From Meron to Oct. 7: What does ‘responsibility’ mean? - analysis

It took a state commission of inquiry nearly three years of hearings, and a report spread over 332 pages, to conclude what most reasonable people knew at the outset: Those under whose watch the 2021 Meron disaster took place share responsibility.

And whom does this include? Of whom can it be said that this tragedy took place on their watch?

Well, for one, the heads of security at the site, whom the report said should never be allowed to manage security again at mass events. Also, the director-general of the National Center for the Development of Holy Sites, the head of the Merom Hagalil Regional Council, the commander of Israel Police Northern Command, the Israel Police inspector-general, the former religious services minister, the former public security minister, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

It is fair to say that they all were in charge to varying degrees when 45 people were crushed to death, and another 150 were injured, at the annual Lag Ba’omer pilgrimage to the tomb of Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai in Meron. As such, it is only logical for them to be held responsible.

And that is what the committee did on Wednesday: It held a long list of people, including Netanyahu, personally responsible.

But so what?

The committee determined that Netanyahu bears personal responsibility, and that he should have known that the situation in Meron was a disaster just waiting to happen. But it did not draw any conclusions regarding his suitability for his job.

It did draw personal conclusions regarding Amir Ohana, who was the public security minister at the time, recommending that he never hold that position again. But Ohana, who today is the Knesset speaker, can probably live with that; there are numerous other ministerial jobs he could potentially fill.

The committee recommended that Israel Police Insp.-Gen. Kobi Shabtai be dismissed, but given the current war, left it up to the government to decide when would be an opportune time to do just that. In any event, he had already said he intended to step down.

And the commission said former religious services minister Ya’akov Avitan, who is no longer in national politics, should never be appointed a minister again.

Since there is no recommendation regarding Netanyahu, and the recommendations against the others don’t have much bite, the question becomes: What does bearing responsibility mean? This question, moreover, is all the more pertinent in light of the events of October 7.

Several political and military leaders have taken responsibility for the October 7 fiasco, though Netanyahu is not among them. Nevertheless, even those who have taken responsibility, such as Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Herzi Halevi and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, remain in their positions.

One could argue that the midst of a war is not the best time to remove key players responsible for the fiasco, because who will run the war in their absence?

But if they are not removed – and this is something the Meron incident illustrates – might the country not find itself in a situation three years down the line where the same people under whose watch October 7 transpired will remain in their positions?

Does anyone think it will take a future state commission of inquiry into October 7 less time to issue a report than it took the commission investigating the Meron tragedy – and only one person, Israel Police Northern District commander Shimon Lavi, voluntarily left his position before those findings were released?

No one expects that as a result of Wednesday’s report, Netanyahu will step down, or Ohana will do the same. Since the report recommends no harsher sanctions, those listed in it could be forgiven for saying, “OK, the commission found me responsible – life goes on.”

So what is the significance of the report?

First, it is significant because even before the final report was issued, and after interim findings were released, the situation at Meron changed dramatically. The physical site underwent changes, making it more secure, and limitations were placed on how many people are allowed at the site on Lag Ba’omer.

A similar result is likely following the preliminary findings that will be released by a state commission of inquiry, which is expected to be established following October 7, at least regarding the physical defenses and the number of soldiers who will be positioned to guard border communities.

It is when dealing with the question of responsibility, and what that means, that matters become more complicated.

Soon after the Meron tragedy, Ohana, in response to those calling for his resignation, admitted responsibility, but said: “Responsibility does not mean blame.” In other words, responsibility does not mean accountability.

This is the same thing Shabtai said when he testified before the three-person commission.

“I have responsibility for everything that happens in the Israeli police,” he said, before shifting blame from himself to the head of the Northern District, the political echelon, and engineers. “The question is whether responsibility is blame.”

In this country, at least up until now, responsibility has not meant blame. This is why Shabtai could remain in office three years after the Meron tragedy, and why Netanyahu will feel no compunction to resign, even though the commission just determined that he bears personal responsibility.

Importance of taking responsibility

And that is a problem. Why is it important not only to say, “I am responsible,” but also, “I am responsible and am leaving?” Because only the latter creates a culture of accountability; only the latter sends a message to those in public positions of trust that if they want the job – which comes with immense responsibility but also with popular perks such as power, prestige, and high salaries – that when something bad happens on their watch, they can’t say, “I had overall responsibility, but the nuts and bolts were someone else’s business.”

No, those with ultimate responsibility need to make sure that the nuts and bolts are all in place, and if they don’t do that, they will not only be held responsible but also be held accountable.

As unpleasant as it sounds, sometimes heads need to roll for even unintentional mistakes, oversights, and omissions. Not because of a primal urge to punish anyone, but rather to send the message to others that vigilance and diligence are demanded of those holding this country’s most sensitive positions.

Those who do not learn from their mistakes are bound to repeat them. If there is no culture of accountability, and if there is no price for major mistakes that cost dozens of lives, there is no incentive for anyone to learn anything from those mistakes.

The commission of inquiry into the Meron tragedy said clearly on Wednesday who it holds responsible. It will now be left to the public to hold them accountable, and one of the beauties of democracy is that the ballot box gives the public the ability to do just that.