Israeli Doctors Reveal Netanyahu’s Chronic Heart Problem Only After Implanting Pacemaker 

Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attends a session of the Knesset, Israel's parliament, in Jerusalem, Monday, July 24, 2023. (AP)
Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attends a session of the Knesset, Israel's parliament, in Jerusalem, Monday, July 24, 2023. (AP)
TT

Israeli Doctors Reveal Netanyahu’s Chronic Heart Problem Only After Implanting Pacemaker 

Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attends a session of the Knesset, Israel's parliament, in Jerusalem, Monday, July 24, 2023. (AP)
Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attends a session of the Knesset, Israel's parliament, in Jerusalem, Monday, July 24, 2023. (AP)

After undergoing emergency surgery to implant a pacemaker, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, 73, made a video appearance from a hospital near Tel Aviv. Wearing a crisp dark suit, he grinned and declared energetically that he felt "great, as you can see."

But the Sunday photo-op failed to reassure Israelis, who were shocked to learn the same day that their longest-serving prime minister had concealed a long-known heart problem. The admission was a stark contrast to the image of a fully healthy, energetic leader that Netanyahu has gone to great lengths to bolster.

A week after a fainting spell, Netanyahu was urgently fitted with a pacemaker to control his heartbeat. Only then did staff at the Sheba Medical Center reveal Sunday night that Netanyahu has for years experienced a condition that can cause irregular heartbeats.

Until Sunday, the cardiologists had publicly played down concerns, saying the prime minister was dehydrated and describing his heartbeat as "completely normal."

The sudden revelations about Netanyahu’s health troubles came at the height of mass protests against his contentious plan to limit judicial power, with legislators from the governing coalition voting a first key bill into law on Monday.

The news about a chronic heart problem — offered up in a seemingly backhanded way — stoked further anger and distrust at a time of extreme political polarization in Israel.

"The factory of lies surrounding Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s hospitalization continued like an episode of a sitcom," Yossi Verter, a political writer for Israel’s left-leaning daily Haaretz, wrote on Monday. The health crisis, he added, "illustrates more than anything the culture of deceit in which Netanyahu, his ministers and advisers run the country."

Because illnesses can damage a ruler's carefully maintained veneer of invincibility, strongmen around the world often obfuscate their medical history.

But democratic countries, too, have misrepresented the health of their leaders.

Netanyahu’s close ally, former US President Donald Trump, provided a highly sanitized account of his own health – never releasing full details of his medical history before he became president, and limiting information about his COVID-19 diagnosis in 2020. He announced his diagnosis by tweet, but his chief of staff, Mark Meadows, later recounted in a book that Trump tested positive for the virus days before and nevertheless continued with his public schedule and private meetings — a claim the former president has denied.

When Trump was hospitalized to receive an experimental anti-viral treatment, his doctor provided a rosy view of his health, but just minutes later, Meadows told reporters that Trump’s condition was far graver. Officials involved with his care now say Trump came within hours of potentially dying from the virus.

In Israel, the emergency pacemaker surgery marked the latest twist for Netanyahu, who is currently fighting a litany of bribery, fraud and breach of trust charges — a case that has driven Israelis to exhaustion with five elections in four years.

Fueling longstanding accusations that Netanyahu and his wife, Sara, are out of touch with ordinary Israelis, Israeli media reported Monday that his pacemaker cost five times more than a typical model and was not covered by health insurance, citing Medtronic, the manufacturer.

But worrying critics most has been the hospital’s contradictory assessments of Netanyahu’s health and a wider lack of government transparency.

"You can’t ask for public trust if you don’t tell the public the whole picture, and it’s especially important when you talk about a leader’s medical condition," said Tehilla Shwartz Altshuler, a senior fellow at the Israel Democracy Institute, a Jerusalem think tank.

Netanyahu's health saga started last week, after a scorching day spent on a boat in the Sea of Galilee with his family. On Saturday, July 15, Netanyahu was admitted to Sheba hospital after feeling mild dizziness.

The next day, he underwent heart tests, which the prime minister’s office said had all come back clear. Dr. Amit Segev, the director of the hospitals’ cardiology unit, said Netanyahu was fitted with a heart monitor as a purely routine measure "to continue regular monitoring."

