opinion
How Once-cautious Benjamin Netanyahu
Came to Lead Israel’s Most Radical Coalition
Ofer Kenig
T wenty-seven years have passed since
Benjamin Netanyahu was first elected as
Israel’s prime minister. Since 1996, he has
headed six governments over more than 15 years,
more than any other prime minister. Unfortunately, his
current coalition is one of the most radical-populist
governments in Israel’s history. This government
seeks to rapidly undermine Israel’s democracy by
granting unlimited political power to the executive
branch of government at the expense of the judiciary.

How can Netanyahu — a U.S.-educated and
respected world leader who was cautious in his
approach to building previous coalitions, and was
once respectful of Israeli democratic institutions —
support such a dangerous plan? Was the “writing on
the wall” earlier on in his lengthy tenure?
A glimpse into Netanyahu’s years in office reveals
that, indeed, signs of his being a populist leader —
specializing in attacks against the so-called elite —
could be detected long ago. As Likud leader in 1993,
Netanyahu was blamed for ignoring the incitement
by extremists that preceded the assassination of
Yitzhak Rabin (a charge he vociferously denies). As
early as 1997, during his first term as prime minister,
he said that “the left has forgotten what it means to be
Jewish.” Two years later, during an election campaign,
he mocked the “leftist” press by saying “they are
scared” (by the possibility of a right-wing victory). On
Election Day in 2015, he posted a video urging Likud
supporters to go out and vote by warning, “the Arabs
are heading in droves to the polls.” That message led
to accusations that the candidate was using racial dog
whistles to motivate his followers.

However, Netanyahu’s populist discourse and his
natural divide-and-conquer leadership style were
balanced out, at least until 2015, by several factors.

First, Netanyahu always sought to include centrist
and even left-of-center parties in his coalition
governments. Even when he could build a “pure”
right-wing coalition (following the 2009 elections,
for example), he preferred to invite partners from the
opposing political side. His intention, he once said,
was to provide a “wide and stable government that
unites the people.”
Second, despite his hawkish image and his
hardline discourse on security issues, Netanyahu was
considered to be an exceedingly cautious leader in
that arena. Risk-averse, he tended to avoid involving
Israel in major wars and was wary of acting in
ways that would spark violence between Israelis and
Palestinians. Third, over his many years in office, he had
demonstrated respect for the rules of the game —
and towards Israel’s Supreme Court. He even blocked
earlier initiatives that sought to undermine the power
of the judicial branch. “I believe that in a democracy,
a strong and independent Court is what enables the
existence of all other democratic institutions,” he said
in 2012. “Every time a law comes across my desk that
threatens to impair the independence of the courts,
we will take it down.”
The 2015 elections should probably be regarded
as the turning point, after which these balancing
factors quickly gave way to unabashed populism.

The unexpected resounding victory in that year’s
elections brought out the hubris in Netanyahu. He
formed a right-wing coalition government (only slightly
moderated by Moshe Kahlon’s centrist Kulanu party),
personally held four ministerial positions in addition
to the prime ministership, and gave his blessing to the
hugely controversial Nation-State Bill. This legislation,
which anchored in law Israel’s status as the “national
home of the Jewish people,” strengthened the Jewish
component of Israel’s dual “Jewish and democratic”
identity without in turn strengthening its democratic
component — explicitly and implicitly downgrading
minority rights.

Furthermore, Netanyahu’s longtime obsession with
controlling press coverage reached a new level.

His insistence on personally heading the Ministry
of Communications and his excessive involvement
in media — for example, installing a close ally as
director-general of the ministry, and targeting and
strong-arming ostensibly “unfriendly” newspapers
and broadcasters — served as the background for
two of the three indictments for which he is currently
on trial.

The investigations on corruption charges, and his
subsequent trial, further pushed Netanyahu toward
populist extremes. Following three rounds of elections
between 2019 and 2020, which threw Israel into an
unprecedented political crisis, Netanyahu was forced
to form a unity government with former Gen. Benny
Gantz’s centrist Blue & White party. Coincidentally,
just a few hours after the government’s first meeting,
Netanyahu’s trial began in the Jerusalem District
Court. The prime minister arrived at the court on May
24, 2020, accompanied by several Likud Knesset
members, and launched a fierce attack:
“What is on trial today is an effort to frustrate the will
of the people — the attempt to bring down me and
the right-wing camp. For more than a decade, the left
has failed to do this at the ballot box. So over the last
few years, they have discovered a new method: some
segments of the police and the prosecution have
joined forces with the leftist media … to manufacture
baseless and absurd charges against me.”
These statements made it clear that Netanyahu had
crossed the Rubicon, setting the tone for his behavior
ever since. He dispensed with the partnership with
Gantz, sacrificing Israel’s economic and political
interests along with it. In the build-up to the next
elections, he legitimized extremist, racist politicians
such as Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir, who are
today members of his governing coalition. After failing
to form a government in 2021 (having been ousted
from power after more than 12 consecutive years), he
violated fundamental parliamentary conventions and
norms. For instance, he instructed his right-wing allies
to boycott Knesset committees and refused to attend
the customary “update meeting” the parliamentary
opposition leader holds with the prime minister.

His previous respect for the rules of the game and
democratic institutions was a thing of the past.

In that sense, it is no wonder that the current
government he has formed, following his victory in the
2022 elections, is relentlessly pushing the overhaul
of the judicial system, with little regard to the dangers
the legislation poses to Israel’s democracy. This is
due to a combination of Netanyahu’s self-interest
regarding his trial and the interests and worldviews of
his political partners — politicians who hold extreme
views (Ben-Gvir, Smotrich) as well as those who have
previous corruption charges hanging over their heads
(Aryeh Deri, leader of the haredi Orthodox Shas
party). The “old Bibi” would have never coalesced with
such radical forces and would have never so bluntly
disregarded democratic norms. But hubris, an instinct
for self-preservation and his high self-regard as the
“indispensable man” of Israeli politics created a new
Bibi – and a crisis unlike anything Israel has ever seen.

Ironically, Netanyahu finds himself in an unexpected
position — as the moderating force in the most radical
coalition in Israel’s history. He could tap the instincts
that he once had and be the voice of reason, the one
who plugs the dike with his finger. He has the chance
to lead Israel to a major constitutional moment. Will he
rise to this historical challenge? ■
Ofer Kenig is a research fellow at the Israel
Democracy Institute and an associate professor at
the Ashkelon Academic College.

JEWISHEXPONENT.COM 17