Accountability and the Wobbly Chair: Lessons from Failure

Three years after the October 7th attacks, the question of accountability remains central, with the author arguing that a leader who does not face consequences for severe failure poses a danger to the state. The "wobbly chair" is presented not as a sign of instability, but as a crucial safety mechanism, akin to a seatbelt, ensuring leaders remain in place when things go wrong. Without this mechanism, a dangerous complacency can set in, leading to future disasters.

The article draws parallels to past events, citing the Agranat Commission's findings after the Yom Kippur War, which placed responsibility on the military, yet Prime Minister resigned shortly after. It also references the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin, after which the head of the Shin Bet and other officials paid a personal price, not to undo the tragedy, but to underscore that authority and responsibility are intertwined. The author contends that the failures leading to October 7th, despite intelligence and security measures, stemmed from a lack of belief in the threat, a failure that led to the resignation of some senior military and security officials.

The recent incident involving a Flydubai plane, where a co-pilot attempted an attack, is presented as another instance where red flags were missed, raising the question of whether the threat was truly believed. The author points to international examples, such as the resignations of transportation ministers in Greece and Serbia following fatal accidents, highlighting a moral responsibility for events within their purview. The piece concludes by suggesting that if Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had taken ultimate responsibility for the October 7th failures and resigned, it might have fostered a deeper sense of accountability throughout the government, making leaders feel the "wobbly chair" beneath them.

The author reflects on his personal commitment to holding himself to a high ethical standard, particularly since the Rabin assassination. He contrasts leaders who resign when they believe policy is leading to disaster and they cannot effect change, like Avigdor Lieberman in 2018, with those who remain in their positions despite failures. The "wobbly chair," he argues, is not a weakness but Israel's safety belt, reminding leaders that their position belongs to the state and is held only temporarily and responsibly. In contrast, Netanyahu's chair became too stable, allowing for complacency and ultimately leading to the nation's upheaval.