Ever since Raviv Drucker exposed the submarine affair seven years ago, I have wondered about the powerful magnet that binds Benjamin Netanyahu to the thickness of power more than all other politicians, who also strive to sit in the leader's chair without vacating him. What is the source of power that spurs Bibi to hold on to the helm even by improper means?
Historical wondering. What are the plays Macbeth and Hamlet for William Shakespeare if not this one? The modern West dealt with this in the 60s with two resounding bestsellers: Alan Drury's Advise and Consent, and Bud Schulberg's What Makes Sammy Run. It was a brilliant description of the ambitious motives of politicians. Only they have been forgotten over the years.
A long trail of psychologists deals with this issue in democratic countries, and in Israel they have tried to solve the riddle, which is essentially quantitative – that is, a greater than usual lust for power. Netanyahu's biographers, Ben Caspit and Mazal Muallem, dealt with this, and the problem is still unsolved.
One possibility, simplistic and straightforward - the pursuit of honor. The urge to impose the will of the individual on the many. Biblical Joseph's dream of the beams bowing before the leader. The eagerness for money. Hedonism.
Another possibility, which has developed over the years, is Netanyahu's process of self-conviction, according to which he was chosen by some Shekinah to lead the people of Israel in an era of shaping its sovereignty. Since 2003, he has told privately about a survey conducted among public figures in Israel, in which he emerged as the most intelligent and intelligent of them. Messiah? Not in the faith sense, but in the test of a change of government, as the wise say: "There is nothing between this world and the days of Christ but only the bondage of kingdoms."
It is reasonable to assume that the merger of these two options plays a role in Bibi's grip on the throne, causing him to reject convenient offers of a plea bargain in the criminal prosecution against him, based on his resignation as prime minister.
My wife, Dana Margalit, who is a professor of psychology, came up with an interesting idea: In the twilight of their lives, there are people who do not want to prolong their lives, but do so because they fear death. It is also possible that Netanyahu is no longer in a binge of striving for achievements, but fears that his resignation will flood the shame of his chain of failures, and is therefore working to prolong his days in power.
In my understanding, it is inconceivable that Bibi, who is educated and intelligent and well versed in the history of nations and their leaders, employs such a powerful mechanism of denial that obscures his failures in the discourse among himself: in stopping Iran's nuclear program; his heavy responsibility for the concept of encouraging Hamas rule in Gaza; the fracture in relations with the Democratic Party in the United States, where the pro-Palestinian wing makes it even more difficult for President Joe Biden to help Israel; the disproportionate harm he inflicted on the rule of law system in Israel, when he followed Yariv Levin and Simcha Rothman as Soma in the chimney; And in the concession that he surrendered, he made by adding Itamar Ben-Gvir to his government.
He understands very well what will be written in the history books about all this, and in his attempt to push back the embarrassment – adds insult to injury or mistake to mistake, from submitting a specified budget to telling the truth wholesale.
Netanyahu may no longer be in a binge of striving for achievements, but fears that his resignation will bring to light the shame of his chain of failures, and is therefore working to prolong his days in power
Mostly, he understands that the demand for his removal as prime minister is the most substantial consensus that exists in Israeli society right now, who is at the top of the billboard and who, for the time being, is only in the heart rooms. From retired Makor Rishon editor Hagai Segal, to Yair Golan on his way to the leadership of Meretz, and unanimously among figures on the right and in the center who often find testimonies in him.
All this may lead to wrong conclusions. The most prominent of these is to prolong the war. He apparently did not feel that "returning to Kaplan" was a matter of a short sprint, and that the scale of the demonstrations from the previous round would be only a preview of what awaited him.
Wrong? We'll fix it! If you find a mistake in the article, please share with us