The Week The Week
flag of US
US
flag of UK
UK
https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/flexiimages/jacafc5zvs1692883516.jpg

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

Less than $3 per week

Sign in
  • View Profile
  • Sign out
  • The Explainer
  • Talking Points
  • The Week Recommends
  • Newsletters
  • Cartoons
  • From the Magazine
  • The Week Junior
  • More
    • Politics
    • World News
    • Business
    • Health
    • Science
    • Food & Drink
    • Travel
    • Culture
    • History
    • Personal Finance
    • Puzzles
    • Photos
    • The Blend
    • All Categories
  • Newsletter sign up Newsletter
  • Saturday Wrap, from The Week
    A ‘death sentence’, a king in Israel, and England’s new football hero

     
    briefing of the week

    King Bibi

    Over three decades, Benjamin Netanyahu has shaped Israel in his own image

    Why is Netanyahu so influential?
    First elected as prime minister in 1996, he has won five elections since, making him the longest-serving leader in Israel’s history (exceeding even David Ben-Gurion, its founding PM). He has spent just 18 months out of office since 2009. His right-wing politics, particularly his approach to the Palestinian question, have profoundly shaped Israeli society and public opinion. He has seldom been personally popular (recent polls suggest only 40% of Israelis trust him), but “King Bibi”, an exceptionally shrewd operator, long ago established himself as “Mr Security”, the man best placed to protect Israel from its enemies, notably Hamas and Iran.

    To his detractors, he is ruthless, reckless, a danger to democracy who prioritises his own political survival over Israel’s interests – and, of course, the driving force behind the brutal war in Gaza. He is, nevertheless, by far the most influential figure in Israeli politics today, and arguably in the entire Middle East.

    Where do his politics come from?
    Not least, from his father. He was born in Tel Aviv in 1949 – the middle son of Benzion Netanyahu, a Polish-born medieval historian who was a Revisionist Zionist (militant, territorially maximalist) and was often openly critical of his son. His teenage years were spent between Israel and Philadelphia, where his father taught; but when he was 18, in 1967, he moved back to Israel for military service.

    During five distinguished years in the army, he fought in Lebanon and served in the Sayeret Matkal, Israel’s equivalent of the SAS, alongside his brothers Yonatan and Iddo, to whom he was close. In 1976, Yonatan (Yoni) was killed during a special forces raid on Uganda’s Entebbe Airport to free the 106 mostly Israeli hostages held by Palestinian and German terrorists. The only Israeli military casualty of the operation, Yoni is revered as a national hero; his death inspired his brother’s political career.

    In what way?
    It fell to Netanyahu, who was in Boston, studying at MIT, to break the news to his parents; he later founded an anti-terrorism institute in Yoni’s memory, setting him on a path to politics. He was hired by Israel’s ambassador to the US in 1982, became its representative to the UN in 1984, and was elected to the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, in 1988. Five years later, he became leader of Likud, Israel’s main right-wing party; and in 1996 he beat Shimon Peres to become PM. His first term was troubled. Right-wingers were furious that he agreed to cede 80% of Hebron to Palestinian Authority control, among other concessions in the occupied West Bank; the Left accused him of “killing the peace”, by undermining the 1993 Oslo Accords, of which he was a fierce, long-term critic. He lost the 1999 election.

    How did he make a comeback?
    Netanyahu served as foreign minister and then finance minister in Ariel Sharon’s government, before resigning in 2005 in protest at Israel’s withdrawal from the occupied Gaza Strip. In 2009, he was elected PM again. Migration to Israel of more than a million citizens of the former Soviet Union (at least 10% of Israel’s whole population) over the previous 20 years had led the country’s politics to take a more conservative, nationalistic turn – reinforced by the collapse of the peace process, the Second Intifada (2000-2005) and rising Palestinian terrorism. By 2007, Hamas had taken power in Gaza.

    What policies has he pursued?
    A champion of free market economics who has nurtured hi-tech startups, he has also gained notoriety for trying to reshape Israel’s institutions. His attempts at media manipulation, allegedly offering deals in return for favourable coverage, have embroiled him in two criminal cases; while his proposed “judicial reform” law is widely seen as an attempt to weaken the judiciary. On the Palestinian issue, Netanyahu, in theory, changed tack in 2009, endorsing a two-state solution with a “demilitarised” Palestine.

    But he continued to undermine it in practice. His governments have supported Israeli settlers who build on land in the West Bank designated by the UN as Palestinian. He has been in a coalition with ultra-nationalist settler parties since late 2022. His Gaza strategy was, until recently, to keep Hamas in power, as a counterweight to the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank. He allowed Qatar to fund Hamas, believing that it could be safely contained militarily. Since Hamas’s attacks of 7 October 2023, he has once again opposed a two-state solution, saying that he was “proud to have prevented the establishment of a Palestinian state … after we saw the little Palestinian state in Gaza”.

