Mossad Director Roman Gofman’s decision to establish an external think tank to examine the organization’s future is one of the most important decisions made by a Mossad chief in recent years.
This decision is important not because the Mossad is in crisis, but because past successes do not guarantee success in addressing the challenges that are now emerging.
Over many decades, the State of Israel built one of the most impressive intelligence systems in the world. Even after the failure of October 7, there is no doubt regarding the Mossad’s remarkable capabilities. Yet alongside those capabilities, it is clear that mission prioritization and a strategic vision of future threats are the keys to meeting the security challenges Israel will face in the years ahead. In this respect, the Mossad’s central challenge, like that of every security and civilian organization alike, is identifying tomorrow’s challenges and preparing the organization to confront them, much like the motto adopted by the global Scout movement in the 1920s: “Be Prepared.”
Most strategic surprises throughout history did not result from states failing to address the previous threat, but from assuming that the next threat would look exactly the same. Therefore, the most important question is not how to improve today’s Mossad, but how to adapt it to Israel’s needs two decades from now and beyond.
Legitimacy Is a Strategic Security Asset
For example, it appears that the State of Israel underestimated the struggle over Israel’s standing in the world. We identified efforts to undermine Israel’s legitimacy as an image problem. Governments treated the issue as a matter of “public diplomacy,” and at times “consciousness” or perception management. Yet in recent years, we have come to understand that this is a form of strategic warfare against Israel, one whose consequences could pose a genuine threat to the country.
Just as Israel possesses military, economic, and technological assets, it also possesses a strategic asset: international legitimacy for our existence as the nation-state of the Jewish people.
The danger, therefore, does not stem from antisemitism, which has accompanied the Jewish people throughout history, but from the rapid spread of movements, organizations, and ideas seeking to undermine the very right of the State of Israel to exist.
The fact that respected universities, alongside international organizations, technology companies, influencers from various fields, and young people across Western countries openly make statements that effectively deny the legitimacy of Israel as the state of the Jewish people constitutes a strategic threat to Israel. As noted, this is not merely the behavior of individuals who have been raised for generations to hate Jews, troubling as that phenomenon is in itself. Rather, it is a deliberate and systematic strategy designed to paralyze Israel’s ability to defend itself.
Since October 7, 2023, we have witnessed this phenomenon with an intensity previously unknown to us. On some of the world’s most prestigious campuses, across social media platforms, and in growing segments of public discourse in the West, it has become clear that the battle is no longer being waged as a debate between two sides, each seeking to persuade others of its justice. Instead, it is a struggle between one side and another side that denies the very legitimacy of its existence.
Traditionally, we have viewed the delegitimization of Israel as a failure of public diplomacy and messaging. In reality, however, it is a global system of influence, funding, organizations, platforms, and incentives. Once this system is understood, it becomes clear that this is not a public diplomacy problem at all, but a genuine intelligence challenge. It is a challenge that requires exposing the strategy and those operating it, and in many cases taking action against those actors.
Our enemies long ago realized that they would not be able to defeat us through military means. Egypt’s president already understood this after the Yom Kippur War, and now others around the world understand it as well. Anti-Israeli diplomacy has also achieved only limited success so far, primarily because of the American protection Israel enjoys. Consequently, our enemies have shifted to a modern and highly effective weapon: shaping consciousness through influence networks, front organizations, coordinated campaigns, digital platforms, and cross-border funding systems. Yet for the time being, it appears that Israel is absent from this arena and is effectively conceding in advance any attempt to confront this strategic challenge.
Nothing in the Mossad’s history prepared it for this challenge. The organization was built around traditional targets such as governments, armies, terrorist organizations, and leaders. The arena now belongs to a new and far more complex world.
Social networks shape consciousness. They have demonstrated their ability to incite people and bring them into the streets. Leaders in non-democratic countries fear these networks and do everything in their power to restrict their activity, yet their influence remains substantial.
Private technology companies influence the opinions of billions of people. Algorithms determine which ideas gain prominence and which disappear. Information platforms shape political, economic, and security perceptions. A small number of individuals now wield power that was once reserved for states.
The implication is that the very object of intelligence is changing. For decades, intelligence focused on people, organizations, and states. The new world requires it to understand networks, algorithms, platforms, and complex systems in which power is dispersed, often concealed, and lacking a clear address.
The Mossad of the twentieth century specialized in identifying individuals, recruiting sources, and understanding organizations. The Mossad of the twenty-first century must understand how information, money, influence, and technology combine to create entirely new systems of power.
Israel Is Not Alone in This Revolution
The need to reorient the Mossad, and the intelligence community more broadly, also stems from the changing nature of reality in the wake of the artificial intelligence revolution. This revolution is poised to transform intelligence practices in much the same way as the previous revolution, the internet revolution.
Artificial intelligence will make it possible to identify hidden connections and patterns within enormous volumes of information. At the same time, it will enable the creation of automated influence campaigns, highly credible fake content, and perception-shaping operations on a scale that was once reserved for great powers. This means that the intelligence advantage of the future will be determined not only by the quality of sources, but also by the ability to understand and analyze complex systems with speed and precision.
Israel possesses clear technological advantages in this revolution as well. However, we must remember that our enemies are experiencing the same revolution, and as we know from military affairs, defensive power must be significantly greater than offensive power in order to withstand it. In this new world, the role of intelligence is to identify fundraising and recruitment campaigns and to track financial flows. This information is no less important than monitoring terrorist leaders.
Terrorism requires funding, and the ability to stop the flow of money is, in practice, the ability to stop terrorism.
Returning to the Value of Humility
Another challenge facing the Mossad is preserving secrecy and humility. In the world described thus far, image and perception carry great importance. Organizations understand this, and so do states. But the Mossad should not concern itself with such matters. As always, it must continue to maintain humility, including in the operational sphere. Pride and the pursuit of publicity may ultimately work against the organization.
One of the Mossad’s historic sources of strength has been the combination of operational audacity and public modesty. Ambiguity was not a weakness. It was an asset.
The more the organization is judged by its achievements rather than by its media presence, the lower the risk of politicization and the greater its professional freedom of action.
Fundamental Questions for the Think Tank
If I were sitting around the table of the think tank convened by the incoming Mossad director, I would propose examining four fundamental questions:
- How can hostile influence networks be confronted? In other words, how can they be identified in their formative stages, their operators exposed, and their activities disrupted and dismantled before they cause significant damage?
- How can traditional intelligence be integrated with artificial intelligence, open-source intelligence, and advanced network analysis?
- How should success be measured in influence and perception campaigns, where the objective is to shift trends rather than carry out a specific operation?
- And how can an organization built in an era of states and armies be adapted to a world in which an increasing share of hostile power is concentrated in technology platforms, global networks, and actors that are not necessarily states?
The Bottom Line
As noted, the Mossad, which specialized in major missions against states, is now required to confront the globalization of hostile actors. It is no longer only about individuals; it is about networks. Agents are no longer merely the classic operatives of the past. They are also internet bots, and the Mossad must contend with them as well.
This is a new and complex world. For that reason, the think tank established by the incoming Mossad director is of critical strategic importance for safeguarding Israel’s long-term security and well-being.
