Honest Criticism of the Netanyahu Government's Wartime Conduct

Backing Israel’s right to exist does not mean backing every choice of its government. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s coalition has made real errors since October 7, 2023. A pro-Israel case that will not say so is not a serious one. This page names fair, sourced critiques. It does not accept the UN and ICJ framing that calls Israel’s war a genocide. The evidence does not support that charge. It does support plenty of hard questions about how Israel’s elected leaders have run this war.

The judicial overhaul split the country before the war

In 2023, coalition ministers Yariv Levin and Simcha Rothman pushed a sweeping judicial overhaul. The plan would have let a bare Knesset majority override the Supreme Court on key rulings. Hundreds of thousands of Israelis protested week after week. Reservists warned they would stop showing up. Past security chiefs said the fight was draining focus from real threats.¹²

By the time Hamas attacked on October 7, Israel was deeply split. That is not only a judgment call from abroad. It is the view of mainstream Israeli outlets and many retired defense leaders.²

October 7 and the question of responsibility

The Hamas assault killed about 1,200 people in Israel and took 251 hostages. It was the worst day for Jews since the Holocaust.³ It also happened on Netanyahu’s watch, under a security doctrine he long backed.

Israeli military and intelligence chiefs have accepted personal blame. Former IDF chief Herzi Halevi and former Shin Bet chief Ronen Bar both resigned and said the failure was theirs to own.⁴ Netanyahu has not offered the same. He has said a full state commission of inquiry should wait until after the war. Israeli commentators across the spectrum, including in the Times of Israel and Haaretz, have pressed him to say more, sooner.⁵

Qatari money to Hamas before the war

For years, Netanyahu’s governments allowed Qatar to send suitcases of cash into Gaza. The stated goal was to keep Hamas calm and split Gaza from the West Bank. Israeli reporting after October 7 showed that senior officials had warned the policy was risky and was helping Hamas build up. Times of Israel and Reuters have both traced the paper trail.⁶⁷

That policy was a choice. It was Netanyahu’s choice. Many Israelis now see it as a core strategic error.

An extreme-right coalition with a cost

To stay in power, Netanyahu built his 2022 coalition with Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich. Both have made public statements that were condemned by Israel’s president, by opposition leaders, and by the U.S. government. Smotrich’s March 2023 remarks erasing a Palestinian town drew a rare public rebuke from the U.S. State Department.⁸ Ben-Gvir’s push to arm civilian groups and his trips to sensitive holy sites have drawn warnings from Israel’s own security services.⁹

A fair pro-Israel view can say this plainly. These ministers have hurt Israel’s standing and given fuel to its worst critics.

Settler violence and West Bank policy

Settler attacks on Palestinian villagers in the West Bank rose sharply after October 7. The Biden administration placed sanctions on some violent settlers in early 2024. The Trump administration later lifted those orders, but U.S. officials in both parties have pressed Israel to do more to stop the attacks.¹⁰¹¹ Israeli human-rights groups and mainstream papers have reported cases where police and soldiers stood by. Israel’s own attorney general has pushed for more prosecutions.¹²

Defending Israel does not mean defending those attacks. It means asking the Israeli government to enforce its own laws.

Hostage deals and humanitarian aid

Hostage families, former security chiefs, and large parts of the Israeli public have accused Netanyahu of moving too slowly on deals that could bring hostages home. Reporting in Reuters and the Wall Street Journal has detailed cabinet splits where Netanyahu blocked terms the security chiefs were ready to accept.¹³¹⁴

On aid, the U.S. government has pressed Israel many times to open more crossings and let in more food, water, and fuel. Secretary of State Antony Blinken and, later, Trump-era officials both warned Israel publicly about aid flow into Gaza.¹⁵ Some of those pressures worked. Others did not. This is fair ground for criticism.

On the press tilt

None of this changes a second fact. A large body of research shows that global coverage of Israel runs harder and more negative than coverage of other democracies at war. ADL and AJC tracking of antisemitic incidents since October 7 shows record highs in the United States and Europe.¹⁶¹⁷ Pew work on media trust and bias finds deep gaps in how Israel is framed compared to peer states.¹⁸ Honest critics can hold both truths. Netanyahu has earned specific criticism. The press climate around Israel is still unfair in ways that track long patterns of anti-Jewish bias.

Bottom line

War is awful. This one has killed and broken too many people, Israeli and Palestinian. Israel still has the right to exist, to defend its people, and to fight groups sworn to its destruction. That right does not wipe out the duty to ask hard questions of its leaders. The Netanyahu government has made choices that deserve fair criticism. Saying so out loud is part of a credible pro-Israel case, not a break from it.

Sources