    How did 7 October affect him?
    The attacks, in which 1,195 people were killed and 251 taken hostage, were the result of serious intelligence failings, and initially dealt a crushing blow to Netanyahu’s reputation, and to his Hamas policy. His relentless prosecution of the war in Gaza since, in which 64,200 people have died, according to Palestinian authorities, has damaged Israel’s global standing (though the campaign still has significant support at home). It is widely suspected that he has kept the war going to delay a reckoning over his failures, and to reduce the possibility of his being tried on corruption charges, relating to media manipulation and allegedly receiving expensive gifts from businessmen.

    Why is he still in power?
    What looked like a disaster has also proved an opportunity: it gave Israel the chance not just to destroy Hamas as a military force, but to decimate its ally Hezbollah in Lebanon, and to execute the “12-day war” against Iran’s nuclear facilities. Netanyahu has seized the opportunity to redraw the map of the Middle East, humiliating Iran and its “axis of resistance” and bolstering his own position. But the basic tensions remain: his own coalition pushes for “total victory” in Gaza, while much of the world, the Muslim world in particular, demands a fair settlement for the Palestinians.

    Dealing with Washington
    “Who the f**k does he think he is? Who’s the f**king superpower here?” These were reportedly Bill Clinton’s words after his first meeting with Netanyahu, in 1996. The Israeli PM knows the US and its media well, and – buoyed by pro-Israel lobby groups and support from the Christian Right – he has felt confident to push back against Democratic presidents who have sought to rein in Israel. Barack Obama’s officials described him as “untrustworthy” and “disrespectful toward the president”. In 2015, Netanyahu accepted a Republican invitation to address Congress – and railed against the nuclear deal Obama was brokering with Iran. He had better relations with Joe Biden, especially after 7 October. But by the time Biden left office, he was privately referring to Netanyahu as an “asshole”.

    Donald Trump, by contrast, has been a near-perfect ally. The US officially recognised Jerusalem as Israel’s capital in Trump’s first term. In 2020, his administration brokered the Abraham Accords, normalising relations between Israel and several Arab states; Trump joined Israel’s attacks on Iran, and has suggested Palestinians be removed from Gaza. He has even called for Netanyahu’s corruption charges to be dropped.

     
     
    controversy of the week

    The attack on Doha

    “The symbolism could not be sharper,” said Mohamad Ali Harisi in The National. On Tuesday, Hamas’s negotiating team in Qatar was debating a new US proposal for a ceasefire in Gaza, supposedly endorsed by Benjamin Netanyahu’s government – when Israel “tried to wipe them out”. Israeli jets fired missiles into a compound in a residential district of Doha, the capital of a nation that has “worked tirelessly to host ceasefire talks”.

    At least five Palestinians and one Qatari were killed. Add in the fact that Israeli forces are still pushing into Gaza City, and fresh Israeli settlements are being carved out of Palestinian land in the West Bank, and the message to the world is clear: “Israel’s extremist ministers would rather sabotage diplomacy than see a deal emerge.” Israel doesn’t want peace. It wants war, and land. In theory, Netanyahu has two objectives in Gaza, said Haaretz: defeating Hamas and freeing the 20 or so living Israeli hostages. But it’s now obvious that the talks about freeing them were nothing more than a “charade”. For the hostages, this reckless attack was a “death sentence”.

    The strike on Doha was “legitimate” and “long overdue”, said Avi Issacharoff on Ynetnews. After 7 October, the logical step should have been to target every senior Hamas figure. And Qatar, a country that has long hosted Hamas’s leadership, and has given it billions in funding, was never a neutral broker.

    Hamas claimed responsibility for this week’s terrorist attack in Jerusalem with relish, said The Daily Telegraph. Six civilians were killed. Israel believes, reasonably enough, that it should fight fire with fire – that its future security “will only be guaranteed once Hamas has been completely destroyed”. Peace is a laudable aim, but it cannot happen “so long as Hamas remains dedicated to the destruction of Israel and continues to murder civilians”.

    But even on its own terms, the bombing was a failure, said Mark Almond in the Daily Mail. Israel’s audacious attacks on Iran’s military top brass, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and the Houthis in Yemen have been very successful. But instead of “decapitating” Hamas, this strike appears to have killed only the son of the chief negotiator, Khalil al-Hayya, other minor Hamas officials, and a Qatari officer. It has also disastrously undermined one of Netanyahu’s long-term projects: normalising its relations with the more moderate Arab states.

    Astonishingly, it seems the US “did not move to stop the attack”, said Patrick Cockburn in The i Paper – though Qatar is a close ally, which hosts the largest US base in the Middle East. A White House spokesperson said that President Trump felt “badly” about the attack, but it confirmed that he knew it was coming – yet did not intervene. If Israel can bomb Qatar, as it has bombed Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Iran and Yemen, then “no state in the region is safe”. This is “deeply irrational” of Trump: “it is not in American interests to further destabilise the entire Middle East”.

     
     

    Spirit of the age

    Church attendance in the UK has plummeted over the decades, and 46% of the population can be classed as “religiously unaffiliated” – but when asked if they believe in God, an afterlife, or “something spiritual beyond the natural world”, only 20% say no to all three. According to research by the Pew Research Centre, 33% of those who say they have no religious affiliation say they believe in an afterlife, and 24% believe in God – as do 8% of the self-identified atheists who make up 14% of the UK population.

