Since its founding in 1948, Israel’s prime ministers have sought to depart legacies that might outlast them — some by means of conflict, others by means of diplomacy, and some by means of historic blunders. David Ben-Gurion secured the state’s independence and constructed its foundational establishments. Golda Meir presided over a conflict that price her workplace. Menachem Start signed peace with Egypt whereas increasing unlawful settlements. Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated for attempting to make peace with the Palestinians.
Every chief, indirectly, 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 really 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. As we speak, I imagine he sees a possibility not solely to consolidate that title, however to reshape Israel’s regional place completely — by means of pressure, 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 will not be merely incompatible with Israel’s safety; it’s an existential risk. 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 conflict on Gaza. The assault has levelled total 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 conflict crimes, ethnic cleaning, and genocide. It’s dealing with genocide costs, supported by a number of nations, on the Worldwide Court docket of Justice. The Worldwide Prison Court docket has additionally issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu and his former defence minister, Yoav Gallant, for alleged conflict crimes and crimes towards humanity, together with using hunger as a weapon of conflict.
But Netanyahu presses on, arguing that Gaza must not ever once more pose a risk to Israel, and that the destruction is critical to safe the nation’s future.
This logic doesn’t cease at Gaza. He has used comparable 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 at any time when and wherever it deems essential.
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 forestall 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 protected 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 risk to be eradicated.
Even Netanyahu’s diplomatic efforts observe 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 will not be 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 means of sheer pressure. In his imaginative and prescient, Israel controls the land, dictates the principles, and solutions to nobody.
However historical past might keep in mind him in a different way.
What Netanyahu calls safety, a lot of the world more and more sees as systemic violence. The worldwide response to the conflict on Gaza — tens of millions marching in protest, worldwide authorized motion, rising boycotts, and diplomatic downgrades — means that beneath his management, Israel will not be gaining legitimacy however dropping it.
Even amongst its allies, Israel faces rising isolation. Whereas the US continues to supply diplomatic cowl, phrases like “apartheid”, “ethnic cleaning”, and “settler colonialism” are now not confined to fringe activism. They’re getting into mainstream political discourse and shaping public consciousness, notably 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 imagine this evaluation misses a deeper reality: that he sees this second — this conflict, 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 might obtain the alternative 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 certainly one of ethical and political collapse.
Netanyahu shall be remembered. As we speak, as Gaza burns and Iran faces strike after strike, there isn’t any longer any doubt about that. The one query is whether or not his legacy shall be certainly 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.