RIYADH: Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has been outspoken in his criticism of Benjamin Netanyahu. While stopping short of accusing his successor of committing genocide, he has repeatedly said that what is happening in Gaza constitutes war crimes.

Speaking to Katie Jensen, host of the Arab News current affairs program “Frankly Speaking,” Olmert said that although Israel’s response was justified following the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas-led attack, the conflict had become untenable — and a “death trap for Israelis.”

“The whole war which started after the ... violation of the temporary ceasefire agreement in March of 2025 is an illegitimate war,” said Olmert, who served as prime minister from 2006 to 2009.

“And in the illegitimate war, which is opposed by the majority of the Israelis, over 70 percent, in which lots of Israeli soldiers will be killed, when there is a serious danger to the lives of the hostages, and there will be thousands of Palestinians killed for a war which has no objective, which can’t reach any goal, which will do nothing good for any party involved, such a war is a crime, and I’ve accused the Israeli government of doing it.”

He added that many Israelis now believe the war primarily serves Netanyahu’s personal interests rather than the families of the remaining hostages and the security of wider Israeli society.

“This is what everyone says in Israel now,” he said. “This is an unneeded and unnecessary war, that there is not any national interest of Israel which can be served by continuing the war. And therefore, the inevitable conclusion is that it serves the personal interests of the prime minister. This is something which has been said by everyone.

“Expanding the war now against Gaza, which is so densely populated with more than a million people and where Hamas is hiding inside the most densely populated areas with non-involved citizens, is a death trap for Israelis, for something which doesn’t serve any national interest is a crime, and you have to ask yourself: What does it serve? And therefore many people conclude that it serves a personal interest.”

When asked by Jensen whether he still believes Netanyahu belongs in The Hague to face war crimes charges, Olmert said he did not recall making such a statement. This is despite a widely shared clip from an interview with UK broadcaster Piers Morgan on June 2, in which Olmert was asked directly whether Netanyahu should face trial in The Hague.

“Look, there should be a voice. And if as a result of the fact that I was prime minister and I’m fairly well-known in the international community that people want to hear what I have to say, I have to say it. Yes,” Olmert told Morgan in the clip.

Although he now appears to have walked back those comments, Olmert did endorse describing Israel’s Minister of National Security Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich as terrorists, calling them “messianic” and “extremists.”

Ben-Gvir has provoked outrage by leading Jewish prayers at Jerusalem’s Al-Aqsa Mosque, violating long-standing agreements and drawing condemnation from Palestinian, Arab, and international leaders.

He has also advocated for Israeli sovereignty over Gaza, and promoting mass “voluntary” Palestinian emigration. Western governments have sanctioned him for incitement to violence and past criminal convictions for supporting terrorism and racism.

Smotrich, also sanctioned by Western states, has been criticized for inflammatory statements backing settlement expansion in the West Bank, incitement against Palestinians, and positions seen by EU partners and rights groups as undermining Palestinian rights and peace prospects.

Jensen teed up the issue with this question: “When we look at some of the comments from (Netanyahu’s) ministers, people like Smotrich, who said there is no such thing as Palestinian people — he stood under a map of ‘Greater Israel’ while saying that — he also said the Palestinian village of Huwara should be wiped out.

“Or comments from Ben-Gvir, who went on Israeli television and said his right to move freely in the West Bank is more important than Palestinians’ freedom of movement … If we consider these men’s words and actions, in your view, are these men terrorists?”

Olmert was unequivocal in his response.

“Look, this is an easy part of the question,” he said. “Yes, they are in a way in the sense that Ben-Gvir was convicted for taking part in what is considered to be terrorist actions in the past. But I think that this situation is more, somewhat more complex.

“Let’s face it. On one hand, there are these messianic groups, which are totally, totally unacceptable. For the majority of the Israelis, there’s no question about it. They are extreme, they are messianic.

“Yes, indeed, they want to expel all the Palestinians from the West Bank and annex the West Bank. And so they want to do it in Gaza. But I think that the majority of the Israelis are against it.”

Unlike Netanyahu, who has leaned into the rhetoric of his far-right ministers, Olmert said he would never have supported the notion of a “Greater Israel” — a political concept espoused by extremists that envisions expanding Israeli territory to include swathes of Palestine, Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, and even land between the Nile and the Euphrates.

