To beat Bibi, stop making it about Bibi

Not necessarily because Israelis no longer want him gone. Recent polling suggests Netanyahu and his coalition have a serious fight on their hands. But, because Netanyahu has always been strongest when the election is about Netanyahu. Love him or loathe him, he dominates the story.

For years, “anyone but Bibi” has been shouted at demonstrations, printed on placards, debated endlessly on television and turned into an organising principle for opposition politics. And yet Bibi is still here.

Netanyahu has been written off so many times that predicting his political demise has become something of a fool’s game. He has survived elections, investigations, criminal charges, mass protests, coalition crises, October 7 and a war that changed Israel profoundly.

Now, with Israelis heading back to the polls on October 27, something interesting is happening. The story may be beginning to change.

I spend a lot of time thinking and writing about narratives – in war, politics and information warfare – and particularly about what happens when we try to counter them. We tend to assume that if a narrative is powerful, the answer is to attack it. Correct it. Disprove it. Expose the person telling it.

But what if, by doing that, you help keep it alive?

If I spend all my time arguing against your story, I am still inside your story. I am talking about the characters you have chosen and answering the questions you have framed. Most importantly, I am keeping your story at the centre of the conversation.

This is what Netanyahu’s opponents may have been doing for years. Think about how much of Israeli politics has revolved around one man. Are you for Bibi or against Bibi? Do you believe the cases against him? Is he responsible for October 7? Is he destroying Israeli democracy or defending it? Is he the only Israeli leader capable of standing up to Washington? Can Israel survive another Netanyahu government? Different questions. Same man.

And Netanyahu is exceptionally good at being the protagonist. He understands narrative instinctively. His political story has remained remarkably consistent: Israel lives in a dangerous neighbourhood; he is the experienced statesman who understands that danger; he will stand up to Israel’s enemies and, when necessary, its friends.

Israel did, of course, manage to remove Netanyahu once. In 2021, Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid assembled an extraordinary coalition stretching across the political spectrum and including, for the first time, an independent Arab party. It became known as the “change government.” But change from what? Bibi. Even when Netanyahu was sitting in opposition, he remained the reference point. Within a year, the coalition had lost its majority. The Knesset was dissolved, Lapid took over as caretaker prime minister, and Israelis went back to the polls. By the end of 2022, Netanyahu was back in power.

Which is why I am watching Gadi Eisenkot’s campaign with interest. His slogan is not “Get rid of Netanyahu.” It’s “Israel Must Win.” That distinction matters. Eisenkot launched his campaign talking about education, the economy, public security, national service, the Haredi draft and Israelis leaving the country. He has continued to put issues such as military service at the centre of his political offering. You can agree or disagree with his answers. That isn’t the point. The point is that these are answers about Israel. And this is where the distinction between countering a narrative and replacing one becomes important. If Israel’s opposition makes the election about why Netanyahu must go, Netanyahu remains at the centre of the election.

But what happens if the election becomes about something else? What does Israel look like after October 7? How does it translate military action into sustainable political outcomes? What happens with Gaza? How does Israel deal with the Haredi draft without tearing an already fractured society further apart? How does it repair damaged relationships abroad? How does it restore trust at home? And after years of war and political upheaval, where exactly is Israel going?

Those questions don’t make Netanyahu irrelevant. It would be absurd to suggest they do. But they do something potentially much more damaging to him politically. They make him one of the people who has to answer them.

There is a lesson here that goes well beyond Israeli politics. Governments, militaries, journalists and technology companies spend enormous amounts of time trying to counter disinformation, propaganda and hostile narratives. But I wonder whether we sometimes misunderstand the task. Because a narrative doesn’t have to be true to benefit from being repeated. And rebutting something requires repeating at least part of it. Before long, we can find ourselves spending more time talking about the story we are trying to defeat than the story we want people to hear.

I have seen versions of this repeatedly in conflict reporting. The battle is not only over what happened. It is over which events are selected, which are amplified, what meaning is attached to them and, ultimately, which story becomes the frame through which everything that follows is understood.

Politics is not so different.Sometimes the answer to a powerful narrative is not a more aggressive counter-narrative. It is changing the conversation.

None of this means Eisenkot will win. Netanyahu has been underestimated far too many times for anyone sensible to make that prediction. The opposition remains divided, the electoral mathematics are complicated and there are still more than two months to go.

But perhaps Netanyahu’s opponents have stumbled onto something they should have understood years ago. If you want to defeat a man who has made himself the centre of the political story, stop helping him remain the centre of the political story.

For years, Netanyahu’s opponents have asked Israelis one question: Is it time for Bibi to go?

They may finally have found a better one. Where does Israel go next?