A better Israeli prime minister than Benjamin Netanyahu would call elections immediately. Israelis deserve a government they believe can lead them out of the crisis, not the one that got them into it. If that government is still led by Netanyahu, then at least he will have a sincere mandate and dissident Israelis will have less reason to protest against him. It would also give the prime minister more power vis-Ã -vis the military, which believes it can openly disagree with the civilian leadership.
A better Israeli prime minister would declare the following policy regarding a Palestinian state: The Israeli government will strive for a state like Costa Rica or the United Arab Emirates. It will oppose and obstruct states like Yemen and Afghanistan. A Palestinian state would be much more likely to come into existence if its character was moderate rather than militant, committed to the prosperity of its people rather than the destruction of its neighbors.
A better Israeli prime minister would create long-term safe zones for women, children, the elderly, and the sick within the Gaza Strip — at least for as long as Israel remains in the Strip. These safe zones would be monitored and funded by the United States Agency for International Development and its European agencies, would be open to foreign journalists, and would be well-supplied with food, shelter, and medicines. These safe zones would alleviate humanitarian suffering, reduce civilian endangerment, end the constant movement of Gaza residents around the strip, simplify Israel’s terrorist attack efforts, and rob Hamas of some of the propaganda victories it has frequently won in the image war.
A better Israeli prime minister would lay out a post-war vision for Gaza: no Israeli occupation of any part of Gaza, but a 10-year Arab mandate for Gaza. Led by Arab countries with diplomatic ties with Israel, preferably Saudi Arabia, the goal would be to provide security and governance for the people of Gaza while at the same time ensuring Hamas does not remain in power. Governments such as Norway, Ireland and Spain that recognize a Palestinian state would need to put money in the pocket, not just pay lip service, by providing assistance for reconstruction. If successful, it could serve as a model for the West Bank.
A better Israeli prime minister would offer all Hamas fighters and leaders safe passage out of Gaza to Qatar in exchange for the release of all remaining Israeli hostages, living and dead. Yahya Sinwar and the other ringleaders of the October 7 attack would be tried later. But Israel should not make an agreement that effectively legitimizes Hamas’s continued hold on power.
A better Israeli prime minister would never accept ministers who were not up to the job, especially in wartime. National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir has never served in the military. Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich has no financial background. Elections may bring right-wing firebrands to power, but they do not require a prime minister to keep them in positions that harm the national interest.
A better Israeli prime minister would set a clear deadline for the full implementation of 2006 UN Resolution 1701, which calls for Hezbollah to withdraw behind the Litani River, a few miles north of the Lebanese-Israeli border. A deadline would draw attention to Hezbollah’s violations of the resolution, give Israel more justification to launch a war in the north if the deadline is not met, and give the United States more reason to offer its full support to Hezbollah’s efforts.
A better Israeli prime minister would not plan to address Congress when the Lebanon war could break out at any moment. He would not give a speech that highlights the partisan divide in the U.S. over support for Israel. He would seek to mend tensions with Democratic leaders and liberal Americans by highlighting that Israel is the only country in the Middle East where progressive values ​​are respected, rather than antagonizing them. And he would never publicly express disagreement with the U.S. president (who he could even ask to be respectful), at least as long as Israel remains dependent on U.S. weapons.
A better Israeli prime minister would oppose government scholarships and grants to students for religious reasons who refuse to comply with enlistment orders. Those who contribute least to Israel’s security and material well-being would receive least from those who give most.
A better Israeli prime minister would clearly explain what this war really is: not Israel versus Hamas, but a multi-front operation against an “axis of resistance” that includes not only Hezbollah and the Houthis, but also their masters Iran and their allies Russia, Syria, China and North Korea. In other words, the fighting we are seeing in Gaza is not a regional war between Jews and Muslims, but a battle in a long-running global struggle between the free world and the unfree world.
A better Israeli prime minister would do all of this and more, and Israel would be in a much less perilous position.
