��������

There is nothing new or surprising about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s habit of changing his version of reality according to his personal and political needs. Opportunism, cynicism and lying in the service of surviving in power come naturally to him.

Yet, during a recent speech in which he admitted Israel was facing increasing isolation on the global stage, this fact was delivered not as an objective observation or warning, but strangely enough as something to be embraced. His dystopian vision for Israel, outlined in what was one of his most bizarre speeches yet, even by his own standards, was of the country becoming a “super-Sparta.”

By now Israelis and the rest of the world have become accustomed to Netanyahu as a chameleon-like character who changes his mind and his policies to suit his personal needs. But one would think that even he, who began his professional life as a furniture salesman, might have some boundaries as he constantly changes the narratives he desperately tries to sell to his people so that he can cling to power.

His new “super-Sparta” narrative, which he later described as a “slip of the tongue” in a pathetic attempt to correct the damage after the Tel Aviv stock market took an immediate dip in its wake, caused some people to go beyond simply questioning his policies to doubting his cognitive abilities to carry on holding the most powerful position in Israeli politics.

To clarify, a slip of the tongue it was not. Netanyahu was reading from a prepared speech and he is known for being meticulous in going through every single detail of his speeches before delivering them.

Consciously or subconsciously, it was a moment of acknowledgment that Israel is increasingly isolated on the international stage and should brace itself for some hard times ahead. Suggesting, as Netanyahu did, that the country was becoming an autarky, a completely closed economy, and spinning this gloomy message as somehow desirable had very few takers. 

By now Israelis and the rest of the world have become accustomed to Netanyahu as a chameleon-like character.

Yossi Mekelberg

It is especially striking when it comes from someone who in all his ministerial positions, including his time as finance minister, prided himself on liberalizing and deregulating the Israeli economy to promote his neoliberal view of the country as an export-oriented economy that strives to ensure international markets are wide open to its goods and services.

It could be argued that there has always been an irreconcilable contradiction between being an advanced economy that relies on close engagement with the global economy, and a hawkish foreign policy that has constantly alienated most of the international community, including close allies.

To a large extent, it is difficult to explain why this inherent tension did not come to a head long ago, first and foremost within Israel, and in its relationships with the international community.

For most of Israel’s trading partners, whether the US, Europe or even China, there are benefits to trade with an advanced economy; Israel’s hi-tech military technology and pharmaceutical industries, for instance, have been at the cutting edge of the modern global economy.

Sadly, however, in return for enjoying those benefits of trade, countries have been prepared to turn a blind eye, for decades, to Israeli policies that have done everything possible to ensure a two-state solution to the conflict with the Palestinians, which is something most of the world strongly supports, is impossible.

The erosion of Israel as a liberal democracy has been characteristic of Netanyahu’s time in office. But since his return to power after the 2022 election the trend has accelerated and it is now impossible even for Israel’s closest friends to ignore. It has been a relentless attack on the very pillars of the democratic system, with particularly vicious assaults on the judiciary, gatekeepers and the media, and has drawn criticism.

But it is the way in which the war in Gaza is being conducted — with little-to-no regard for civilian lives, the suggestion that hundreds of thousands of people could be transferred out of the territory, and a reluctance to bring the conflict to an end — that has tested the patience of world leaders to the limit.

For too long the US and Europe subscribed to Netanyahu’s assertion that Israel was part of the West and safeguarded their interests against, as he once put it, “militant regimes.” 

The inhuman destruction of Gaza and the readiness to starve its people has caused a change of mind in most European countries.

Yossi Mekelberg

However, the inhuman destruction of Gaza, and the readiness to starve the people there and displace most of the population several times over, has caused a change of mind in most European countries, which have gradually concluded that Israel should face the consequences of behavior that, beyond being immoral, damages Israel’s own interests and evokes radicalization.

Since its inception, Israel has longed for international acceptance and engagement, and its survival and prosperity have been very much dependent on that. The very idea that such a small country, in terms of population and territory, which has limited natural resources and exists in a permanent state of conflict, and with a significant proportion of its population economically barely productive, could become totally self-sufficient demonstrates a complete detachment from reality.

Such a goal is neither viable nor does it have a constituency among Israelis. It is seen as an absurd idea for a prime minister who failed to defend them on Oct. 7 to insist on continuing a war that can only lead to more suffering and further international isolation.

The center of gravity in Israeli society cherishes being part of the global discourse, economically and culturally. There is nothing Israelis like more than traveling the world and enjoying a standard of living that comes from a successful domestic economy that is very much integrated with the global economy.

Netanyahu, who is well-versed in world history, should have known that just as Sparta lived by the sword, so it fell by the sword. And as much as Israel’s security paradigm relies on military power, as Israelis celebrated the Jewish New Year this week, the vast majority of them, with very few exceptions, would like to see the war end and normal life resume.

They most definitely will not heed a vision of becoming a modern-day Sparta from someone known for a hedonistic lifestyle that has embroiled him in the legal troubles he continues to face; where would he even find cigars and pink champagne in such an austere autarky?

Furthermore, for Israel’s prime minister to ask for such a sacrifice from the very people who have long carried the economic burdens — along with the requirement of serving in the country’s military, many of them for hundreds of days over the past two years, while Netanyahu, to benefit his own political survival, is prepared to defy the law and the will of most citizens by continuing to exempt tens of thousands of ultra-Orthodox Jews from military service — is a combination of moral bankruptcy and a misreading of the anger among those who serve.

All that stands between Israelis and a government without Netanyahu is the people being given the chance to choose their next leadership at the ballot box. They will not vote for someone who advocates a dystopian future.

• Yossi Mekelberg is professor of international relations and an associate fellow of the MENA Program at Chatham House.

X: @YMekelberg