Uncategorized
How a once-cautious Benjamin Netanyahu came to lead the most radical coalition in Israel’s history
(JTA) — Twenty-seven years have passed since Benjamin Netanyahu was first elected as Israel’s prime minister. Since 1996, he has headed six governments over a period of 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 assignation 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 wa 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 in 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 own 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?
—
The post How a once-cautious Benjamin Netanyahu came to lead the most radical coalition in Israel’s history appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Indonesia’s Biggest Islamic Group Asks Chief to Resign Over Invitation to Pro-Israeli Speaker
Then Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu meets with Yahya Cholil Staquf, secretary general of the 60-million member Nahdlatul Ulama, Indonesia’s largest Muslim organization, at his office in Jerusalem. Photo: Haim Zach/GPO.
Indonesia’s biggest Islamic organization, Nahdlatul Ulama, has asked its chief to resign for inviting a US scholar known for his support of Israel during the Gaza war to an internal event in August, according to meeting minutes reviewed by Reuters.
The leadership of NU, which is also the world’s biggest Islamic organization with around 100 million members and affiliates, has given Chairman Yahya Cholil Staquf three days to offer his resignation or be removed from his post, according to the minutes from a meeting on Thursday.
NU cited Staquf’s invitation to a person “affiliated with an International Zionism network” for an internal event and alleged financial mismanagement as reasons for his ouster.
Staquf, who has been NU’s chairman since 2021, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
NU official Najib Azca told Reuters the decision was linked to Staquf’s invitation to former US official and scholar Peter Berkowitz for an August training event.
Staquf has apologized for the invitation and called it an oversight as he had not carefully checked Berkowitz’s background, adding that he condemned Israel‘s “brutal genocidal acts in Gaza.”
Berkowitz often writes in support of Israel‘s campaign in Gaza, according to his website, including a piece in September aiming to refute allegations of genocide against Israel.
Berkowitz spoke at NU seminars about the history of Western political thought in August, his website showed.
Berkowitz did not immediately respond to an email requesting comment that reached him outside of office hours.
Indonesia, the world’s Muslim-majority nation, has routinely condemned Israel‘s actions in the Palestinian enclave of Gaza since the war broke out in 2023. It has long advocated for a two-state solution and has no diplomatic relations with Israel.
Uncategorized
Protesters at Tel Aviv Rally Call for State Inquiry into Oct. 7 Failings
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu participates in the state memorial ceremony for the fallen of the Iron Swords War on Mount Herzl. In Jerusalem on 16 October 2025. Photo: Alex Kolomoisky/POOL/Pool via REUTERS
i24 News – Israeli protesters gathered on Saturday in Tel Aviv, to demand the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appoint a committee to initiate a state inquiry on the security failings of October 7.
Saturday night rallies in Tel Aviv have been a fixture of the two-year-long war in Gaza that was triggered by the Hamas-led cross-border attack on October 7, 2023, that saw the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust.
Protesters charged that Netanyahu refuses to be held accountable for his share of responsibility in Israel’s blackest day. They likewise took exception to Netanyahu’s wish to select the members of the committee, arguing this represented subversion of the democratic process.
Protesters also demanded the return of remains of the three deceased hostages still remaining in Gaza: Ran Gvili, Dror or and Sudthisak Rinthalak.
Uncategorized
Ukraine ‘Ready to Discuss’ Trump Admin’s Plan to End War, as US Official Says Plan Not Up for Negotiation
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky speaks at the press conference after the opening session of Crimea Platform conference in Kyiv, Ukraine, 23 August 2023. The Crimea Platform – is an international consultation and coordination format initiated by Ukraine. OLEG PETRASYUK/Pool via REUTERS
i24 News – Kyiv will engage with Washington’s 28-point plan to end the war with Russia and demonstrate it is open to substantive discussions, a senior Ukrainian official said on Saturday, even as an official from the US administration of President Donald Trump indicated that the plan was not up for negotiation.
“In the coming days in Switzerland we are launching consultations between senior officials of Ukraine and the United States on the possible parameters of a future peace agreement,” Rustem Umerov, secretary of the National Security and Defense Council, wrote on his official Facebook account.
“Ukraine approaches this process with a clear understanding of its interests. This is another stage of the dialogue that has been ongoing in recent days and is primarily aimed at aligning our vision for the next steps,” he further added. “We value the involvement of the American side and its readiness for a substantive discussion. Ukraine will continue to act responsibly, professionally, and consistently — as required by our national security.”
This comes after President Volodymyr Zelensky warned on Friday that Ukraine risked losing its dignity and freedom — or Washington’s backing — over a US peace plan that endorses key Russian demands.
Washington’s 28-point plan calls on Ukraine to cede territory, accept restrictions on its military and renounce its bid to join NATO.
Meanwhile, Financial Times reported on Saturday that US army secretary Daniel Driscoll communicated in no uncertain terms to Ukrainian and European officials there was no room to negotiate on its plan and Washington would show little flexibility.
“We are not negotiating details,” he was quoted as saying.
Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has previously refused to budge on Russia’s demands, said on Friday the US plan could be the basis of a final resolution to the nearly four-year-old conflict. He said Kyiv was against the plan but neither it nor its European allies understood the reality of Russian advances in Ukraine.