"His heart is completely normal, without any evidence (to the contrary)," Segev announced that Sunday.

But a full week later, last Saturday, Netanyahu was rushed to the hospital for sudden surgery to receive a pacemaker.

In a video statement, Dr. Eyal Nof said that the heart monitor had sounded an alert late Saturday after detecting a condition called heart block. The electrical signals that trigger a heartbeat begin in the top of the heart, but during heart block they have trouble reaching the heart's pumping chambers at the bottom. Slow heartbeats, skipped beats and fainting are symptoms. A pacemaker usually controls the disorder but untreated cases can lead to cardiac arrest.

The doctors' delayed acknowledgment of Netanyahu's condition sparked intense public criticism. Sheba Medical Center declined to comment on the mixed messages. A person familiar with Netanyahu’s treatment, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to brief the media, said the hospital was under "strict orders" not to disclose Netanyahu’s condition last week.

"This is a disaster: The doctors knew about his medical condition and lied to the people," said Eliad Shraga, Chairman of the Movement for Quality Governance in Israel, a civil society group. "If he is not in fit and proper condition maybe he is not fit to run a nation in such a crisis."

Netanyahu has not commented on his condition beyond his two upbeat videos released from the hospital, in which he declared feeling "excellent" and ready to carry out business as usual.

In the face of mounting political crises, Netanyahu has carefully crafted an appearance of omnipotence, campaigning on his insistence that only he is capable of leading the tiny country. During his 15 years in power, his good health has largely gone unquestioned. His father, Benzion, died at the age of 102, lending weight to his family’s claims of vigorous health and vitality.

News of Netanyahu’s ailments could jeopardize the personal charisma that has been so critical to his political staying power, experts say.

"He feels that he’s above the law and above nature," said Altshuler.

Netanyahu appeared shaky at times during the legislative sessions on Monday just hours after his release from the hospital, his eyes sunken, but he soldiered on.

Although Israeli government protocol requires that prime ministers release annual medical reports, Netanyahu has not published one since 2016. That report declared his lab tests "completely normal" and his overall health "excellent," only mentioning that a polyp had been removed from his large intestine. In 2018, Netanyahu was briefly hospitalized after suffering from a fever.

Because the protocol is legally unenforceable, Netanyahu has had few other recorded health scares. But last October, he was rushed to a hospital for examination after feeling pains in his chest during his election campaign. He went jogging in a park the next morning, a display of physical fitness made for the cameras.

Ahead of the vote on the first major law to overhaul Israel’s justice system, protesters thronged the Israeli parliament building. Shraga, the good governance advocate, had to shout to be heard over the deafening chants of "De-mo-cra-tia!" — Hebrew for democracy.

"Without transparency, everything is at risk," he said.



25 Years of Unanswered Questions in Iraq

A Saddam Hussein mural is seen in Baghdad in 1991. (Getty Images)
A Saddam Hussein mural is seen in Baghdad in 1991. (Getty Images)
TT

25 Years of Unanswered Questions in Iraq

A Saddam Hussein mural is seen in Baghdad in 1991. (Getty Images)
A Saddam Hussein mural is seen in Baghdad in 1991. (Getty Images)

People in Iraq often wonder dejectedly: What if Saddam Hussein were alive and ruling the country today? Many will reply with fantastical answers, but Saddam’s era would have responded: Iraq is isolated, either by siege or by a war that he launched or was being waged against him.

Many people cast doubt on whether actual change has been achieved in Iraq since the US invasion in 2003. The invasion ousted the Baath version of Iraq and Saddam was executed in December 2006, leaving questions to pile up over the years with no one having any answers.

After a quarter century, Iraq is accumulating questions. It casts them aside and forges ahead without addressing them. At best, it reviews itself and returns to that moment in April 2003 when the US launched its invasion. Or it asks new questions about the 2005 civil war, the armed alternatives that emerged in 2007, how ISIS swept through the country in 2014, or the wave of protests that erupted in 2019. It also asks new questions about Iran’s influence in the country that has persisted for decades.

The questions are many and none of the Iraqis have answered them.

