The Israeli government has finally launched an investigation into the failures that led to the Hamas massacre of Oct. 7, 2023 — but not the independent state commission of inquiry that Israeli law, democratic norms, and public sentiment demand.

Instead, it is pursuing an internal investigation — a scheme central to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s efforts to escape political consequences for the catastrophe, and an evolution of his broader project to weaken Israel’s checks and balances.

To understand how we got here, we must recall the argument the government now uses against a state commission: that the public supposedly “does not trust” any effort involving the Supreme Court. This narrative is new, and also false. Until only a few years ago, polling consistently showed that the Supreme Court was one of the most trusted institutions in Israel.

But as soon as criminal indictments for corruption were filed against him in 2019, Netanyahu launched a sustained campaign portraying the court as a bastion of left-wing activism, suspect in its motives at every turn. His claims on this front have, from the start, been false. But a falsehood repeated often enough can shift public sentiment. That appears to be part of the plan.

When Netanyahu addressed the Knesset last week, he claimed that the “vast majority” of the Israeli public “does not believe” in establishing a state commission. This is a transparent lie. According to the Israel Democracy Institute, 74% of Israelis — including 75.5% of Jews and 68% of Arabs — support establishing a fully independent state commission. Among leftists and centrists, support is above 85%.

Families of Oct. 7 victims stood and turned their backs on him. But while the lies may sound obvious, they have had a measurable effect, particularly on the right. This intentional erosion of trust aims to weaken oversight, expand executive power, and delegitimize any institution capable of restraining the government.

Israel has an accepted mechanism for drawing lessons from national disasters, established by the State Commissions of Inquiry Law of 1968. Under that act, commissions are chaired by sitting or retired Supreme Court justices endowed with sweeping quasi-judicial powers and full independence from government control.

The Agranat Commission after the Yom Kippur War and the Bejski Commission after the early-1980s banking crisis are remembered as credible precisely because they were insulated from political manipulation. Their conclusions reshaped national understanding and restored institutional trust, although the Agranat Commission is criticized for largely clearing Golda Meir’s government of blame.

A Sunday decision by the government to instead establish its own probe will, by contrast, allows ministers to determine the mandate, membership, and powers of a “government commission.” In practice, that means those under scrutiny will choose their own investigators, and can limit the scope of the enterprise.

The need for a true reckoning — not this parody of corruption run amok — could not be more urgent. The Oct. 7 attack revealed systemic collapse across Israel’s entire security and political architecture.

Internal reviews since have made clear that longstanding assumptions about Hamas — particularly the belief that the group was deterred and more interested in governance than conflict — were catastrophically misguided. The military left the Gaza border with minimal protection, with much personnel diverted to the West Bank to try to contain provocations against the Palestinians by militant settlers backed by the government. The Defense Minister, Chief of Staff, head of Military Intelligence, head of the Shin Bet, and other senior officials from that period have all resigned or been removed.

These failures were not solely operational; they were strategic, doctrinal, and political. For years, Netanyahu’s Gaza policy — allowing Qatari cash into the Strip, sidelining the Palestinian Authority, insisting that Hamas could be “managed” and finding a benefit in having the Palestinians be politically divided — shaped Israel’s thinking.

Netanyahu, however, has refused to even hint at accepting any responsibility. During the Gaza war, he argued that any inquiry must await its conclusion. Critics howled that such a claim incentivized his prolonging of the war — but thus did Netanyahu buy two more years of time.

Now, with the war seemingly over, comes this latest machination.

Critics across Israeli society have already labeled the government’s decision a whitewash and a cover-up. The Movement for Quality Government decried “a transparent attempt to evade a real and independent investigation.” The October Council — representing bereaved families, survivors, and relatives of hostages — condemned the move as an attempt by those in power to “absolve themselves of punishment.”

The refusal to establish a state commission is not an isolated decision. It sits alongside ongoing efforts to dilute the Attorney General’s authority, undermine independent media, and reshape public understanding of Israel’s core institutions. Internationally, Netanyahu benefits from an American political climate less committed to defending liberal democratic norms. President Trump’s letter to his counterpart Isaac Herzog last week, urging him to pardon Netanyahu and end his bribery trial, underscored this new reality.

In this reality, the election coming up within a year is emerging as a referendum on the fundamental, existential question of whether Israel wants to remain a true democracy, or join the ranks or elected dictatorships, ranging from Viktor Orban’s Hungary all the way to the worst-case scenario of Vladimir Putin’s Russia.

And if Israel votes to save itself from Netanyahu and his cabal, expect the new government to decommission the whitewash — and appoint a state inquiry commission.

The post A new scheme dishonoring victims of Oct. 7 — hatched by Israel’s own government appeared first on The Forward.