     
     
    Viewpoint

    Farage and free speech

    “I was interested to see Nigel Farage in the US Congress, describing this country as ‘North Korea’, where free speech is ‘under assault’. Could this be the same Nigel Farage who, in 2015, tried to get me arrested by Kent police for something I said? I had joked that he’d only been to South Thanet, where he was running, ‘a few times’. He complained. Not for Nigel, though, a mere libel writ. He reported me under the Representation of the People Act 1983, which makes it a crime to spread false information about candidates. I was scared. Fortunately, Kent Police thought it was nonsense. It’s not that I don’t agree about the free speech problem, but he is as guilty as the rest of them, Biggin Hill’s Kim Jong Un.

    Camilla Long in The Sunday Times

     
     
    talking point

    Graham Linehan: free-speech martyr?

    “How many police officers does it take to arrest one middle-aged sitcom writer?” Unfortunately, it’s not a joke, said Frank Furedi in the Daily Mail. When Graham Linehan, the co-creator of Father Ted and The IT Crowd, landed at Heathrow from his home in the US last Monday, five armed police were waiting for him. His alleged offence? A series of posts on X/Twitter in which he had inveighed against trans rights activists. In one, he called them “misogynists and homophobes”. In another, he had tweeted that if a woman saw “a trans-identified male” in a “female-only space”, she should “make a scene, call the cops and if all else fails punch him in the balls”.

    Linehan insists he meant it as humour; but even if you think it’s unfunny or objectionable, it was surely not a pressing police matter. Yet Linehan was arrested and held for 12 hours; he was granted bail only on the condition that he kept off social media. It’s a symptom of a wider issue, said The Times. Britain has a real problem with “the suppression of free speech”.

    The chorus of outrage was predictable, said Marc Burrows in The Independent. But Linehan has spent many years “making inflammatory comments” about trans people, relentlessly hounding “a vulnerable, marginalised group”: he came back to Britain to face charges that he harassed a trans woman and broke her phone. And the truth is that tweets “have real-world consequences”. Free speech has never been absolute. Inciting violence is an offence; and encouraging people to punch trans women certainly sounds like incitement to me.

    I’m no fan of Linehan’s crusade, said Janice Turner in The Times: it has often been “cruel” and counter-productive. “Yet the contrast between the police response to his words and those addressed to women by violent trans activists is simply breathtaking.” Any woman who has spoken out on this subject has received endless death threats and rape threats. We have stopped reporting them because the police just aren’t interested. Yet they seem to jump to attention when trans activists call. The police today mostly won’t attend over a stolen phone or car, even if you can track it to a precise address. “Yet for a problematic tweet, they’ll arrest you at the airport.”

     
     

    It wasn’t all bad

    Drones could be used to fly lifesaving defibrillators to heart attack patients faster than an ambulance can reach them, a government-funded study has found. For the research, in a rural location that ambulances would take time to reach, volunteers were asked to dial 999 when they came across a CPR mannequin. Drones were then dispatched with the machines, which were lowered via a winch as instructions were given over the phone. Experts said the system had proved “promising”, and could soon be rolled out.

     
     
    people

    Chloe Kelly

    In the past three years, Chloe Kelly has twice been England’s hero: first, when she scored the winning goal against Germany in the final of the 2022 Women’s Euros; and again in July when she nervelessly buried a penalty to secure a second Euros championship victory for the Lionesses, this time against Spain. Did Kelly feel the nation’s hopes on her shoulders when she stepped up to the penalty spot? “It didn’t feel like pressure,” she told Tracy Ramsden in The Sunday Times. “I knew I was going to score.”

    She’d missed a few in training the day before, “So I got my misses out of me.” On the spot, she explains, “it’s you versus the keeper and I back myself. Everything goes quiet in my mind at that time… You can’t hear the fans. It’s literally the whistle, me and her. What’s the worst that can happen?” You could lose? “I could miss,” she corrects. “Then the next person steps up and I back them to score. That for me doesn’t feel like pressure. I’ve had the worst moments in my career because of injury not playing, going through tough moments mentally. Missing a penalty doesn’t define me.”

     
     

    Image credits, from top:  Jacqueline Penney / AFPTV / AFP / Getty Images; Ronen Zvulun / Pool / AFP / Getty Images; Alishia Abodunde / Getty Images; Alex Burstow / Arsenal FC / Getty Images
     

    Recent editions

    • Morning Report

      Brazil punishes a coup attempt

    • Evening Review

      Heated rhetoric ramps up

    • Morning Report

      Charlie Kirk’s murder stokes political tensions

    VIEW ALL
    TheWeek
    • About Us
    • Contact Future's experts
    • Terms and Conditions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Cookie Policy
    • Advertise With Us

    The Week is part of Future US Inc, an international media group and leading digital publisher. Visit our corporate site.

    © Future US, Inc. Full 7th Floor, 130 West 42nd Street, New York, NY 10036.