By John Q. Hosedrinker 
An Israeli scholar observed the Hungarian election, drawing parallels between Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. This observation stems from a fear among Israeli opposition parties that Netanyahu aims to dismantle democratic institutions to remain in power indefinitely, mirroring Orbán’s tactics. While polls suggest Netanyahu could lose the upcoming election, securing a majority for the opposition is complicated by ideological divisions and potential alliances with Arab parties, reflecting deeper structural issues within Israeli democracy. The impending election is seen as a critical test of Israel’s democratic resilience against authoritarian tendencies and its ability to address internal contradictions.
Read the original article here
The political landscape appears to be shifting, and some of Donald Trump’s most prominent international allies might be facing a reckoning. The departure of Viktor Orbán from his previously solid standing is seen by some as a sign of things to come, and the spotlight is now turning towards Benjamin Netanyahu. The notion is that if Orbán, who has long been a fixture in Hungarian politics and a key figure in certain nationalist circles, can see his influence wane, then perhaps Netanyahu, a long-serving Israeli Prime Minister, could be next in line.
This potential shift isn’t just about individual leaders losing power; it’s framed within a broader context of geopolitical alliances and the diminishing influence of a particular brand of right-wing populism that once seemed to be on the rise. The idea is that leaders who have been closely associated with Trump’s “America First” approach and shared similar ideologies might find their positions increasingly precarious as global dynamics evolve.
Inside Israel, there’s a growing sentiment among opposition parties that Benjamin Netanyahu’s time in power could be drawing to a close. The central theme of their campaigns appears to be the defense of democracy, suggesting a deep-seated concern that his leadership poses a threat to Israel’s democratic institutions. This concern is not limited to the political arena; it’s a topic that has permeated public discourse and influenced how many Israelis view their own country’s trajectory.
The domestic issues that animate Netanyahu’s opponents are significant. There’s a palpable fear that his ultimate goal is to dismantle the existing democratic framework and solidify his grip on power indefinitely. This apprehension is fueled by actions such as appointing loyalists to critical security positions, what’s described as demonizing the Arab minority, and the pursuit of legislation aimed at consolidating control over the judiciary.
Furthermore, Netanyahu is currently entangled in a corruption trial, with serious allegations stemming from a purported scheme to exchange regulatory benefits for favorable media coverage. The situation is so charged that even former President Donald Trump has reportedly urged Israeli President Isaac Herzog to grant Netanyahu a pardon, highlighting the interconnectedness of these political figures.
Netanyahu’s playbook is often compared to that of Viktor Orbán, suggesting a shared approach to governance and maintaining power. The two leaders reportedly know each other well, and Orbán’s Hungary has become a recurring point of reference in Israeli political discussions, serving as a cautionary tale for the center-left and a model for the Netanyahu-aligned right. The intense scrutiny of foreign elections within Israel, particularly the Hungarian election, underscores the perceived parallels.
Current polling in Israel suggests that Netanyahu, who has been Prime Minister for an extended period, might lose his governing majority if elections were held today. The elections are mandated to occur by a certain deadline, and if these trends persist, it could indeed mean that he becomes another significant figure in the Trump-aligned international far-right to face a downfall.
However, it’s important to acknowledge that Netanyahu has a history of losing power and then returning. His resilience in Israeli politics is a well-documented phenomenon, and some caution against assuming his departure will be permanent if he were to lose the next election. The complex nature of coalition governments in Israel can often lead to political deadlock, potentially extending his tenure even in a caretaker capacity.
The broader sentiment regarding Netanyahu’s potential departure is often expressed with a mix of hope and skepticism. While many wish for his exit, there’s a concurrent concern that any successor might not represent a significant improvement. The argument is made that Israeli society itself leans right, and even centrist opposition groups may not deviate substantially from policies like expansionism or support for West Bank settlements.
The underlying issue, according to some perspectives, is not solely Netanyahu but rather the broader ideology of Zionism. He is seen by some as a symptom of a larger political and ideological current within Israel. The hope for his removal is palpable, with some even wishing for a “Nuremberg” moment for him and others involved in what they perceive as detrimental actions.
The decision to pursue an Iran war is viewed by some as a move that ultimately doomed both Netanyahu and Trump. There’s a belief that certain elements within Israeli intelligence were aware that public opinion would not align with Israel or America on such a conflict, yet the decision was made to proceed, with devastating consequences.
The perceived outcome of this conflict has been detrimental, with Iran potentially gaining leverage and Gulf nations finding themselves in a precarious position due to their past allegiances. The bombing of civilian targets and the subsequent admission of responsibility by the US have created a rift that may not be easily mended.
The comparison between Netanyahu and Trump is frequently made, with both leaders seen as figures who have relied on similar tactics and appeals. The idea that Trump’s network of allies is shrinking reflects a broader trend where leaders who once seemed unassailable might be facing increasing pressure.
There’s a strong desire for Netanyahu’s removal, with many believing that the world, including the Israeli people, would rejoice. However, the structural challenges within Israeli politics, particularly the dynamics of coalition governments, have historically allowed Netanyahu to regain power after periods of opposition. Some argue that the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, needs reform before a consistent change in leadership can be reliably achieved.
The emergence of figures like Péter Magyar in Hungary and potentially Naftali Bennett in Israel are seen as analogous. Both are characterized as conservatives who present themselves as defenders of liberal democratic institutions, attracting broader support. However, even with the potential for Netanyahu’s defeat, the specter of deadlock remains, suggesting a prolonged period of political uncertainty.
Ultimately, the prospect of Benjamin Netanyahu’s political fall is a complex one, intertwined with domestic Israeli politics, broader regional dynamics, and the shifting tides of international alliances. While the desire for his departure is strong among many, the path to achieving it and the subsequent political landscape remain subjects of intense speculation and concern.