Ending the trial could help break Israel’s political deadlock and toxic polarisation, opening the way for a unity government finally able to confront the country’s real challenges
December 1, 2025 15:23
Pardoning Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is painful, imperfect, and on many levels deeply wrong. And yet, given where Israel finds itself today, it may be the right thing to do.
In an ideal world, the trial would continue. Netanyahu would either be acquitted and see his name cleared or be convicted and face justice like any other citizen. The public would witness that Israel’s judicial system applies equally to all. That outcome would strengthen the rule of law and bolster confidence in democratic institutions.
But Israel does not live in an ideal world. We live in one where the trial has collided with a broken political system – and the consequences have been severe.
Yes, the trial demonstrated equality before the law. But it has also become a political lightning rod, fuelling division and accelerating the collapse of trust in the courts. Society is split not by evidence or legal reasoning but by political identity. For one camp, Netanyahu remains innocent no matter what the judges say. For the other, he will always be guilty. The verdict, whenever it comes, is unlikely to heal anything since half the country will reject it outright.
This is the context in which President Isaac Herzog’s dilemma must be judged. While the legal questions matter, the national consequences matter more, and a pardon could provide a path out of Israel’s political deadlock.
Within the next year Israel faces yet another election – its sixth since 2019. For half a decade, the country has been trapped in a cycle of boycotts and short-lived coalitions. Parties led by Yair Lapid, Benny Gantz, Naftali Bennett, and Avigdor Liberman have refused to sit in government with Likud, justifying the boycott almost entirely on Netanyahu’s indictment.
If there is no trial and no legal cloud, what precisely prevents the formation of a unity government? Policy disagreements are part of democracy but political paralysis does not have to be, especially when the country faces continued challenges and threats on its borders.
Instead of personal vendettas and hardened political red lines, the national priority should be the establishment of a broad Zionist governing coalition capable of dealing with Israel’s real challenges: securing volatile borders, stabilising the economy, meaningfully integrating the Haredi population into civilian and military service, repairing internal divisions, and restoring faith in state institutions.
I recognise the counter arguments – Netanyahu is the one who sowed and created much of the division. He thrives on it and has continuously betrayed his political partners like Benny Gantz to the extent that his word cannot be trusted. It is also true that he is the main person responsible for the failures that led to the October 7 Hamas attack – he was the prime minister for most of the 14 years preceding the attack and he made the decisions that led to the creation of the policy of containment which allowed for Hamas to gain strength.
Nor can it be ignored that a pardon under these circumstances would be unprecedented – it will be issued while a defendant remains on trial, without confession or apology, which traditionally accompany pardons.
All of this is true. But it is also secondary to the reality that Israel’s political system is no longer functioning.
The last elections produced a government dependent on the narrowest sectorial interests – the ultra-Orthodox and far-right factions – leaving the state unable to make fundamental decisions and solve its longstanding issues. Long-term strategy is suffocated by coalition survival tactics.
For years, the only unifying slogan of the opposition was “replace Netanyahu”. At different times that goal was understandable and perhaps necessary. Israeli democracy thrives on leadership change. But after a judicial crisis that tore the country apart and two years of war that have stretched national resilience, has the boycott strategy delivered stability or effective leadership?
The answer is no.
A pardon could open the door to something different: a government drawn from Israel’s Zionist mainstream – Likud alongside Yesh Atid, Blue and White, Yisrael Beytenu, Bennett’s party, and potentially moderate factions from the Religious Zionist camp. A coalition of pragmatic rivals capable of debating policy in the interest of the state. Such a coalition could legislatively confront draft evasion, address long-delayed civil and economic reforms, and conduct national security policy without daily coalition brinkmanship.
Isn’t this what Israel needs most urgently?
The legal case against Netanyahu was always complex. The allegations involving gifts raised uncomfortable ethical questions but not necessarily ones that crossed the criminal threshold. The media-related cases trod into murky territory where journalistic-politician relations are difficult to police. Regardless of the outcome, the verdict was always going to be tough.
A pardon will not erase Netanyahu’s failures or moral responsibility. It will not correct the mistakes that preceded October 7. It will not rehabilitate his political record.
It is only a tool – an imperfect and painful one – aimed at restoring the basic capacity to govern. And this is what Israel needs today – a functioning leadership. Leadership sometimes demands choosing the least damaging option when no choices are good. Pardoning Netanyahu may be precisely that.
The writer is a co-founder of the MEAD policy forum, a senior fellow at JPPI, and a former editor-in-chief of the Jerusalem Post. His newest book is While Israel Slept.
To get more from opinion, click here to sign up for our free Editor's Picks newsletter.
