Netanyahu Sets off Firestorm of Protest

The prime minister provokes domestic and international fury

The Israeli government’s prosecution of a war that has long since outlived any military purpose, its deliberate policy to restrict food from entering Gaza, its refusal to recognize the mass starvation it precipitated (let alone take responsibility for it), and its decision to occupy (at least) Gaza City—ignoring IDF objections, international outrage, hostage families’ pleas, and overwhelming domestic opposition—have endangered Israel’s relationship with American Jewry and spawned an unprecedented internal crisis in Israel.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has accomplished what decades of terrorism, antisemitism, and hatred toward Israel did not: he has prompted some of Israel’s strongest allies to consider pausing financial and/or diplomatic support, so long as he refuses to course-correct.

Senators Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.); Ranking Member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Jack Reed (D-R.I.); Ranking Member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Mark Warner (D-Va.); Vice Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Chris Coons (D-Del.); Ranking Member of the Senate Appropriations Committee Subcommittee on Defense, and future Democratic whip Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii)—all devoted supporters of Israel—released a letter on Saturday that denounced Netanyahu’s decision to occupy Gaza as a “dangerous move opposed by numerous senior Israeli security officials.”

The senators declared:

We are nearly two years into this conflict, and it is clear military escalation will not deliver an end to the violence, will delay the return and may even lead to deaths of Israeli and American hostages held by Hamas, and will severely damage any prospect of a future political settlement between Israelis and Palestinians.

They insisted that the parties “immediately return to the negotiating table and secure a ceasefire that brings the hostages home and charts a diplomatic resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.”

Meanwhile, the most serious conflict between the Israeli government and ultra-Orthodox men over their continued exemption from military service has spilled into violence, another consequence of endless war that has devastated military and reservist forces and created an unprecedented manpower shortage. Netanyahu’s war is ripping Israel away from international allies while destroying its definitive secular and ultra-religious elements.

At a press conference on Sunday, Netanyahu insisted Israel was not responsible for the widely-reported suffering and starvation. While no reasonable person doubts that Hamas’s brutal invasion on Oct. 7, 2023 triggered the war, Netanyahu’s effort to deflect any responsibility, shift blame to the press, and insist upon continued military assault and occupation has provoked howls of protests in Israel.

The New York Times reported, “For Israelis and Palestinians alike, Mr. Netanyahu’s argument that Israeli forces needed to invade Hamas’s final strongholds were almost painfully familiar. In February 2024, Mr. Netanyahu identified another Gazan city — Rafah — as ‘Hamas’s last bastion.’” However, 1 ½ years later, the war rages on. “Asked about who might rule Gaza after Hamas’s defeat, Mr. Netanyahu said it would be neither Hamas nor the Palestinian Authority. But he declined to say who might step into the vacuum, adding that it was too soon to tell.” His widely rebuked refusal to plan for the “day after” the war is now widely viewed as a bid to stay in power and avoid criminal prosecution.

Criticism in Israel was immediate and furious. Opposition Leader Yair Lapid wrote, “The meaning of what Netanyahu presented today is that hostages will die, soldiers will die, the economy will break apart and our international standing will crash.” He added, “We need to make a deal, bring all the hostages home and finish the war.” Leader of Blue and White, Benny Gantz, also blasted Netanyahu: “Too many words, too little action, too much time,” he wrote.

Yair Golan, who heads the left-wing Democrats party, said, “What we saw tonight is not ‘one step away from victory,’ but the most severe security failure in Israel’s history. A prime minister who is abandoning dozens of Israeli citizens in captivity to their deaths is a danger to the security of the country.” He also announced that his party would support a general strike next Sunday, Ha’aretz reported.

Meanwhile, the official representative of the hostage families is pleading for an end to the war. A “bright red flag is waving over the government’s decision to sacrifice our loved ones,” said the Hostages and Missing Families Forum in a press release before Saturday’s rallies. “Reach a comprehensive hostage deal, stop the war, bring us back our loved ones — their time is up.” The families joined in the call for a general strike.

Lapid correctly declared, “Netanyahu has no majority in the Knesset, and he has no majority among the people. He heads an illegitimate minority government, and he is unable to even manage it. This government cannot [be allowed to] drag us into the occupation of Gaza.” (Even Netanyahu’s right-wing coalition partners have announced they have lost confidence in him.) Put differently, Netanyahu does not represent the will of the Israeli people.

How, then, do American politicians, Jewish leaders and other respected figures maintain their support for Israelis but not condone Netanyahu’s actions? For starters, they can meet with demonstrators, opposition parties, IDF leaders, hostage families, and others who reflect democratic, humane values. (This tactic has been used with other autocratic regimes dating back to the Cold War.)

With limited tools to express their revulsion toward Netanyahu’s chosen course, allies must reconsider decades-old aversion to pausing military aid and/or to blocking U.N. resolutions condemning Israel’s conduct. Why arm Israel to continue doing what Americans abhor and what violates international law and simple decency? Why block United Nations Security Council resolutions that actually reflect Americans’ own objections to Israel’s conduct?

Without a responsible American president and competent advisers who care about the U.S.’s long-term relationship with Israel (which requires that both countries be democratic states and that support for Israel remain bipartisan) a human rights catastrophe drags on, Israel faces an existential crisis, and the Israel’s isolation intensifies. This is the consequence of America’s failure to play the role of trusted broker, defender of international order, and bulwark of democracy and human rights.

Trump’s invitation for Israel to do whatever it wants in Gaza leaves civilians starving, IDF soldiers facing more casualties and trauma, many Israeli civilians horrified, and the long-term U.S.-Israel relationship (as well as the bond between American Jews and Israel) hanging by a thread.