Authoritarianism in Israel began with occupation, not Netanyahu v. Ronen Bar

Thousands of #Israeli’s are taking to the streets because of Prime Minister Netanyahu’s intention to fire the head of the Shin Bet, Ronen Bar. Alon Pinkas suggested in Haaretz that Israel’s ‘Weimar moment’ has arrived, which is to say that institutions crucial to the maintenance of democracy risk being fatally degraded. Yet, the erosion of Israeli #democracy has less to do with Prime Minister Netanyahu than one might think. Ultimately, Israel’s slide towards an electoral autocracy is a consequence of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians since 1967 – the start of occupation – or perhaps even 1948 – Israel’s first forced mass displacement of #Palestinians.

This is the case because in the long run a democracy cannot repress and occupy another people without doing increasing moral and mental damage to itself. The methods required to maintain control over unwilling ‘outsiders’ (here: Palestinians) are necessarily authoritarian and contrast too blatantly with the democratic rights of self-determination, human dignity and the rule of law that prevail among ‘insiders’ (here: Israeli’s). The cognitive dissonance that results from this gap demands that outsiders are turned into an existential threat, or even dehumanized. In cases of permanent repression under the condition of approximate population parity, as in Israel-Palestine, permanent control demands apartheid with all its visible injustices.

In particular, a democracy that institutionalizes and popularizes a settlement enterprise based on a mix of nationalist and religious claims to land can expect ultra-nationalists and zealots to emerge. The worldview of such groups typically applies to the opposing outgroup (here: Palestinians) as well as to their ingroup (here: fellow-Israelis). Eric Hoffer’s (1951) ‘The true believer’ remains insightful on this point. Ultranationalism and zealotry ultimately make firing Ronen Bar the corollary of repressing Palestinians.

The professionals of Israel’s security services are as much part of this problem as the zealots. In ensuring national security in the context of a settlement enterprise, security professionals merely prepare the next stage of forced displacement and dispossession of Palestinians due to the growth of ultra-nationalism and zealotry that their protection enables at the same time. Occupation requires repression, repression tends to generate resistance and resistance invites more repression.

Yes, there are thousands of Israeli’s that protest resumption of the war in Gaza. Various Haaretz articles and opinion polls by the Israel Democracy Institute indicate, however, that they do not primarily take to the streets in empathy with the slaughter and displacement of Gaza’s Palestinian population. Rather, they protest their government’s decision to prioritize repression and settlement over the lives of the remaining hostages. But its decision is only a logical step towards an authoritarianism rooted in occupation.