>> Read the full position paper in pdf
The October 7 attack represents the biggest failure in Israel’s history to protect the lives of its citizens and defend its sovereignty, a grave political-security debacle that engendered a profound crisis of trust in the state’s institutions. Given that the individuals potentially responsible for the failure that enabled the attack comprise the entire political and security leadership, what is needed is an institutionally independent investigation, which can only be carried out by a state commission of inquiry.
The need for an investigation is based on the realization that a recovery process calls for ascertaining the facts, understanding what caused the failures, and drawing professional conclusions whose implementation will lessen the danger of similar blunders in the future.
In all the countries where they are commonplace, including Israel, the decision to introduce commissions of inquiry was prompted by a crisis of confidence in state institutions leading to the conclusion that only an autonomous and apolitical entity will regain the public’s trust and restore the legitimacy of these institutions in the long term.
The Commissions of Inquiry Law states that the government is authorized to establish a state commission of inquiry to investigate “a matter of vital public importance at that time.“ There is no doubt that the October 7 attack abundantly meets this criterion, by virtue of its severe consequences, the key role played by public institutions and high-level officials, and the unprecedented distrust in the state’s ability to fulfill its most fundamental role, which is to protect the lives of its citizens.
Despite the need and justification for it, there is a very low chance that the current government will appoint such a commission. First of all, governments tend to avoid, or even to oppose, the establishment of commissions to probe debacles for which they may be held accountable. Secondly, based on a comparison between his 17-year cumulative tenure as prime minister and other Israeli governments, Netanyahu has shown exceptionally strong aversion to use this tool. Third, Netanyahu has to date adamantly refused to accept any responsibility for the political-security failure that enabled the 7 October attack. Fourth, the non-apolitical attitudes of Netanyahu’s governments in recent years are incompatible with the principles underlying the institution of independent inquiry commissions.
Having said that, to the extent that the October 7 debacle should go on stirring public unrest, the government may choose to allay the pressure by appointing a commission. Given the very high level of public attention commanded by the blunders preceding the attack, a vigorous public demand for an inquiry commission and prominence of the issue in the public agenda have in the past shown to contribute to the chances of such a development, and therefore there is merit in pursuing the efforts in this direction.