Brett McGurk is a veteran American diplomat who thought he’d seen it all — or at least thought so — and managed to serve under multiple administrations. On November 14, 2023, he attended a meeting of Israel’s war cabinet to discuss the first hostage deal. There, he watched Netanyahu bang on the table and thunder, “I will never accept these terms. They’re about to surrender.” But as the meeting ended, Netanyahu took McGurk by the arm and said, “We need this deal.” To reinforce the message, Netanyahu later called him and confirmed that he agreed to the exact same deal he had just sworn to oppose.
This surreal scene is described in Bob Woodward’s new book, War. The tone of the author — perhaps McGurk’s, too — toward this behavior is somewhat admiring. “So much of politics is performance,” he wrote. Well, maybe not. This hypocritical and deceitful behavior may help Netanyahu stay in power — but along the way, he’s damaging every possible ally, facing international arrest warrants, prolonging the war unnecessarily, and causing needless deaths of soldiers, hostages, and Palestinians — not to mention missing the chance to forge an Israeli-Saudi alliance.
At some point, even President Biden reportedly wondered — according to Woodward — “Why hasn’t there been a domestic uprising in Israel against Netanyahu? How is he still in power?” The hunger for alternative leadership is not only present in foreign capitals — it’s evident in every poll in Israel. There is unprecedented distrust in the government, in the prime minister’s motives. Yet, this hunger for new leadership has not found a safe harbor. I don’t share the harsh criticism aimed at opposition leaders, and I believe Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid both did a good job as prime ministers, debunking the myth that Netanyahu is irreplaceable. But I do share the growing sentiment echoing across the political spectrum: Gadi Eisenkot needs to lead the camp. Not because he’s a fresh political figure or because of the personal tragedies he has endured — simply because he is the most impressive Zionist leader operating in Israel today. There is surprising consensus on this, even among some figures on the right.
Eisenkot is the polar opposite of Netanyahu. Scenes like the one McGurk experienced wouldn’t even cross his imagination. We’ve grown used to the idea that cunning is the key to political success in Israel. During Eisenkot and Gantz’s time in the war cabinet, I often heard internal descriptions. “Gadi forgets he’s a politician,” I was told. “He expresses positions that will be used against him.” Gantz, by contrast, was very cautious. Eisenkot’s positions were unpopular: pushing for a ceasefire, a comprehensive hostage deal, an agreement with Saudi Arabia.
Many are now working to convince him: “Gadi, run. Go to Benny. Tell him a leadership swap is needed.” But Eisenkot refuses to consider it. Let’s not forget — when he was offered the position of IDF Chief of Staff, he told the defense minister he thought Gantz was better suited for the role at that time. This is not a man who would stab in the back the person who brought him into politics — even if Gantz blatantly broke the promise he made to Eisenkot upon his entry: to hold party primaries.
There is only one solution. Eisenkot should resign from the party and from the Knesset. Not with a dramatic exit — heaven forbid. He should continue to raise his voice from outside the parliament. His influence will not diminish without the title “MK.” As elections near, he can decide whether to form a party and run at its head. If he does, it might not drastically change the political map — but it will bring one crucial thing: the center-left camp will have a highly impressive candidate for prime minister, uniquely suited for these dire times.