Last Tuesday, a video clip showing Yashar! chairperson and former chief of staff Gadi Eisenkot speaking English hesitantly, with a heavy Israeli accent, was posted by Yonatan Urich, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s strategic adviser, on his social media.
It was reported that Urich – who was indicted two days later on charges of “transmitting classified information [to the German Bild tabloid back in September 2024 – SHR] with the intent of harming state security” – admitted that Likud had opened a campaign of ridiculing Eisenkot, after the latter had challenged Netanyahu to participate with him in a public debate.
The whole episode is rather strange. First of all, Eisenkot’s challenge to Netanyahu at this stage seems premature. Since the establishment of his party, Yashar!, last September, Eisenkot has been progressively gaining popularity in the opinion polls. Toward the end of last week, Yashar! actually reached equality in several of the polls with Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid’s joint Together party, and in at least one poll Eisenkot was seen as being more suitable than Netanyahu to be prime minister.
However, let us not forget that we are at least four months before the elections to the 26th Knesset, and we do not yet know who will be the candidate for prime minister from the Center-Left bloc of parties. It might or might not be Eisenkot.
In addition, Netanyahu might decide to interfere with the smooth running of the elections or, alternatively, decide not to run at all (as suggested by US President Donald Trump last Wednesday) for health reasons or because the polls will continue to suggest that he will lose.
There are three self-professed candidates that could run on behalf of the current opposition against Netanyahu: Bennett, Eisenkot, and Yisrael Beytenu chairperson Avigdor Liberman. Though Yisrael Beytenu is the smallest of the three relevant parties (The Democrats, a left-wing party, is not relevant in this context), Liberman insists he should lead the bloc because of his greater and longer political experience compared to the other candidates.
However, in the final reckoning, the choice will probably be between Eisenkot and Bennett. The relevant question is who is more likely to attract disappointed right-wingers from Likud. Since Bennett is considered a liberal right-winger and Eisenkot is more of a centrist, Bennett is viewed as preferable for the bloc. Nevertheless, there are those who consider Eisenkot to be a more suitable candidate from other perspectives.
The English language issue
Even though the question of whether there should be a pre-election debate between the two leading contenders for prime minister – one from Likud and one of the leaders of the opposition parties inside or outside the current Knesset – is premature at this stage, the question of whether polished English is one of the necessary qualifications for the job ought to be addressed.
Unless my memory fails me, I do not remember ever hearing former German chancellor Angela Merkel speak English (she was chancellor for 16 years), nor Vladimir Putin, who has served as prime minister and then president of Russia over the last 27 years.
Of all Israel’s prime ministers since its establishment in 1948, Netanyahu’s English has been the most impressive, though I would argue that the (British) English spoken by former foreign minister Abba Eban (1966-1974) was more polished than Netanyahu’s and that Eban was a far more impressive orator. Would Eban have made a good prime minister? I doubt it.
Of course, fluent English is a benefit for a prime minister or president who must occasionally engage in intricate and highly consequential diplomatic negotiations or present the positions of his country to foreigners by means of the international media. However, what is much more important for the person’s success in diplomatic endeavors is not the quality of the language he speaks but the accuracy of the content.
At least since he entered Israeli politics in 1988 (but even before, as a diplomat in the US), Netanyahu’s English has been impressive. However, has it always served to express the truth? Has it always been wise? Has it always been well received? And is Israel’s current international isolation the result of a deterioration in the quality of Netanyahu’s English, or is it the result of his policies, or absence thereof, or his occasional flimsiness with facts?
We all remember the recorded whispers of former French president Nicolas Sarkozy and former US president Barack Obama during the November 2011 G20 summit in Cannes, when a stray open microphone broadcast a candid exchange between them regarding Netanyahu. Sarkozy was overheard stating, “I cannot stand him. He’s a liar,” while Obama replied, “You’re fed up with him? I have to deal with him every day.”
Eisenkot's qualifications and use of English
And back to Eisenkot’s English. His command of the language is far from perfect, but it is basically correct and clear. You will not catch him with embarrassing mistakes, like Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich’s famous “grandmiser” (he was searching for the word “grandmother”), which did not elicit mockery from Likud.
One is reminded of the mockery from Likud circles regarding David Levy’s English when he served as foreign affairs minister in Yitzhak Shamir’s government in 1990-1992, but never a word about his excellent French, which he acquired in Morocco, where he was born and grew up. Eisenkot, whose parents also came from Morocco (he was born in Israel), said about the current episode that it was purely racist in origin and unworthy of comment.
One wonders why Likud has chosen to mock Eisenkot on these ridiculous grounds. It has been suggested that Likud is worried about Eisenkot’s growing popularity, which appears to be connected to his honesty, modesty, and pleasant demeanor; his effective military career; the fact that he lost his youngest son and two additional young family members in the war in the Gaza Strip; and his constructive contribution as a member of Netanyahu’s emergency unity government within the framework of Benny Gantz’s National Unity party, from October 12, 2023, to June 9, 2024.
Eisenkot served in the government as minister-without-portfolio, and as an active observer in the war cabinet, where he kept warning against the absence of strategic decisions and demanded that hostage deals be negotiated urgently.
It is still too early to predict whether Eisenkot will be our next prime minister. All one can say is that if he will be, his premiership will be very different from Netanyahu’s – far beyond his imperfect English.
The writer has written journalistic and academic articles, as well as several books, on international relations, Zionism, Israeli politics, and parliamentarism. From 1994 to 2010, she worked at the Knesset Library and the Knesset Research and Information Center.