After 41 days without a cabinet, Israel’s Iran file sits in a departing prime minister’s hands

The Jerusalem Post reported on 13 November that the security cabinet “is expected to convene this coming Sunday, November 15, for the first time in more than a month. Its last meeting took place on October 5, before the Knesset elections” — a gap of 41 days spanning the 27 October vote. The reason the meeting carries weight is a single report: the public broadcaster KAN said late on 11 November that the cabinet had instructed the military to step up preparations for a possible attack on Iran, and that the directives “could lead it to carry out activities that could trigger a war.” KAN’s claim has been relayed by agencies but not matched by another Israeli outlet. Channel 12 reported on 10 November that the dispute between Netanyahu and Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir over Iran had resurfaced; Channel 13 reported that the military told both Netanyahu and Gadi Eisenkot it sees no urgent need to strike, but that Israel should join if Washington renews its own attacks. All three are broadcaster reports, not confirmations.

Eisenkot, chairman of Yashar and holder of the mandate to form a government, wrote to Netanyahu on 11 November. “I am addressing you as the one who still holds the reins of government and who is still responsible at this time for the security of the State of Israel, the IDF and the security forces,” he wrote, warning that deploying forces absent a direct and immediate threat “could have devastating consequences for Israeli democracy and public trust in the institutions of government.” He asked Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara to guarantee him regular briefings, saying: “I will not allow a vacuum in oversight of a government that has lost the confidence of the Knesset.” Gulf News notes the letter did not explicitly mention Iran — the Iran framing is the press’s. The Prime Minister’s Office called it “an irresponsible move that publicly discusses sensitive security matters.” Defence Minister Israel Katz said Israel’s security “is not in transition.” Avigdor Liberman warned on 12 November against dragging Israel into war without oversight.

The two men met for two hours in Jerusalem on 12 November, with Netanyahu’s military secretary Maj. Gen. Guy Markizano present. Haaretz’s Noa Shpigel reported the briefing followed repeated requests from Eisenkot’s associates, and that the PMO asked to move a scheduled Markizano-only meeting so Netanyahu could attend. The joint statement said only that “Eisenkot was briefed on the security and diplomatic challenges facing the State of Israel at this time.” Beforehand, a source familiar with the briefing told Channel 12 that “once Eisenkot is exposed to the full intelligence picture, he will understand everything” — an anonymous leak that served the PMO. On the law, Neve Gordon of Queen Mary University of London told Al Jazeera that “a caretaker prime minister can legally take Israel to war, including against Iran.” Ynet’s own framing: Israeli law neither prohibits it nor grants unlimited authority.

Assessment: The operative fact is institutional, not legal. Any strike requires security cabinet approval, and the security cabinet is chaired by Netanyahu and staffed by his ministers — the body that would authorise the war is the only one the election did not touch. That is why Eisenkot’s letter asks for briefings rather than a veto: he has no mechanism, only publicity. Read the week’s broadcaster reports with care. KAN’s war-preparation line is single-sourced; Channel 13’s no-urgency line is single-sourced and cuts the other way. Both serve identifiable camps inside the defence establishment. Amos Harel’s Haaretz column calling Iran Netanyahu’s “lifeline” is analysis, and widely read as such in Israel — it is not evidence of intent.