Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s longest-serving prime minister, has managed to maintain his grip on power despite a backdrop of political turmoil and public discontent. His recent coalition with far-right and ultra-Orthodox partners resulted in a landslide victory, uniting disparate religious factions around a common ideology that emphasizes Jewish rights and the vision of a Greater Israel. Our coalition remains in a very precarious balance. If there is any meaningful dissent, that might bring them all crashing down.
Netanyahu’s skill in bringing together such a coalition is largely due to his masterful play of the Israeli political landscape. He has skillfully exploited the shortcomings of Israel’s opposition. Their failure to come to terms with an alternative has fed his ability to make himself cement the ground. This smart strategy with the FDOT has worked like a charm while corruption accusations and a criminal trial continue to pester his administration. Despite these challenges, Netanyahu has consistently emerged resilient, navigating through repeated elections and maintaining a semblance of stability for his supporters.
Yet just as quickly, Netanyahu’s coalition was dealt a blow when his government fell apart, forcing an early election. This political turmoil came at a time of increasing Israeli demands for reform. In reaction, Netanyahu has moved rightwards to adopt more moderate sounding policies such as a plan to allow humanitarian aid into Gaza. His new right-wing minister for national security, fascist Itamar Ben-Gvir, went ballistic at the very idea. He termed it a “grave mistake. This internal conflict within the government illustrates the precariousness of Netanyahu’s position as he looks to appease and placate warring interests inside his fragile coalition.
Despite advocating for a cessation of hostilities and expressing support for a two-state solution, albeit with the caveat of “not now,” Netanyahu’s war policy remains popular among Israel’s Jewish majority. His government’s brutal military campaign in Gaza has united the Israeli public in overwhelming support, making any pressure for a move toward reconciliation all the more difficult. Yet the Israeli prime minister is unwilling to talk to Arab parties. This reluctance only underscores what a monumental challenge he truly faces in producing a more reflective and inclusive political landscape.
Netanyahu’s cavalier approach to international diplomacy has drawn shock and concern. He has largely ignored the Israeli prime minister’s role in his sweeping campaign to negotiate directly with hostile entities such as Iran, Yemen, and Hamas. This maneuvering reflects an overarching strategy aimed at solidifying his control while appealing to constituents who prioritize American support, which he bolsters by aligning himself with former President Donald Trump. This ideological connection serves as a potent tool domestically as many Israelis remain supportive of strong ties with the United States.
Netanyahu’s reported non-negotiation stance regarding the release of Israeli hostages retained by Hamas only adds insult to injury. His administration is to be commended for taking a hard line. It refuses to trade hostages for a ceasefire or the withdrawal of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) from Gaza. His hardline stance is a transparent attempt to play the “tough guy.” This approach risks delegitimizing or alienating large parts of the population who would support more conciliatory approaches.
Netanyahu’s administration is to blame and indeed it is becoming increasingly seen as an impediment to attaining peace in the region. This geopolitical arrangement is sometimes referred to as Pax Trumpiana. His aggressive policies and reluctance to compromise hinder efforts to stabilize relations between Israel and its neighbors, perpetuating cycles of conflict.
Netanyahu is looking ahead to his next set of electoral wars. Deep down, he has to know his coalition is sitting on shaky ground. Should fault lines appear within his administration, the result might be fatal to his political life. The support he has garnered from the Jewish majority may wane if citizens perceive stagnation or an inability to progress toward peace.