- Since its founding in May 1948, Israel has dealt with violent attempts to destroy its existence as a sovereign Jewish state.
- Israel’s security doctrine emphasizes that the only way to ensure the survival of Israel as a Jewish state was to build an ‘Iron Wall’ that could withstand enemy attacks until the other side was compelled to negotiate.
- Both the Right and Left-wing parties in Israel are united in their opposition to the Iranian nuclear program which they perceive as challenging Israel’s nuclear monopoly and military supremacy in the Middle East.
- Netanyahu with his tenuous domestic political position and needing the support of his far-right coalition allies, likely felt that he had to respond militarily to the Hamas attacks on October 7, 2023.
Since its founding in May 1948, Israel has dealt with violent attempts to destroy its existence as a sovereign Jewish state. Beginning with local Arab terrorism during the British Mandate era, the threat escalated with the invasion of neighbouring Arab states – Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Iraq and Lebanon upon Israel’s declaration of independence in 1948. Subsequent decades saw continuous warfare including terrorism in various forms such as stabbings, shootings, and rocket attacks.
Since Israel remains a small state with a relatively small Jewish population compared to the surrounding hostile Arab nations Israel’s security doctrine emphasizes that the surrounding Arab countries, all of them Muslim, would never accept Jews returning to their ancestral and sacred homeland and would see them as foreign invaders. The doctrine further emphasizes that the only way to ensure the survival of Israel as a Jewish state was to build an “Iron Wall “that could withstand enemy attacks until the other side was compelled to negotiate.
Israel’s Security Challenges and its Response
To address these various security challenges, the Israeli state mandates compulsory military service for Israeli Jewish citizens, both men and women. After three years of service (two years for women), they enter the reserve forces, where they serve for an additional 25 years, thus enabling Israel to mobilise a large army in times of war.
In its early years of statehood, Israel’s security doctrine emphasized that Israel needed early warning for war to mobilise its reserve army; that it had to build a strong military that projected power to deter its enemies from initiating war; and, if war broke out, to quickly defeat the enemy on its territory by swiftly transitioning to an offensive posture. This strategy worked well for Israel as it forced several Arab states to recognize Israel’s sovereign existence as a Jewish state.
Israel’s peace agreement with Egypt, signed in 1979, removed the largest and strongest Arab state from the circle of conflict with Israel. Subsequent contracts were signed with Jordan, the UAE, Bahrain, and Morocco, and informal relations with Saudi Arabia have improved considerably. Following the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran, the Shia Islamic regime in Iran built a “ring of fire” around Israel, composed of its proxies in Lebanon- Hezbollah, its proxies in Yemen – the Houthis, and extremist Sunni organizations in the Palestinian territories of the Gaza and West Bank. The introduction of extreme religious motives by Iranian-sponsored proxies such as Hezbollah and Hamas has changed the nature of the Arab-Israeli conflict from a largely territorial conflict to a territorial-religious strife.
Bipartisan Consensus on National Security
In Israel, political parties are vital in shaping Israel’s policies towards national security challenges. Left-wing parties in Israel such as the Labor Party and Meretz traditionally focus on promoting social equality, advocating for a secular government, and pursuing peace with the Palestinians through a two-state solution. These parties tend to attract support from secular Jews, the middle class, and those who advocate for the separation of religion and state.
Right-wing parties in Israel are characterized by a focus on national security, scepticism towards peace negotiations with the Palestinians, and support for expanding Jewish settlements in the West Bank. Likud founded by Menachem Begin, is the most prominent Right-wing party and has been a dominant force in Israeli politics for much of the past few decades, particularly under the leadership of Benjamin Netanyahu. Likud promotes a free-market economy, strong national defence, and the preservation of Israel’s Jewish character. The religious Zionist Party represents a more conservative and religious wing of the right, advocating for settlement expansion and opposing significant territorial concessions to the Palestinians.
In Israel, the distinction between Right and Left is largely defined by attitudes towards security and the peace process with the Palestinians. Left-wing parties generally support a two-state solution and are open to making territorial compromises, including the removal of some settlements, to achieve peace. In contrast, Right-wing parties emphasise the importance of security, typically oppose significant territorial concessions, and support the expansion of Jewish settlements in the West Bank.
Despite their differences, the Right-wing and Left-wing parties in Israel arrive at a consensus when it comes to resolving the Palestinian issue or dealing with Iran. Both the Right and Left-wing parties in Israel are united in their opposition to the Iranian nuclear program which they perceive as challenging Israel’s nuclear monopoly and military supremacy in the Middle East. Israel’s Right and Left-wing parties also agree on the need to militarily destroy or weaken Iranian-supported proxy militant groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah which call for Israel’s destruction. Both the Right-wing and the Left-wing parties in Israel also agree that securing the cooperation of Israel’s diplomatic and military ally the United States is vital against efforts to internationally isolate Israel in response to military action that Israel undertakes against Hezbollah or Hamas or potentially against Iran’s nuclear facilities.
Israel’s Domestic Political Instability
The Israeli political system is not governed by a written constitution instead it is a series of enacted Basic Laws that regulate the functions of the various powers and institutions of the Israeli state. ; these laws were successively promulgated by the Israeli parliament known as the Knesset. The Israeli political system is characterized by a multitude of political parties and the inability of a single party to gain a majority in the Knesset since the founding of Israel and even today. This has to do with the nature of the Jewish Zionist settler and immigrant society that was founded in Palestine, and also to Israel’s adoption of proportional representation and a low electoral threshold. This opened up the possibility for an array of small and mid-sized parties to obtain representation in the Knesset, which has led to all governments formed in Israel, since its founding, to be composed of multi-party coalitions.
