As Israel approaches the three-year mark since the October 7 attacks and with parliamentary elections imminent, the electoral agenda is dominated by a singular question: "Did he know?" Recent media reports suggesting Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was warned by the United Arab Emirates prior to the attacks have reignited scrutiny of his alleged foreknowledge and responsibility.

This intense focus on Netanyahu's potential failures, however, serves as a mechanism for Israeli society to sidestep a broader confrontation with its collective role in the events leading up to and following October 7. Instead of fostering a genuine reckoning, the election campaign appears to be channeling public anger towards scapegoating Netanyahu, thereby absolving Israeli society and the Zionist movement of their complicity in the preceding violence and the subsequent actions in Gaza.

The narrative surrounding the attacks and their aftermath has largely omitted critical lines of inquiry. There is little insistence on investigating whether the "Hannibal Directive," a controversial military protocol, was enacted during the Israeli military's response on October 7, and if so, how many Israeli citizens it may have harmed. Furthermore, subsequent Israeli military operations have not been scrutinized for potentially endangering Israeli hostages, or for the number of hostages potentially killed by Israeli forces.

Questions surrounding the targeting of key Palestinian negotiators, including Hamas chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran in July 2024 and Hamas delegations in Doha in September 2025, also remain largely unaddressed in public discourse. The repeated rejection of ceasefire proposals that could have facilitated the earlier return of hostages has also garnered minimal attention.

Notably absent from the mainstream discourse is any significant discussion regarding the arrest warrants issued by the International Criminal Court against Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for alleged crimes against humanity. The exclusion of these critical issues from the electoral debate highlights a deeper psychological dynamic at play within Israeli society.

For many Israelis, October 7 represents a profound psychological rupture, creating a dissonance between their self-perception and their complicity in the subsequent violence. The issue, therefore, is not one of misinformation or denial, but rather a collective avoidance of confronting criminality in which a significant portion of society is implicated.

The marginalization of Gaza and Palestinians in the broader Israeli political conversation stems from their systematic dehumanization within Israeli society. This detachment makes it easier to overlook or justify actions that would otherwise be considered abhorrent, creating a barrier to empathy and accountability.

This avoidance of a comprehensive reckoning leaves crucial questions unanswered about the events of October 7 and their aftermath, including the full extent of Israeli responsibility and the implications for future peace efforts. The current political climate, focused narrowly on Netanyahu, risks perpetuating a cycle of violence by failing to address the root causes and societal complicity.