A US marine wraps the American flag around the head of a Saddam Hussein statue in Baghdad. (Reuters file)

Saddam and the alternative

The September 11, 2001, attacks shook the United States and the entire world. They struck fear in Baghdad. Saddam had that year claimed that he had written a book, “The Fortified Castle”, about an Iraqi soldier who is captured by Iran. He manages to escape and return to Iraq to “fortify the castle”.

The terrifying Saddam and the terrified Iraqis have long spun tales about escaping to and from Iraq. It is a journey between the question and the non-answers. That year, when Baghdad was accused of being complicit in the 9/11 attacks, Saddam’s son Uday was “elected” member of the Baath party’s leadership council. The move sparked debate about possible change in Iraq. Bashar al-Assad had a year earlier inherited the presidency of Syria and its Baath party from his father Hafez.

The US invaded Iraq two years later and a new Iraq was born. Twenty-five years later, the country is still not fully grown up. Twenty-one years ago, on April 9, 2003, a US marine wrapped the head of a Saddam statue in Baghdad with an American flag. The Iraqis asked: why didn’t you leave us this iconic image, but instead of an American flag, used an Iraqi one?

Baghdad’s question and Washington’s answer

As the Iraqis observe the developments unfold in Syris with the ouster of Bashar from power, they can’t help but ask how this rapid “change” could have been possible without US tanks and weapons. Why are the Syrians insisting on celebrating “freedom” every day? They are also astonished at the Syrians who scramble to greet Abu Mohammed al-Golani, who has not yet managed to put this image behind him and fully assume his original identity of Ahmed al-Sharaa. The Iraqis wonder how the Syrians are managing this transition so far without a bloodbath.

They ask these questions because the Iraqis view and judge the world based on their own memories. They keep asking questions and await answers from others instead of themselves.

The Iraqis recall how in August 2003, after four months of US occupation, that the Jordanian embassy and United Nations offices were attacked, leaving several staff dead, including head of the UN mission Sergio de Mello. The Americans arrested Ali Hassan al-Majid, or “chemical Ali”, Saddam’s cousin, and 125 people were killed in a bombing in al-Najaf, including Shiite cleric Mohammed Baqer al-Hakim.

During that bloody month, the Iraqis asked questions about security, forgetting about Saddam’s alternative, democracy and the promised western model. Later, the facts would answer that the question of security was a means to escape questions about transitional justice.

Sergio de Mello (r) and Paul Bremmer (second right) attend the inaugural meeting of the Iraqi Governing Council in Baghdad on July 13, 2003. (Getty Images)

The question of civil war

Paul Bremer, the American ruler of Iraq, once escorted four opposition figures to Saddam’s prison cell. They flooded him with questions. Adnan al-Pachachi, a veteran diplomat, asked: “Why did you invade Kuwait?” Adel Abdul Mahdi, a former prime minister, asked: “Why did you kill the Kurds in the Anfal massacre?” Mowaffak al-Rubaie, a former national security adviser, asked: “Why did you kill your Baath comrades?” Ahmed al-Halabi simply insulted the former president. Saddam recoiled and then just smiled.

Saddam’s opponents left the prison cell with answers that should have helped them in running the transitional justice administration, but they failed.

The following year, Washington appointed Ayad Allawi to head the interim Iraqi Governing Council (IGC) that had limited jurisdiction so that it could be free to wage two fierce battles: one in Najaf against the “Mahdi Army”, headed by Moqtada al-Sadr, and the other against armed groups comprised of “resistance fighters” and “extremists” in Fallujah.

The opposition in the IGC got to work that was already prepared by the Americans. They outlined the distribution of Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds in the country, with historic questions about the majority and minority, and the “oppressed” now assuming rule after the ouster of the “oppressors”.

On the ground, the Ghazaliya neighborhood in western Baghdad with its Shiite and Sunni residents was in store for a bloodbath. On a winter night in 2005, an entire family was massacred and an enfant strangled to death. Soon after, lines drawing the Shiite and Sunni sections of the neighborhood emerged. The popular market became the tense border between the two halves. Two new rival “enemies” traded attacks, claiming several lives.

In Baghdad’s Green Zone, the IGC drew up a draft of the transitional rule. In January 2005, 8 million Iraqis voted for the establishment of a National Assembly.