In 1968, the Knesset legislated the Basic Law of the government, which states that the Israeli government, composed of the prime minister, as well as other ministers, is the executive authority of the state, and carries out its tasks after the Knesset approves the proposed action. Until 1981, threatening ministers who disagreed with their policies with resignation and reconstituting a new cabinet without them, or going to early elections, was the weapon employed by Israeli prime ministers. This was so as the legal stature of the prime minister in the first three decades of Israel’s founding was that of first among equals, which meant that the prime minister’s resignation would lead to the dissolution of the whole cabinet, imposing the formation of a new government or holding new elections.
In 1981, an important change occurred in the attributes and stature of the prime minister, with the Knesset amending the basic law of government. The amendment gave the prime minister the powers to dismiss cabinet ministers, affirming that “the minister is responsible towards the prime minister in the tasks delegated to the minister”. This amendment greatly strengthened the position of the prime minister in Israel’s political system.
Hyper-realist Strategic Policy Amidst Turbulent Domestic Politics
Israel’s government was in a tenuous position before the war in Gaza. The 2022 elections returned a fractured Knesset, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was only able to form a coalition government that included several Right-wing parties. The small size of his majority meant that his far-right partners were able to demand concessions to support his government.
The October 7 2023 Hamas attacks initially unified Israeli society behind the government. The way Israel conducted the war against Hamas in Gaza resulting in several Palestinian civilian casualties has caused this support to decline in some circles. The Israeli government’s inability to negotiate a release for the remaining Israeli hostages held by Hamas remains a festering wound in Israeli politics.
Initially, National Unity, the chief opposition party supported Benjamin Netanyahu’s government. National Unity’s leader, Benny Gantz, initially formed a war cabinet with Netanyahu and Israeli Defence Minister Yoav Gallant to direct the war effort. Benny Gantz has emerged as a voice of moderation in Israel’s response to Iran. As a former chief of general staff of the Israel Defense Forces from 2011 to 2015, Gantz is better able to comprehend than most other members of Netanyahu’s wartime government the many strategic problems Israel would face if tensions with either Iran or its proxies namely Hezbollah and Hamas were to spiral out of control.
In June 2024 Benny Gantz resigned from Netanyahu’s wartime cabinet due to differences over the conduct of the war against Hamas in Gaza. Following his decision to quit Netanyahu’s wartime cabinet, Benny Gantz’s ability to exert influence over Israel’s conduct of conflict against Iran or its proxies will be limited. But it also allows Gantz to cast himself as someone who stood up to Netanyahu ahead of any future elections in Israel.
The resignation of Gantz has further enabled the smaller far-right parties in Netanyahu’s coalition that are outside the war cabinet to have greater influence over the conduct of Israel’s military campaign against Hamas and Hezbollah. Right-wing coalition members of Netanyahu’s government during the current conflict have frequently expressed hardline views regarding how Israel should respond for example National Security Minister Itama- Ben-Gvir, leader of the Right-Wing ultra-nationalist party Otzma Yehudit Party, has stated that Israel needs to “go crazy” in its response. Similarly, Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich stated that if Israel’s response “resonates throughout the Middle East for generations to come – we will win”.
Netanyahu with his tenuous domestic political position and needing the support of his far-right coalition allies, likely felt that he had to respond militarily to the Hamas attacks on October 7, 2023. This pressure from his Right-wing coalition allies has led the current Israeli government under Prime Minister Netanyahu to adopt a Hyperrealist strategy that favours a kinetic military solution to Israeli’s national security challenges be it Iran or Iranian-sponsored proxies such as Hamas and Hezbollah. This could partially explain why Israel has recently decided to escalate its conflict against Hezbollah in Lebanon. Such a Hyperrealist strategy adopted by Israel reduces the chances for a peaceful solution to the current conflict in the Middle East and increases the chances of conflict escalation unless the United States chooses to pressure Israel to step back from the brink of an all-out war with Iran.
Thus, Israel’s turbulent domestic politics has trumped otherwise rational strategic calculations. Iran has stated on several occasions that any Israeli retaliation against Iran’s nuclear facilities or its oil facilities would result in a massive retaliation by Iran not just against Israel but also against Arab Gulf states that host American military bases such as Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar and Bahrain.
(Dhruv Ashok is a PhD research scholar from Christ (Deemed to be University), Bangalore. He writes on current affairs and international politics. His areas of interest include conflict resolution and historical narratives. Views expressed are the author’s own)
References:
- Bergman, R. (2019). Rise and Kill First: The Secret History of Israel’s Targeted Assassinations. John Murray
- Chakraborty, R. (2024). The Evolution of Israel’s National Security Doctrine: A Journey from Ben-Gurion to Netanyahu. Walnut Publication
- Horncastle, J (2024). Israel hits back at Iran: How domestic politics is determining Israeli actions. Retrieved from https://theconversation.com/israel-hits-back-at-iran-how-domestic-politics-is-determining-israeli-actions-228316
- Muhareb, M (2011). The Process of National Security Decision-Making in Israel and The Influence of the Military Establishment. Retrieved from https://www.dohainstitute.org/en/lists/ACRPS-PDFDocumentLibrary/The_Process_of_National_Security_Decision.pdf
- Tyler, P. (2013). Fortress Israel: The Inside Story of the Military Elite who run the country and Why They Can’t Make Peace. Farrar, Straus and Giroux
Dhruv Ashok is a PhD research scholar from Christ (Deemed to be University), Bangalore. He writes on current affairs and international politics. His areas of interest include conflict resolution and historical narratives. Views expressed are the author’s own.
Aayush Pal 
Balaji Subramanian 
Palak Dogra