Olmert warned that such rhetoric and policies were costing Israel friends and allies.

“There is a deep division between a major part of the public opinion, which is in favor of changing course, and a part which is now governed by the Netanyahus and the group of thugs which are known to be the cabinet ministers,” he said.

“Now, what they are doing, they are causing a very big damage to the reputation of the state of Israel, to the integrity of the state of Israel, and to the perception of what Israel stands for.

“And that causes a huge difficulty in the relations of Israel with the traditional friends of Israel, European countries, France, Germany, Great Britain, Canada, other countries. And it also creates difficulties that will become more and more difficult to deal with, with America.

“And unfortunately also it creates difficulties with our very important friends in Egypt and Jordan, and also in the Emirates. And it certainly prevents the possible movement towards a normalization process with Saudi Arabia.”

Netanyahu has faced corruption charges since 2019, including allegations of bribery, fraud, and breach of trust. His trial, which began in 2020, has been repeatedly delayed on security grounds. He denies all charges.

There are also outstanding arrest warrants issued by the International Criminal Court against Netanyahu and his former defense minister, Yoav Gallant, relating to alleged war crimes in Gaza. Israel itself faces charges of genocide at the International Court of Justice.

Olmert himself resigned as prime minister in 2009 amid corruption allegations and was later convicted and imprisoned for bribery and breach of trust. Despite this, he insists his voice carries weight, arguing that most Israelis now oppose Netanyahu.

Indeed, mass demonstrations across Israel in recent weeks opposing an expansion of the war in Gaza highlight a dramatic shift in public attitudes toward the trajectory of the right-wing coalition government.

“Had I been prime minister, it would have been entirely different,” said Olmert. “I would have adopted what I represented at the time that I was prime minister, talking about the two-state solution, negotiating, (and) hopefully trying to force a Palestinian leadership to comply.”

Olmert said the failure of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process to date could not be blamed entirely on Israel. He recalled that during his tenure he had offered the Palestinians a state, but says they rejected the proposal.

“Let’s not forget that in 2008, 2009, when I was prime minister, I proposed to the president of the Palestinian Authority a comprehensive peace plan based on the (19)67 borders,” he said.

His plan included an Israeli withdrawal from much of the West Bank, land swaps for annexed settlements, a corridor linking Gaza and the West Bank, shared or international administration of Jerusalem’s holy sites, and the symbolic acceptance of a limited number of Palestinian refugees into Israel, with compensation and resettlement for the rest.

The Palestinians rejected the deal over concerns about the right of return, the rushed timetable for consideration, doubts over Olmert’s political survival, and dissatisfaction with the terms on Jerusalem and land allocation.

Regardless of fault, the repeated collapse of peace efforts in this period culminated in the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas-led attack and Israel’s ensuing war on Gaza, which has since killed at least 60,000 Palestinians and left the enclave devastated.

One of the war’s greatest scandals to date has been the creation of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation in early 2025. Critics have denounced the GHF for sidelining UN-led relief mechanisms in favor of a US- and Israeli-backed scheme that placed military personnel and private US contractors in charge of distributing aid in militarized zones.

Reports have documented hundreds of deaths and injuries among Palestinians seeking food at GHF aid sites. Groups including Medecins Sans Frontieres described the locations as scenes of “orchestrated killing” and demanded the program’s immediate suspension.

Olmert said he did not know whether Israelis had deliberately targeted civilians at GHF sites, but insisted it was Israel’s responsibility to feed Gazans.

“I think that there is a lot of fake information about precisely the circumstances regarding the humanitarian supplies and how Hamas is trying to provoke in order to reach out for food for their own needs, knowing that Hamas is not particularly careful about the lives of Palestinians and … how much is it a result of very unacceptable practices of Israeli soldiers. I don’t know,” he said.

“I say one thing and this is at the bottom line, which I think is what counts. Israel controls Gaza, we are in charge there. Therefore, it is incumbent upon Israel to provide the humanitarian needs in Gaza to everyone that needs it, effectively, comprehensively, and without the interference or the provocations of whoever wants to disturb it. This is our responsibility.”