Israel has spent weeks living with a question that has become part of everyday life: What happens tonight? Will Iran attack? Will there be another escalation? Can people fly? Should they leave? Should they stay? In this episode of Tel Aviv Diary, I am joined once again by veteran journalist Dan Perry, who spent many years leading the Associated Press’s coverage of the Middle East, for a wide-ranging discussion about where Israel finds itself after months of war—and where it may be heading next.
We begin with Iran. What was supposed to alter the strategic balance of the Middle East now looks far more complicated. The Iranian regime remains in power, the Strait of Hormuz has become a central strategic problem, and the United States appears increasingly reluctant to continue the confrontation. Dan and I examine how Washington and Jerusalem entered a conflict in which one of Iran’s most predictable responses—the disruption of the Strait of Hormuz—appears not to have been adequately planned for. We also discuss the dangers of a prolonged war of attrition and the enormous military and economic costs that Israel will ultimately have to pay.
That leads inevitably to Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu. Israel placed enormous strategic weight on its partnership with the Trump administration, but what happens when American and Israeli interests—or simply their willingness to continue fighting—begin to diverge? We discuss the consequences of relying so heavily on Washington and whether Israel abandoned one of the central principles that guided its military doctrine for decades: wars should be fought decisively and kept as short as possible because a small democratic country cannot sustain endless conflict.
From there, we turn to the Israeli election. After October 7, the prolonged war and the events of the past several years, one might have expected the coming election to be a foregone conclusion. It isn’t. Netanyahu’s coalition is substantially behind, yet a remarkably large portion of the electorate continues to support the parties that make up the current government. Dan and I discuss why modern elections increasingly resemble contests of identity rather than arguments over policy—and why that makes predicting Israel’s political future so difficult.
We also examine a deeper struggle over the meaning of democracy itself. What does “liberal democracy” actually mean? Why have courts, the military, the Shin Bet, the Mossad, the civil service and the press become targets in Israel’s political struggle? And what happens when citizens come to believe claims about institutions that simply are not supported by the historical record? The debate is no longer merely over left and right; it is increasingly about the institutions, checks and balances, and individual rights that define a democratic state.
The conversation then moves beyond Israel’s borders to a rapidly changing Middle East. Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Pakistan are moving toward a new security alignment—far removed from the hopes, before October 7, that Israel and Saudi Arabia might become pillars of a new regional architecture. We discuss what that emerging Sunni alignment could mean for Israel and whether it represents a genuine strategic threat or, at least for now, something more declarative than operational.
We also confront the unresolved Palestinian question and the demographic reality that Israeli governments have spent decades trying to postpone. There may be little prospect of a Palestinian state in the immediate future, but postponing a solution indefinitely is itself a policy, with consequences. Dan argues starkly that continuing down the present path risks Israel’s long-term viability, including the possibility that the high-tech sector and many of the Israelis who sustain the country’s economy will eventually look elsewhere.
It is, admittedly, not an especially optimistic conversation. But we end on a more hopeful note. Both of us believe the coming election could mark the end of the Netanyahu era. Dan is more optimistic than I am about how quickly the damage can be repaired, but we agree on something more fundamental: Israel’s problems are not necessarily irreversible. A different government could begin the long process of rebuilding institutions, restoring confidence and changing the country’s direction.
And perhaps there is another reason for optimism. As traditional media changes, podcasts, newsletters and independent journalism are creating new places for serious political discussion—places where ideas can still matter and where thoughtful people can still influence the direction of public debate.
A candid, sometimes sharp, and deeply concerned conversation about Iran, Trump, Netanyahu, Israeli democracy, the coming election, the changing Middle East—and the fundamental question facing Israel today: Can the country still change course before the consequences become irreversible?
Comments
Nothing yet. Say the first thing.
Sign in to join the conversation.