Former Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert has told Sky News that Israelis should throw out their current leader Benjamin Netanyahu. Mr Olmert said Netanyahu’s administration should be toppled even in the middle of the war it is fighting in Gaza.
Ehud Olmert says current leader is now a danger to Israel and argues the goal should be resuming talks leading to a Palestinian state.
He said Netanyahu is the worst leader ever in the history of Jews
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been “destroyed emotionally” by his massive failure on national security and is now miscalculating by preparing to take overall control of Gaza’s security for an “indefinite period” after Hamas has been crushed, according to former leader Ehud Olmert.
In an interview with POLITICO, Olmert argued Netanyahu was in a state of “nervous breakdown,” as he sought to avoid being thrown out of office for failing to safeguard national security in the murderous Hamas attacks of October 7. This meant Israel was now steering off course strategically, Olmert went on, insisting the priority should be to negotiate an endgame with the international community — involving a return to talks on the formation of a Palestinian state, rather than turning back the clock to full military oversight over Gaza.
“[Netanyahu] has shrunk. He’s destroyed emotionally, that’s for sure. I mean, something terrible happened to him. Bibi has been working all his life on the false pretense that he is Mr. Security. He’s Mr. Bullshit,” he said. “Every minute he is prime minister he is a danger to Israel. I seriously mean it. I am certain the Americans understand he is in bad shape.”
As a case in point of the prime minister’s wrong-headed approach, Olmert warned Netanyahu’s strategic plan for keeping control over the post-war Gaza Strip — aired in an interview with ABC news on Monday — sounded tantamount to going back to 2005, when Israel exercised military rule over the coastal enclave.
“It’s not in Israel’s interests to oversee the security of Gaza,” he said. “It is in our interests to be able to defend ourselves in a different way than we did before the October 7 attack. But to control Gaza again? No.”
Olmert also warned the patience of Israel’s Western allies was wearing thin thanks to the failure of Netanyahu and his ministers to outline a realistic plan for the post-Hamas governance of Gaza. “There is a lot that we can do, but we can’t do everything that we desire,” he cautioned.
Olmert, who led Israel from 2006 to 2009 as a leader from the liberal Kadima party, complained there was lack of sober thinking in Israel’s war cabinet.
Indeed, Netanyahu’s approval ratings have hit rock bottom since the attack. A mid-October poll showed Israelis believe the failure to prevent the Hamas onslaught exposed a “leadership debacle” with two-thirds wanting anyone but Netanyahu to be the country’s next prime minister. In another survey 44 percent of respondents said Netanyahu is responsible for what happened October 7. Only 18 percent of Israelis thought that he doesn’t have to leave office. Seventy-six percent want him out of office sooner or later.
Israel Hayom, a traditionally pro-Netanyahu newspaper, said Wednesday he should step aside, writing: “Take responsibility and accept that the buck stops with you.”
After his premiership, Olmert served a prison term for accepting bribes and for obstruction of justice during his terms as mayor of Jerusalem and as trade minister. He was praised across the political spectrum for resigning as party leader as investigations intensified, saying in his resignation speech he was “proud to be a citizen of a country in which a prime minister can be investigated like any other citizen.”
Time for two-state talks
Olmert spoke with POLITICO just hours after Netanyahu gave the clearest indication so far of what Israel might be planning for Gaza in the war’s aftermath. In an interview with ABC News, Netanyahu omitted to say who he thinks should govern the enclave once Hamas was gone but he said Israel would “have the overall security responsibility” for Gaza indefinitely. “We’ve seen what happens when we don’t have it. When we don’t have that security responsibility, what we have is the eruption of Hamas terror on a scale we couldn’t imagine,” Netanyahu added.
U.S. President Joe Biden had previously said it would be a “mistake” for Israel to occupy Gaza again. While Netanyahu’s plan may fall short of a full re-occupation — something the United States and other allies have warned against — it would presumably entail considerable control of the enclave and a continued presence of Israeli troops.
Critically, it would likely dash any hopes the U.S. harbors of persuading the West Bank-based Palestinian Authority, which controlled the Strip before Hamas violently ousted it in 2007, from agreeing to return. The PA’s president, Mahmoud Abbas, has in the past dismissed the idea of the PA being reinstated by force of Israeli arms.
Netanyahu’s remarks would appear to undercut Defense Minister Yoav Gallant’s insistence last month that one of the main aims of Israel’s military campaign was to sever “Israel’s responsibility for life in the Gaza Strip.” Among the ideas mooted for what happens to Gaza once Hamas has been defeated include a consortium of Arab states taking security responsibility, potentially with U.N. mandate to oversee the return of the PA.
Olmert said he thought it was inconceivable any Arab states would sign on to the peacekeeping plan, suggesting only a Western-intervention force would work. His biggest fear is Israel will continue to dither and fail to grapple with what should happen to post-war Gaza. This will add to Western exasperation, he warned.
“There is a total lack of planning for the next phase,” he complained. “What are we going to do? Okay, according to Netanyahu, we are going to smash and break down Hamas. And I think, by the way, that we can do it. Then what is the next step? What are we going to do then? Does anyone think about it? We need to present to the international community our idea of an endgame,” he added.
“If Israel produced a serious proposal for two-state negotiations it would have a dramatic impact on the international community. It would give us more space and time to achieve the aims of our military operations — it would have an impact on public opinion in Western countries and in the media. It would show Israel is committed to doing something it hasn’t wanted to in the past 15 years. So, something positive could come out of all of this. But we’re not doing it, and no one wants to think about it. No one wants to spell it out. No one wants to say it.”
Fundamentally, Olmert suggested, the problem was now that Netanyahu is “in the state of nervous breakdown. I’m not exaggerating. He’s being squeezed from all sides and his focus seems to be stopping being thrown out of office the day the war stops and even maybe before then,” he said.
“You expect him now to talk about the second phase and the third phase. He’s not certain he will survive politically this phase,” Olmert added.
