Why Netanyahu should not resign: The pros and cons - opinion

We have been visited recently by a plethora of journalists, academics, and other commentators, who have said that the time has arrived for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to resign as prime minister and retire from politics.

Anyone viewing this matter dispassionately will understand that it is very, very unlikely that Netanyahu will heed these calls: He will not resign before the next scheduled election. So that we understand the issue, what are the arguments for and against earlier resignation?

As best as I can determine, there are six arguments for early resignation, some related to one another, some wholly independent.

First, the trial is a diversion from his duties as head of the country. Even if he has managed so far, he will not be able to continue.

Second, and also connected with the trial, he risks conviction and imprisonment. Far better for him to plead guilty to a minor offense and leave quietly, without prison. That of course, is entirely his decision.

Third, October 7 was a failure of the first magnitude, and the head of government, whatever his causative actions were (or weren’t), is ultimately responsible. He should have resigned immediately, even before publication of a report by a commission of inquiry, and even though the war is ongoing.

Fourth, also connected to October 7, the Gaza War has been a failure. The war is still on after twenty months. True, the IDF has made great progress, and true, of the 251 hostages, Israel has received back 148, which is 59%, but 20 living hostages remain.

Fifth, whatever Netanyahu’s achievements, it is time, right now, for a new generation to take the reins, even though we are in the midst of two wars and negotiations for peace.

Sixth, it is success rather than failure, which mandates early resignation. Netanyahu has won in Iran, and he should conclude his service on a positive note.

In my view, all of these arguments for early resignation have flaws, but collectively they may make a case. What, then, are the arguments for continued service, against early resignation? There are three.

Is this the time for us to switch leaders? Even people who dislike Netanyahu or his policies, would likely recognize that he is, today, the most experienced and knowledgeable politician in Israel. If you do not want Netanyahu to manage these hugely momentous issues, the question is: Who would you prefer? Yair Lapid, Benny Gantz, Gadi Eisenkot (who just left Gantz), Yair Golan? Or perhaps you want some yet unknown person of the younger generation?

Second, the electorate put Netanyahu in his position until the next scheduled election on October 27, 2026. It is therefore the electorate, and only the electorate, that should decide who our next leader should be. Israel has not adopted the American system with a fixed presidential term of four years. We have, rather, a parliamentary system in which the government may fall before it achieves full term. However, if the existing government manages to hold itself together, then why should we not wait until full term has been achieved in another sixteen months?

Third, and probably the most controversial of all the arguments both for and against early resignation, is that solid, stable government demands that Netanyahu not accede to the demands of a hostile legal system, but rather continue his service. The independence of our courts is not at issue, because the courts must, under our system, accept for trial any indictment brought by an attorney-general. This person is the highest legal official in the land, with the power to indict, to pursue prosecution, or to stop litigation on almost any terms, subject of course to court approval.

What happened here is that for whatever reason, then-attorney general Avichai Mandelblit brought indictment on four cases. Of these, the truly serious one was Case 3000, involving a possible bribe of €20 million euro ($23.5 m.), but Netanyahu was dismissed from that case almost immediately, since he had no involvement.

However, in open hearing, the trial judges stated that the prosecution would have great difficulty proving bribery. That was a very unusual statement for a court to make in the middle of a trial, and is therefore the death knell for that charge.

Netanyahu has undoubtedly come to the conclusion that conviction is very unlikely except perhaps regarding the cigars and wine. Further, there is no realistic chance of prison, it is unlikely that the court would oust him from politics for cigars and wine, and in any case, the trial will continue for years. Therefore, there is no sensible reason for Netanyahu to resign now.

The entire indictment by Mandelblit is itself questionable. The trial has been going on since May 2020. The current attorney-general, Gali Baharav-Miara, should have agreed to settle the dispute with a financial fine, but she refuses for whatever reasons. Essentially, the attorneys-general want to decide who should be our political leader; they reject the democratic will of the electorate.

Those the arguments for and against early resignation by Netanyahu. In my view, he must continue as prime minister; early resignation is not an option.

The Obama administration widely considered Netanyahu to be a coward because of his failure to attack Iran during the mid-2010s. In truth, Netanyahu is a cautious man who does not like to decide or act in haste. Still, during his political career, he has made at least three courageous decisions.

On March 3, 2015, Netanyahu spoke to Congress against the proposed nuclear agreement between the US and Iran. He knew that Barack Obama and many Democrats, who were then in power, would be bitterly opposed, yet he spoke on behalf of Israel, so that no one would misunderstand our view.

In May 2020, Netanyahu was indicted. He did not cave in and he did not collapse, but chose to fight the case, both for himself and for the integrity of a government that must not be subject to the legal extortion of attorneys-general. He should not reverse that decision by early resignation, and won’t.

These three were decisions of courage, and they will be Netanyahu’s final legacy to the Jewish people.