Thirty years ago, shortly after Benjamin Netanyahu assumed the office of prime minister, Israel experienced a significant security crisis known as the Western Wall Tunnel incident. In 1996, Netanyahu, then roughly three months into his term, ordered the uncoordinated opening of an exit to a tunnel in Jerusalem’s Muslim Quarter. This decision was taken unilaterally, without consulting either the security establishment or his cabinet, despite their explicit opposition to the move just days earlier.

The action ignited violent clashes that resulted in the deaths of 11 Israeli soldiers, six Israeli civilians, and more than 100 Palestinians. The incident gravely damaged security cooperation between Israel and the Palestinian Authority and threatened the continuation of the Oslo Accords, which had been signed three years prior.

For years, analysts viewed Netanyahu’s decision as a reckless and negligent security failure. However, historical reviews have also highlighted issues surrounding the transparency of related government records. Historian Adam Raz points out that no official summary or protocols of the cabinet meeting held on September 20, 1996—where the decision to avoid opening the tunnel was recorded—can be found. Mordechai Ben-Porat, who served as cabinet secretary, noted in his memoirs that the records were inexplicably missing. The absence of these documents raised questions about whether they were lost due to oversight or deliberately destroyed.

This episode bears resonance with more recent security controversies involving Netanyahu. In the lead-up to the October 7, 2023 attack by Hamas, reports emerged alleging that Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed, president of the United Arab Emirates, warned Netanyahu about an imminent major operation planned by Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar. Netanyahu has strongly denied that this conversation took place, citing the absence of any calendar entry. Nevertheless, some officials, including former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, have suggested that a prime minister can intentionally suppress such information from the public record.

Observers see parallels between these two events, not only in the handling of official documentation but also in Netanyahu’s broader strategic approach. Critics argue that Netanyahu has consistently pursued a policy of deliberately fostering a state of controlled security chaos in Palestinian territories. This approach, they say, aims to prevent diplomatic progress but carries inherent risks to Israel’s own security by occasionally allowing violence to escalate beyond control.

In both 1996 and 2023, Netanyahu appeared aware of the potential consequences of his decisions or inactions but proceeded nonetheless, guided by a worldview that frames the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as perpetual. Such policies, critics contend, have repeatedly placed Israel’s security and peace prospects in jeopardy in favor of maintaining a status quo shaped by ongoing conflict.