Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has come under withering criticism from relatives of hostages for months.
Some have called him the “Hangman from Gaza Street,” others a “murderer,” and others a “traitor.” He has been depicted as a man who would condemn over 100 hostages to their deaths rather than lose his government and as a heartless leader apathetic to the suffering of his people, prolonging the war – meaning condemning additional soldiers to death – simply to gain a reprieve from his legal woes.
At times, this type of criticism is deafening. When these voices are raised and amplified in the media, the reflex of a not insignificant portion of the country is simply to close their ears and tune it out: to chalk it up to pain, to loss, to hurt, or to a pathological hatred of the prime minister.
The nature of the press these days, heavily influenced by social media, is to highlight the extreme. If one wants to get heard, scream the loudest and come up with the most extreme formulations.
Often, however, these arguments are drowned out by the nastiness of the tone, and people will stop listening because of the sheer unpleasantness of the rhetoric, causing the message to be lost in the abrasive manner of its presentation.
Calling Netanyahu a “murderer” or a “hangman” may resonate with a specific part of the population, but it definitely does not strike a chord with many others.
This is what made the criticism voiced by Elhanan Danino, whose son Ori was among the six hostages executed by Hamas two weeks ago, stand out.
Leaked tape
A tape of a conversation Danino had with Netanyahu during a shiva visit on Monday was leaked to KAN Bet, and it caused a mini-sensation. The tape was aired over and over on Monday and Tuesday morning, both on the radio and television, and Danino and his wife were interviewed numerous times about Netanyahu’s visit.
Their words caused a commotion not necessarily because of what they said – their criticism had been aired before – but rather because of the way it was said, the sincerity in which it came across, and because it was stated directly to Netanyahu.
Another reason their words seemed to resonate more loudly than some of the other criticism voiced by hostage family members is because Danino and his wife are Mizrachi haredim (ultra-Orthodox), with Danino saying in an interview on KAN Bet on Tuesday that former Sephardi chief rabbi Yitzhak Yosef is his spiritual leader.
What differentiated his criticism of Netanyahu, though it was sharp, from others, was that it was focused on the issues, not on personal attacks. Criticism that is pertinent, not personal, resonates louder.
“I don’t know if there was a [hostage] deal [to be had] or not, but forgive me, everything happened under your watch,” Danino was heard saying in his meeting with Netanyahu.
“My son was killed in a tunnel that was built under your watch. Forgive me, you’ve been in power for many, many years. The concrete and dollars came into [Gaza] during your watch. You are responsible for everyone’s lives.”
Danino, without leveling a brutal personal attack on the prime minister, articulated what many feel: that since Netanyahu has been in power for 14 out of the last 15 years, he owns the country’s policy toward Gaza and Hamas. It is his. He cannot avoid it and must take responsibility for it.
Danino, in the KAN Bet radio interview on Tuesday, said that the day before Netanyahu’s visit, they spoke by phone and he told the prime minister about what was read from the Torah last Shabbat: the precept of the egla arufa (the broken-necked heifer).
This refers to a ritual described in the Torah that involves a ceremony performed when an unsolved murder occurs in the countryside. “They measure the steps to the nearest city and say to the elders of the town, ‘Don’t say that your hands did not spill this blood,’ because merit is brought through a meritorious person, and liability through a person who is liable,” Danino said, recalling the conversation. “I am not a judge, I am not determining anything, but we have a Torah, and the Prophets, and Writings, which [Netanyahu] always quotes. There is a path. Jewish heritage was not established today, and Israel was not established today. It is the inheritance of our forefathers.”
Danino said he told the prime minister that he felt some of those values had become blurred and asked that Netanyahu bring the Jewish values of mutual responsibility and solidarity into his office.
How Danino spoke to the prime minister in the leaked recordings and on the radio and television set him apart. Danino stressed that he apologized at the beginning of his comments to Netanyahu: “I very much asked his forgiveness before I said what I said, and I had no intention of insulting him. The commandments governing man’s interaction with his fellow man are very important to me. It is one of the foundations of solidarity.”
While one of Danino’s sons did go after Netanyahu in a personal manner during the visit, saying that Netanyahu built himself up on the back of his brother, Yoni, who was killed at Entebbe, the father, Elhanan, was careful with his words and respected the prime minister’s honor.
But he did not mince words in attributing to Netanyahu responsibility for the division that predated October 7 and that has now reappeared. In this, he articulated the feelings of many, but did so in a respectful way.
“Stop messing around up there with nonsense and stirring up strife. We don’t deserve this land without unity. And we will have no rebirth [as a nation] without this land.
“This disaster happened because of the division and disunity that exists; it’s as clear as day that this is what happened. Don’t engage in petty and cheap politics and spin – there is no price for human life.”
Danino, in words that much of the country could sign off on and is thirsty to hear – and which are repeated in interview after interview with bereaved family members or returning or wounded reservists – said: “Strengthen unity, strengthen love of Israel, stop the spin and the nonsense. Seriously! You are the leader, you were elected to lead. Cleanse yourself of all the nonsense. Too many other things have entered into this.”
The media dealt extensively with Danino’s comments, not necessarily because of anything new in them, but rather because of how they were delivered. There was something refreshing in the manner in which this was all articulated. This was constructive, not destructive, criticism.
Danino said his words came from his heart and were intended to enter the prime minister’s heart. His words sounded full of pain as well as a deep concern for the welfare of the hostages, the country, and the Jewish people.
But more than anything else, what set these sharp words apart is that they were void of the hate that has too often crept into this type of conversation. It is the lack of this hatred that made these words more powerful and the reason they resonated as loudly as they did.