Rabbi Steven Pruzansky, an attorney, is a senior research associate at the Jerusalem Center for Applied Policy.
(Oct. 12, 2026 / JNS)
In recent weeks, reports have saturated the media claiming that before Oct. 7, 2023, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu was warned about an impending Hamas attack by Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, then-Shin Bet chief Ronen Bar and probably others. Netanyahu, it is claimed, ignored all the warnings.
No reports have been corroborated, which has not stopped Netanyahu’s foes from using them as campaign fodder. But these charges recall movies I have seen twice before.
A look at the reaction to similar catastrophes in the United States is instructive. The two analogous intelligence failures in American history were the bombing of Pearl Harbor by Japan on Dec. 7, 1941 (roughly 2,400 Americans killed) and the Arab terror attack on Sept. 11, 2001 (roughly 3,000 Americans killed).
Soon after the Japanese sneak attack, reports circulated in the United States that President Franklin D. Roosevelt knew about the Japanese attack in advance but did not respond because he was seeking to bring the United States into World War II. This accusation was devoid of credible evidence but persists today and has generated an entire literature.
On May 16, 2002, just six months before the midterm elections in the United States, The New York Times breathlessly reported that on Aug. 6, 2001, scarcely a month before Sept. 11, then-President George W. Bush was warned about a potential attack by the CIA. The Presidential Daily Brief was headlined, “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.” The criticism was thunderous and caustic, with Bush lambasted for his alleged indifference to the report and his failure to respond.
Almost two years later, well into his reelection campaign, Bush released the full text of the briefing and explained that the CIA provided no details of what Bin Laden was planning or when and where he planned to do it. Essentially, Bush said, the warning stated that someone “who hated America” was going to attack, and the FBI since 1998 had detected “patterns of suspicious activity consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks” (italics mine), which was not actionable intelligence.
The briefing said nothing that Bush didn’t already know, but that did not prevent the Times from claiming otherwise. This was inaccurate, but the stories were meant to cause political harm to Bush, not reflect historical reality.
That is what is happening here and now in Israel, and we can expect a few more such offerings in the coming weeks from the anti-Netanyahu media, all designed to suppress his vote.
Every branch of government and almost every political figure for the last 35 years bears some responsibility.
No credible evidence has ever surfaced that suggests Netanyahu had actionable intelligence that a Hamas attack on Oct. 7, 2023 was imminent. This is not to suggest that Netanyahu bears no responsibility for the massacre. As the prime minister, he certainly does, but that responsibility is shared by almost everyone in the political class and the security establishment. It was a colossal, systemic failure. Every branch of government and almost every political figure for the last 35 years bears some responsibility.
It is also fair to say, in retrospect, that what has happened since Oct. 8, 2023—the devastation of our enemies on multiple fronts, the decimation of Hamas and Hezbollah, the battering of Iran, the disintegration of the Syrian threat and Israel’s emergence as the leading regional power—could only have happened under Netanyahu.
Within months, most of the political establishment would have agreed to a ceasefire. While this would have returned the hostages, it also would have allowed Hamas to survive, rebuild and regenerate. They would never have attacked Hezbollah or Iran.
What remains a mystery is the differing reactions of Israeli and American societies to national traumas. No American hung placards saying, “FDR is guilty!” or “Bush failed!” No American highways were littered with signs calling on either president to resign or be incarcerated. Indeed, both FDR and Bush were reelected, each approximately three years after their respective catastrophes. Both men were judged more for what they did in the aftermath of the attack and less for not anticipating what they did not know.
Furthermore, the Israeli media actively goads the public in its obsession with forcing Netanyahu to say, “I am responsible.” Their goal is to use this soundbite to open and close the evening news while repeating it endlessly in between.
For the record, neither FDR nor George W. Bush ever accepted personal responsibility for the intelligence failures on their watch. The focus was on the enemy. The responsibility of a national leader is assumed.
Ironically, many of those aiming to replace Netanyahu share responsibility for the conditions that led to Oct. 7. These are the same individuals who recommended the coddling and funding of Hamas, hesitated to eliminate the group when given the chance and neglected the vast tunnel networks of Hamas and Hezbollah. They championed the “small and smart army” doctrine and fostered the conceptzia that ultimately led to catastrophic intelligence failures. This list also includes supporters of the Oslo Accords and the Gaza Disengagement—those who believed it was wise to grant territory to terrorist groups.
The opposition is running on Oct. 7 and little else. Netanyahu is running on Oct. 8 and beyond.
We would do well as a nation to recall the words of the late Rabbi Jonathan Sacks: “The Jewish people right now needs leaders, people unafraid to face the challenges of today and build for tomorrow instead of, as so often happens, fighting the battles of yesterday.”