The country under his leadership continues its descent away from democracy as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu prepares to handle a joint session of the US Congress on July 24, 2024.
Prior to Hamas’s attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, the nation was sucked into a long-running argument over government-led measures that threatened to stifle criminal authority.
Following that argument, for the first time, a leading democracy score demoted Israel’s categorization from a “liberal republic” to an “electoral democracy”. The new classification noted that the government’s judicial and legislative responsibilities have declined, as well as the government’s ability to protect civil rights.
Israel is not the only country in the world where democracy is in danger: According to a recent report from the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, the state of politics has been declining for the past six decades.
Democracy is associated with three key elements: administration, organisations and individuals ‘ principles. When they appear to be deteriorating, a republic is said to be fast.
According to researchers and social experts, a nation’s democracy can often deteriorate during a protracted conflict. For example, people may lose belief in human organizations, like the authorities, the police and the military. Additionally, political extremism and help for violent values like the use of force frequently become more commonplace in society.
Soon after October 7, there were some flimsy expectations that the attack would lessen internal political animosity and possibly reverse Israel’s political decline. But as the battle against Hamas has continued, the country’s republic has continued to diminish.
Israel’s political complacency
Most assessments of Israel’s political drop tend to focus on Netanyahu’s criminal test for corruption, which is continuing, and his government’s efforts to remove the judiciary of its power to examine and limit government actions.
However, there are more recent developments of authoritarian legislative activities, restrictions on civil society organizations, and the deterioration of underlying democratic norms that have been more important.
For example, in 2018 the government’s legislature, the Knesset, passed a law declaring that Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish folks and omitting the concept of political equality for the 21 % of the people that is non-Jewish
Even concerning is the growing share of the population, especially among the young, that supports these exclusive plans. According to a 2016 statement, nearly 40 % of Israelis aged 15 to 24 believed that political freedom should be withheld from Egyptian people.
The 2016 NGO Transparency Law, which makes it more difficult for human rights organizations that receive quarter of their revenue from abroad, places additional operational strain on these companies.
Additionally, each of these things is occurring in the context of Israel’s ongoing employment and rule over the Arab people and their territories. The fight between Jews and Arabs has long been the subject of Netanyahu’s populist speech and management style.
He uses language that emphasizes threats made by Palestinians, both internally and internationally, including his 2015 poll time “warning” that” the Arabs are voting in countryside.”
No surprisingly, the conflict has amplified this speech.
Also, and as the example above illustrate, attempts to undermine political institutions and values have generally centered on Israel’s relations with the Palestinians, both within Israel and in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
Limits on completely talk
Since the start of the war, the condition has only gotten worse as a result of the coalition government passing a number of laws restricting legal rights, most notably freedom of speech.
In Israel, a law passed in April allows the state to halt a foreign media outlet’s activities if the prime minister or the secretary of conversation determines that it poses a security risk. Using this law, Israel shut down Al Jazeera, a Qatar-based television channel, in May.
Additionally, the Israeli government seized the AP’s equipment when The Associated Press provided media services to Al Jazeera. Although the equipment was returned following a widespread outcry, including from the White House, this demonstrates how this law affects the freedom of the press.
A proposal for a June legislative proposal would require the dismissal of academic professors who allegedly support or incite terrorism. The bill would impose a punishment without a trial for an offense that has no clear definitions or fair trial. Critics claim that it could be used to silence the opposition.
Another law, currently awaiting a ruling from Israel’s high court over its constitutionality, would give the far-right national security minister broad powers over policing. Critics worry that it could be used to impose sanctions on those who oppose government action.
People claim they have abstained from participating in public demonstrations because they fear police violence as a result of this direct ministerial intervention in police affairs. Moreover, this legislation appears to politicize the police, which is supposed to be an independent institution in a democracy.
Illiberal sentiment
A growing number of Jewish citizens in Israel wanted a strong leader who was not easily influenced by the media or public opinion even before the war started.
A rise in militarism and illiberal sentiment resulted from the shock of the surprise attack and Hamas ‘ brutality. In the first month of the war, for example, there were 18, 000 calls for Gaza to be “flattened”, “erased” or “destroyed” in Hebrew posts on the social media platform X, The New York Times reported, citing FakeReporter, an Israeli group that monitors disinformation and hate speech.
As the fighting has progressed and Israelis in general have come together around the war and its objectives, this sentiment has n’t subsided. Two-thirds of Jewish Israelis oppose humanitarian aid to Gaza, according to a poll conducted in February 2024, while 42 % claim that Israel should not abide by international humanitarian laws or international laws of war.
Netanyahu is the main threat to Israeli democracy, despite Israeli protests and claims that he is prolonging the war and keeping him in power, according to my opinion. These, I fear, will outlive Netananyu and the war.
Michal Ben-Josef Hirsch is associate professor of political science and legal studies, Suffolk University
This article was republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.