Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has long captivated the Israeli electorate and the world. On one hand, he is one of the most embattled politicians around today, fending off repeated attempts to remove him through both political and legal tracks. He faces serious corruption charges and currently is meant to be spending several days a week in an underground courtroom in Tel Aviv, providing testimony in the trial against him.

But then there is the other Bibi, as he is known internationally. This Netanyahu is the leader who has appeared numerous times the cover of Time magazine and is one of the most recognisable politicians in the world. Under his leadership, Israel has risen from the ashes of October 7 to reshape the Middle East.

Had someone, for instance, told us in September 2023 that within a year Hamas would be decimated, Hezbollah's entire top leadership, including the iconic Hassan Nasrallah, would be eliminated, Iran would be more vulnerable than ever and Bashar al-Assad's regime in Syria would have collapsed, the likely response would have been disbelief.

Yet this is the reality in the Middle East today. While the events of October 7 remain a stain on Netanyahu and his government - his policy of containment regarding Gaza allowed Hamas to grow stronger - it is impossible to overlook the success he has orchestrated in securing Israel’s borders and reshaping the region. Once the hostages return, Israel will genuinely be able to claim victory in this war.

This dual identity has long been difficult for many Israelis to reconcile when it comes to their leader. How is it that Netanyahu can be so respected on the world stage, welcomed with red carpets in Washington DC, London, Moscow and beyond - while simultaneously standing trial for accepting too many cigars and bottles of champagne from his wealthy friends?

But this is Netanyahu, for better and for worse. Over the years, some have referred to him as "Dr Bibi and Mr Netanyahu," questioning which version of the prime minister they are dealing with: the one who prioritises the nation's welfare or the one who focuses on his own political survival at the expense of the state?

The answer, as it often is with complex political figures, is never straightforward. The reality is far more nuanced. Today there is little doubt that Netanyahu believes his premiership is the cornerstone of Israel’s safety. As a result, even when his decisions seem to prioritise his own survival over the national interest, in his mind - and in the minds of many of his supporters - he is doing what is best for Israel.

Consider, for example, the hostage deal that could have been reached earlier had Israel been willing to withdraw from Gaza sooner, a move that would have risked the collapse of the government due to opposition from Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir. Another case in point is the ongoing issue with the ultra-Orthodox community and their refusal to enlist in the IDF.

There is no one in Israel today who doesn't understand the urgent need for more soldiers. With the increase in military operations and the need for a larger IDF presence along Israel’s borders, the army simply does not have the manpower to meet the demand. As a result, reservists who have already served longer than expected will be asked to continue serving one to two months a year.

In addition to the increased military burden, more than 800 soldiers have been killed since last October and over 13,000 more have been wounded. Yet despite the obvious manpower shortage, the government is on the verge of granting a blanket exemption to the approximately 50,000 Charedi men of draft age who currently refuse to serve in the IDF. Instead of incentivising the ultra-Orthodox to enlist, the Netanyahu government is getting ready to institutionalise their exemption, simply because they claim to be ultra-Orthodox.

Netanyahu knows the stakes. He knows Israel’s military needs and that the IDF is stretched thin. He knows that there are Charedi men who could and should serve, helping to fill the necessary gap. But he refuses to do what is right since it would risk the collapse of his government. If he were to push for compulsory enlistment of the ultra-Orthodox, the Charedi parties, United Torah Judaism and Shas, would likely bolt from the coalition, bringing the government down.

Here, once again, we see the complex balancing act Netanyahu maintains between political survival and national security. While his decisions often appear to be driven by personal and political calculations, there is also no question that, in his eyes, these choices are made with Israel’s future in mind.

As Israel navigates a new and volatile Middle East, it would be a mistake to look at Netanyahu through a single prism. Like all leaders, he too is a figure of contradictions and while we can and should criticise his actions, we must also recognise that his focus on Israel's security is deeply rooted.

It is this paradox that will continue to define Netanyahu’s place in history as a leader who, despite his flaws, has played an undeniable role in reshaping Israel and the wider Middle East.