Security Cabinet to Meet on Iran Amid Caretaker Debate

Israel's Security Cabinet will convene on Sunday, November 15, for the first time since early October. The meeting comes amid a sharpening debate over whether a caretaker government has the authority to launch a new military campaign against Iran.

The question stems from an unprecedented political situation. President Isaac Herzog has given Gadi Eisenkot, chairman of the Yashar! party, the mandate to form the next government. Caretaker Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, however, remains in charge and continues to direct Israel's security policy on Iran.

The debate is unfolding against a deep political rift and disagreements with Washington. Senior figures in the so-called change bloc accuse Netanyahu of pushing for a unilateral operation against Iran. They say this runs against the position of US President Donald Trump, whose administration is currently holding talks with Tehran on an arrangement.

On Wednesday, November 11, Eisenkot sent Netanyahu an unusual formal letter calling on him to avoid dangerous security moves during the transition period. "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," Eisenkot wrote. "At this time, as is well known, you are serving as the prime minister of a caretaker government that no longer enjoys the confidence of the Knesset. Only 46 Knesset members still support your continued tenure as prime minister."

Eisenkot wrote that troubling reports had emerged in recent weeks about extraneous considerations being introduced into Israel's security decisions. Against that background, he stressed that the prime minister has a duty to exercise extra caution and responsibility in making security and national decisions.

Netanyahu rejected the letter. "All decisions were made for security considerations only. The letter is irresponsible," he said.

According to reports, the proposed move has also met with reservations from IDF Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir and senior defense officials. The same change bloc figures claim the goal is to "burn" the days of Eisenkot's mandate. Netanyahu, for his part, says Israel faces a moment of truth and that removing the Iranian threat requires a decisive resolution.

Legally, the picture is clearer than it may first appear. Section 40 of Basic Law: The Government states that going to war, or taking significant military action that could lead to war, requires a decision by the government or by a Security Cabinet authorized to make it. The prime minister cannot make such a decision alone.

The law draws no distinction between a regular government and a caretaker one. Under Section 30 of the Basic Law, an outgoing government continues to fulfill all its functions until a new government is sworn in, so its security powers remain fully intact.

Supreme Court rulings, however, hold that a caretaker government must act with restraint and proportionality because its public legitimacy has changed. When an immediate security need arises that cannot be delayed, the government retains wide latitude. The legal and public questions become far more pressing if it decides on an initiated military move that, operationally, could wait until the political situation is resolved.

At Sunday's meeting, ministers are expected to review their previous decision of October 4, which dealt with raising readiness for attack and surprise-strike scenarios. They will then decide how to proceed on the Iranian front, under American pressure and amid political sensitivity at home.

The tension comes as Washington pursues contacts with Iran. US Vice President JD Vance is considering a direct meeting with Mohsen Rezaei, a senior Iranian security official and secretary of the Supreme National Security Council. The meeting would be part of efforts to advance an agreement to end the war between the countries. President Trump has authorized Vance to move the contacts forward, and Qatar is emerging as a possible venue.

Meanwhile, people around Netanyahu have begun signaling that Likud would not insist on including the Otzma Yehudit party if negotiations open on a unity government. This contrasts with Netanyahu's campaign statements, in which he pledged to stand by his coalition partners, including Itamar Ben Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich. According to the report, Netanyahu's associates have indicated that Ben Gvir would not be part of such a government, partly because of international criticism of his conduct.