Meanwhile, different “armies” kept on emerging in Baghdad. The media was filled with the death tolls of bloody relentless sectarian attacks. Checkpoints manned by masked gunmen popped up across the capital.

Those days seemed to answer the question of “who was the alternative to Saddam.” No one needed a concrete answer because the developments spoke for themselves.

Nouri al-Maliki came to power as prime minister in 2006. He famously declared: “I am the state of law” - in both the figurative and literal sense. Iraqis believed he had answers about the “state” and “law”, dismissing the very pointed “I” in his “manifesto”.

Nouri al-Maliki. (Getty Images)

The Maliki question

The American admired Maliki. Then Vice President Dick Cheney had repeatedly declared that he was committed to the establishment of a stable Iraq. Before that however, he had dispatched James Steele - who was once complicit in running dirty wars in El Salvador in the mid-1980s - to Baghdad to confront the “Sunni rebellion”. Steele set up the Shiite “death squads”. Steele was the man in the shadows behind Ahmed Kazim, then interior minister undersecretary, and behind him stood the new warlords.

In 2006, the political process was shaken by the bombing of the Al-Askari Shrine in Samarra. Questions were asked about the “need” to draw up new maps. Shiite high authority Ali al-Sistani said in February 2007 that the Sunnis were not involved in the attack. In July 2013, Maliki denied an American accusation that Tehran was behind it.

In those days, Maliki’s ego was growing ever bigger, and Steele’s death squads were rapidly growing greater in numbers.

The Iran and ISIS questions

Maliki tried to save himself as one city after another fell into the hands of ISIS. On June 9, 2014, as ISIS was waging battles in Mosul, Maliki met with senior Sunni tribal elders based on advice he had not heeded earlier and which could have averted the current disaster.

It was said that he made reluctant pledges to them and a third of Iraq later fell in ISIS’ hands. Sistani later issued a fatwa for “jihad” against the group, which later turned out not be aimed at saving the premier.

Maliki left the scene and Qassem Soleimani, commander of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps’ (IRGC) Quds Force, took over. Successive prime ministers would know from then on what it is like to be shackled by Tehran’s pressure as IRGC officials made regular visits to their offices.

Soleimani reaped what Steele sowed. By 2017, armed factions were the dominant force in Iraq. Running in their orbit were other factions that took turns in “rebelling” against the government or agreeing with its choices.

Today, and after 14 years, Iran has consolidated what can be described as the “resistance playground” in Iraq that is teeming with armed factions and massive budgets.

Protesters in Baghdad’s Tahrir Square in October 2019. (AFP)

The October question

The Iraqis were unable to answer the ISIS question and the armed factions claimed “victory” against the group. Many ignored Sistani’s “answer” about whether the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) was there to protect Iraq or just its Shiites.

Exhausted Iraqis asked: “What next?”

Next came Adel Abdul Mahdi’s government in October 2018. It was weighed down by unanswered questions and a year later, thousands of youths took to the streets to protest the state of affairs in Iraq, specifically the dominance of armed groups.

They were met with live bullets. Many were abducted and others were silenced. Abdul Mehdi acquitted the killers, saying instead that a “fifth column” had carried out the bloody crackdown on protesters.

After he left office, some Iraqi politicians were brave enough to tell the truth, dismissing former PM’s acquittal and pinning blame on the factions.

Sistani called for PMF members to quit their partisan affiliations. His demand was left unheeded. Mustafa al-Qadhimi became prime minister in May 2020. He left office months later, also failing in resolving the issue of the PMF and armed factions.

By 2022, everyone had left the scene, but Iran remained, claiming the Iraqi crown for itself, controlling everything from its finances to its weapons.

Question about post-Assad Syria

On December 8, Syria’s Bashar fled the country. Everyone in Iraq is asking what happens next. The whole system in Iraq is at a loss: Do we wait for how Tehran will deal with Ahmed al-Sharaa, or do we ask Abu Mohammed al-Golani about his memories in Iraq?

The Iraqi people’s memories are what’s ruling the country, more so than the constitution, political parties and civil society because they are burdened with questions they don’t want to answer.

And yet they ask: What if we weren’t part of the “Axis of Resistance”? Iraq’s history would reply that it has long been part of axes, or either awaiting a war or taking part in them.