He is sinking deeper and deeper into a political crisis. Israel as mass protests against the coalition government with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu continues until the 13th week. On Sunday evening, thousands of Israelis (600,000-700,000 according to private channel 12) demonstrated in Tel AvivV Jerusalem and another 150 parties against the dismissal of Defense Minister Yoav Galan, who a day earlier called on the government to “freeze” the justice control bill.

On Monday afternoon, and under pressure from protests that continued with less intensity outside parliament, Netanyahu announced that he would finally move debate on the bill to the next Knesset session next month. On this background Eurasia Group Chairman Jan Bremer he wonders and analyzes what will happen next with Benjamin Netanyahu.

What exactly happened?

Since coming to power last December, a far-right coalition led by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been trying to pass legislation that would give the executive branch full control over the composition of the Supreme Court and allow the Knesset (Israel’s parliament) to overrule its decisions. simple majority.

While many advocates of reform are motivated by a desire to curb what they have long considered “an overly active, liberal, and undemocratic judiciary,” Netanyahu himself saw it primarily as a means to stay in power.

The judicial review was met with an unprecedented backlash, with hundreds of thousands of Israelis from across the political and social spectrum taking to the streets for 12 consecutive weeks. Thousands of soldiers and reservists on important missions said they would not join if the law passed, and several diplomats resigned in protest. The country’s business community and tech sector are threatening to cripple its economy unless the government changes the definition, with hundreds of international economists, top banks, rating agencies and even the head of Israel’s central bank warning that the overhaul will severely hurt business and the investment climate. countries.

However, Bibi refused to back down.

That changed over the weekend when Netanyahu fired Yoav Galad, Israel’s defense minister and member of his own Likud party, for publicly warning that the law would harm national security.

Almost immediately, mass spontaneous demonstrations broke out throughout the country. Israel’s largest union, which represents almost a quarter of the entire workforce, went on a general strike for the first time in its history, shutting down everything from Ben Gurion Airport to shopping malls, hospitals, universities, local governments and every McDonald’s in the country. a country. This prompted more Likud members to oppose the reform, raising concerns that there would not be enough votes to pass the bill.

Netanyahu postponed the vote on the bill until the summer session of the Knesset (which starts after Easter and lasts until July), which he called “a break for dialogue.” By Tuesday morning the unions had called off their strike.

Who wins and who loses?

After three months, despite the damage done to Israel’s social, economic and military fabric, it may be tempting to view Netanyahu’s statement as a retreat or a concession. Is not. The pause is a pit stop, a tactical respite to ease tensions and de-energize the opposition, which does not oblige the government to make any real concessions or compromises.

Netanyahu did not repeal the law. Instead, he promised his far-right coalition partners that he would continue, and with his own physical freedom under threat, there is every reason to believe it is only a matter of time before he tries again.

In fact, Netanyahu’s only significant concession was made not to the bill’s critics but to the far right, to whom he promised a new national guard under the direct command of Israel’s minister of national security to help deal with the rise in crime in Jewish communities. . Given the reluctance of the police to crack down on pro-democracy protests in recent weeks, a private militias may even prove useful to Netanyahu when the time comes for reform.

Will Judicial Reforms Mean the End of Democracy?

A fractured political system like Israel’s, where no single party can ever control a government and coalitions are incredibly difficult to form and even harder to maintain, has a built-in structural check on all power: division.

This informal but deeply rooted control is more binding than the formal control that is the separation of powers and makes Israeli democracy more solid than Hungarian or Turkish. There is nothing Netanyahu or anyone else can do to change that.

Yes, the proposed revision would theoretically give the executive and parliament the power to limit the judiciary, but the political division would limit how much any governing coalition could limit the independence of the judiciary in practice. In fact, the very reason why the judiciary in Israel is so strong is precisely the structural weakness of the Israeli government.

The idea that any party or leader can suddenly and irrevocably take control of the supreme court when you have 15 political parties and the majority can hardly agree on anything, and any government can collapse overnight is unbelievable.

Israel’s democracy will take a hit, as will its economy. But it won’t be a disaster or a “coup attempt” as its opponents claim.

What does all this mean for Netanyahu?

Like Donald Trump, Bibi is a political animal. Unlike Trump, he is an incredibly skilled tactician. These two characteristics allowed him to hold the highest office in Israel for 15 years, despite countless scandals and challenges to his rule, against all predictions. But he is neither infallible nor invincible.

Sacking his secretary of defense for warning of a potential national security threat—literally in the line of duty—was a mistake that caused the unions, the entire security apparatus, and some high-ranking members of his own party to lose confidence in him. He certainly underestimated the degree of public backlash that judicial review would face.

Are these mistakes enough to end his political career?

May be. The Gallad episode made some of the Likud’s most powerful members see Netanyahu for who he is: a man desperate to avoid jail at all costs. What’s worse is that his “surrender” causes diehards to question his value as a partner. For a leader like him, the only thing worse than appearing incompetent is appearing weak.

True, the government still has a slim majority in the Knesset, and Netanyahu is likely to be able to hold on to his fragile coalition for at least a few more months. But he could easily lose the support of a few Likud MPs if the law passes in the summer, as he promised the far right, and he could easily lose the far right if he breaks his promise — or if he fails to garner votes from the same party to pass his.

To be clear, it is entirely possible that this will not be the issue that ends the Netanyahu government. But sooner or later something will break the coalition. And when voters next come to the polls, they will remember that it was Netanyahu who brought the country to the brink for personal gain.

Source: G-Zero Daily