Netanyahu’s failure led ...
Page 1
Many Israeli officials have warned that continuing on the current path could lead to the imminent collapse of the regime.
Thus, the dissolution of the cabinet, coupled with the current regional and global isolation of the illegal entity, can be seen as the starting point of an irreversible political collapse for the occupiers, the effects of which will become apparent in the near future.
Cabinet inefficiency and intensifying
protests
It is clear that one reason influencing Netanyahu’s decision to dissolve the cabinet is its inefficiency and failure to achieve declared objectives in the eight-month war on Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, such as eliminating or at least containing Hamas and liberating prisoners in exchange for intensified attacks on the besieged territory. The decision comes amidst growing dissatisfaction with the conduct of the war in Gaza and daily calls for protests by anti-government groups. In this environment replete with increasing anti-government sentiment, Netanyahu’s decision may serve as a means to escape the mounting criticisms directed at him and his decisions regarding the Gaza war and related issues.
Platform for disputes instead of unity
One of the key motivations for forming the war cabinet after the al-Aqsa Storm was to display unity among all Israeli parties and groups in decision-making for the Gaza war and to present a united front to the world. However, the subsequent emergence of disagreements and even clashes among cabinet officials revealed that Israel not only lacks a cohesive strategy for the Gaza war but also cannot reach an agreement on how to conduct or end the war. This fragmented image, exacerbated by the presence of extremists like Ben Gvir, pushed Netanyahu towards dissolving the cabinet to at least minimize the portrayal of disarray in decision-making within the Zionist community and to the world.
According to Israeli media reports, over the past nine months of the Gaza conflict, Netanyahu has repeatedly rejected attempts by extremist coalition members, including Israel’s security minister Itamar Ben Gvir and finance minister Bezalel Smotrich, to join these discussions. Additionally, the resignation of Benny Gantz from the cabinet in protest at Netanyahu’s policies and the subsequent formation of a political opposition movement against his war policies demonstrated that the cabinet could serve as a pressure tool against Netanyahu’s decisions.
Therefore, rather than being a body for making crucial wartime decisions, the cabinet became a focal point for political conflicts and, subsequently, a tool for the opposition to pressure Netanyahu and his party within the political framework of the Israeli regime. Consequently, Netanyahu sought to dissolve the cabinet to both reduce discord and eliminate the pressure against himself.
On a deeper level, Netanyahu could no longer manage the cabinet, and his incompetence in handling the Gaza war had altered the trajectory of his political life in the eyes of the public and other officials. Currently, the demand for Netanyahu’s resignation from power is growing among officials and the public, escalating with each step he takes in committing atrocities and genocide against the people of Gaza, following the lack of achievements. Thus, Netanyahu attempted to enhance his decision-making power in the war by making it solely dependent on himself. Immediately after the dissolution of the war cabinet, the Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth speculated that some key decisions would now be made by a cabinet that might include over 50 members, where the voices of warmongers are more dominant, providing Netanyahu with greater political cover to continue the conflict.
Consolidation of extremism
Netanyahu issued the dissolution order when faced with demands from far-right ministers like Ben Gvir and Smotrich to join the cabinet. One of the significant reasons for the existing rifts among officials was the pressure from extremists on Netanyahu and their direct, detrimental impact on US-Israel relations. Two far-right ministers threatened to collapse the ruling coalition by resigning if Netanyahu accepted US President Joe Biden’s peace plan. Additionally, in response to Biden’s recent threat to halt arms exports to Tel Aviv, they labeled him a friend of Hamas. These contradictory and aggressive stances of the extremists were unpalatable to the US, raising concerns that their presence in the war cabinet could strain the close Israel-US partnership and affect financial support. Therefore, Netanyahu aimed to dissolve the cabinet to restore the credibility of the extremists and ultimately his government while reducing tensions with the US. With the war cabinet dissolved, the management of the Gaza conflict is now limited to a few radical ministers and the Israeli minister for military affairs, allowing the extremists to implement their plans for continued genocide in Gaza.