanyahu “King of the Center East” — a title that mirrored his success in positioning Israel as a regional energy with out making any concessions to the Palestinians. Immediately, I consider he sees a possibility not solely to consolidate that title, however to reshape Israel’s regional place completely — by power, impunity, and a technique rooted in securitised dominance.
Since his first time period, Netanyahu has insisted that Israel’s safety should override all different issues. In his worldview, a Palestinian state is just not merely incompatible with Israel’s safety; it’s an existential menace. Even have been such a state to be created, Netanyahu has made clear that Israel should retain what he calls “safety sovereignty” over all of historic Palestine.
This has by no means been mere rhetoric. It has formed his each main resolution, none extra so than the present battle on Gaza. The assault has levelled complete neighbourhoods, killed tens of hundreds of Palestinians, displaced most of its two million folks, and created an unprecedented humanitarian disaster.
Israel stands accused by human rights teams and United Nations companies of committing battle crimes, ethnic cleaning, and genocide. It’s going through genocide costs, supported by a number of international locations, on the Worldwide Courtroom of Justice. The Worldwide Legal Courtroom has additionally issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu and his former defence minister, Yoav Gallant, for alleged battle crimes and crimes in opposition to humanity, together with the usage of hunger as a weapon of battle.
But Netanyahu presses on, arguing that Gaza must not ever once more pose a menace to Israel, and that the destruction is important to safe the nation’s future.
This logic doesn’t cease at Gaza. He has used related arguments to justify Israel’s assaults on Lebanon, together with focused strikes on Hezbollah figures and the tried assassination of the group’s chief, Hassan Nasrallah.
Utilizing the identical rationale, Israel has additionally launched strikes in Yemen and made clear that it’ll act in Iraq every time and wherever it deems vital.
The safety argument has likewise been used to justify the continued occupation of Syrian territory and is at the moment invoked to legitimise ongoing assaults on Iran, ostensibly to stop it from buying nuclear weapons and to degrade its missile and drone capabilities.
In each case, the identical narrative is repeated: Israel can’t be secure except its enemies are damaged, its deterrence unchallenged, and its dominance undisputed. All dissent, disagreement, or resistance — whether or not navy, political, and even symbolic — is forged as a menace to be eradicated.
Even Netanyahu’s diplomatic efforts comply with this logic. The Abraham Accords, signed with the UAE, Bahrain, and Morocco throughout his premiership, have been hailed as peace offers however functioned primarily as devices of regional alignment that marginalised the Palestinians. For Netanyahu, normalisation is just not a path to peace — it’s a solution to cement Israel’s place whereas avoiding a simply decision to the occupation.
What, then, is the legacy Netanyahu seeks?
He needs to be remembered because the prime minister who crushed all resistance to occupation, completely ended the thought of a Palestinian state, and enshrined Israel’s dominance within the Center East by sheer power. In his imaginative and prescient, Israel controls the land, dictates the principles, and solutions to nobody.
However historical past could keep in mind him in another way.
What Netanyahu calls safety, a lot of the world more and more sees as systemic violence. The worldwide response to the battle on Gaza — hundreds of thousands marching in protest, worldwide authorized motion, rising boycotts, and diplomatic downgrades — means that beneath his management, Israel is just not gaining legitimacy however shedding it.
Even amongst its allies, Israel faces rising isolation. Whereas america continues to offer diplomatic cowl, phrases like “apartheid”, “ethnic cleaning”, and “settler colonialism” are not confined to fringe activism. They’re getting into mainstream political discourse and shaping public consciousness, significantly amongst youthful generations.
Many commentators argue that Netanyahu is clinging to energy merely to keep away from prosecution for corruption or accountability for the failures of the October 7, 2023, assaults on Israel. However I consider this evaluation misses a deeper reality: that he sees this second — this battle, this absence of accountability — as a historic window of alternative. In his thoughts, that is legacy work.
The tragedy is that in pursuing this legacy, he could obtain the other of what he intends. Not a stronger Israel, however a extra remoted one. Not a safe homeland, however a state more and more seen as a violator of worldwide norms. Not a legacy of energy, however considered one of ethical and political collapse.
Netanyahu might be remembered. Immediately, as Gaza burns and Iran faces strike after strike, there isn’t a longer any doubt about that. The one query is whether or not his legacy might be considered one of nationwide safety, or one which leaves Israel extra alone, extra condemned, and extra precarious than ever earlier than.
The views expressed on this article are the writer’s personal and don’t essentially mirror Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.
