Former Israeli army chief and opposition Yashar party leader Gadi Eisenkot has positioned himself as an alternative to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, accusing him of leading Israel in the “wrong direction” and undermining the country’s decision-making independence by becoming overly reliant on Washington.
In an interview published Thursday by Ynet, the news website of Israel’s Yedioth Ahronoth daily, Eisenkot said he intends to win the next parliamentary elections and form a government to replace Netanyahu.
He said there were reasons for “cautious optimism,” at least electorally, and argued that Netanyahu was “concerned” by his growing popularity.
The current Knesset’s term expires in October, with general elections expected to be held in September or October.
Israelis do not directly elect a prime minister. Instead, the leader of the party or coalition capable of forming a government with the backing of at least 61 of the Knesset’s 120 members is tasked with forming a Cabinet.
Opinion polls have placed Eisenkot among the leading challengers to Netanyahu’s coalition ahead of the elections.
Asked who would be Israel’s next prime minister, Eisenkot replied: “I am working to make sure it is me.”
When asked where he places himself politically, between the right, left, and center-left, he said: "I'm an Israeli statesman who firmly believes in good governance, and I consider myself a security hawk.”
He added: “People should go back to my farewell ceremony as chief of staff, when Netanyahu reviewed our achievements and praised me for my use of force across the Middle East.”
“Today he (Netanyahu) sends his people to smear me for the same things he once praised,” Eisenkot said, arguing that Netanyahu is targeting him because of concerns over his political rise.
‘Strategic and security failure’
Eisenkot went on to criticize what he described as the “strategic and security failure” that brought Israel to its current situation.
He questioned Israel’s need for US approval before carrying out a strike in Lebanon, saying such a situation was “inconceivable.”
“The prime minister maneuvered us into a position where the person deciding everything is the president of the United States,” he said.
Eisenkot noted that Donald Trump “imposed a problematic agreement in Gaza, he dictates the rules for the use of force in Lebanon, and he imposes restrictions on the use of force against Iran and turns planes around in midair."
Asked whether he was suggesting that Israel ignore Trump, Eisenkot responded: “No… but I would suggest explaining our interests better and standing firm on them.”
When asked what he would have done if Iran had launched missiles at Israel, Eisenkot said he would have followed the recommendation he made to Netanyahu during Iran's first attack in April 2024.
“I recommended a simultaneous strike while the missiles were still on their way here. He blocked it and ultimately accepted someone else's opinion,” he said.
In April 2024, Iran launched what it called “Operation True Promise,” involving missiles and drones, in response to an Israeli strike on the Iranian consulate in Damascus that killed senior commanders of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps.
Eisenkot said his criticism of Netanyahu extends beyond the wars involving Iran and Hezbollah and goes back to the years before the war.
“Netanyahu understands very well the damage he caused the country and the way he brought it to October 7," he said. “He can say he wasn't awakened, that he wasn't updated or wasn't told. But before he goes to sleep at night, he knows he is responsible for the failure.”
He argued that Netanyahu’s legal troubles and personal and political interests had become “the dominant factor in his decision-making.”
“Netanyahu is selling off the principles of the state to gain four more weeks. He has aligned himself with corrupt individuals focused on partisan and sectoral interests,” he said.
Netanyahu is “selling the state's principles to buy four more weeks. He has formed an alliance with corrupt people who are focused on partisan and sectoral interests,” he added.
Eisenkot also said Israel’s strategic institutions are deteriorating and that “we have a weak Cabinet of submissive people.”
“Today, there is no one challenging Netanyahu, and therefore, he is leading Israel in the wrong direction.”
Leaving the war cabinet
Eisenkot said he does not regret leaving Netanyahu’s government in June 2024.
“No. Had I stayed, I would have served as a fig leaf and betrayed the principles that guided me throughout my life. I saw Netanyahu heavily influenced by his surroundings, pressured by (Finance Minister) Bezalel Smotrich and (National Security Minister) Itamar Ben-Gvir and failing to make the right decisions.”
He said he and his allies pushed for a prisoner exchange deal in Gaza and for shifting the military focus to the northern front. “We wanted to influence him to move forward with a hostage deal. He brought it to a vote but acted against it.”
He was referring to the Sept. 2024 explosions involving Hezbollah communication devices, which killed 26 people and injured or permanently disabled thousands.
Gaza and Syria
Asked what he would do in Gaza and Syria if he were prime minister, Eisenkot said: “The first thing that should be advanced is a much-improved interim agreement in Syria.”
After Syrian opposition forces overthrew the regime of Bashar al-Assad on Dec. 8, 2024, Israel declared the 1974 disengagement agreement had collapsed and occupied the Syrian buffer zone, while Damascus said it remained committed to the accord.
Although Syria’s new administration has not threatened Israel, Israeli forces continue to carry out airstrikes and ground incursions, particularly in southern Syria.
Regarding Gaza, Eisenkot said Netanyahu “transferred security authority to the Americans, and it is completely stuck.”
“Hamas must be destroyed militarily and politically, either by force or through an arrangement. One of the two must happen,” he said.
He argued that Netanyahu “does not want the Palestinian Authority. He does not want to replace Hamas.”
Eisenkot, who served as Israel’s chief of staff from Feb. 2015 to Jan. 2019, is among the most prominent former security officials to enter Israeli politics in recent years.
He opposes imposing full Israeli sovereignty over the occupied West Bank, arguing that doing so could create a binational state reality.
At the same time, he rejects the establishment of a Palestinian state under current conditions, saying such a move is not presently on the agenda.
*Writing by Mohammad Sio in Istanbul
