Many Israelis desire Benjamin Netanyahu to apologize and step down. A survey released this week by the Israel Democracy Institute revealed that an astonishing 87 percent of Israelis believe the prime minister should take responsibility for the events of October 7, with 73 percent advocating for his resignation, either immediately or following the Gaza war. While these statistics may be surprising to outsiders, they reflect a long-standing sentiment. Since October 7, the Israeli populace has repeatedly expressed to pollsters a strong desire for Netanyahu’s departure—a sentiment that has persisted through the tumult of the war and has, if anything, grown stronger.
The rationale for this is straightforward: Netanyahu has not only overseen the most significant security failure in Israel’s history but has also governed in opposition to the will of the majority. His party and its allies garnered only 48.4 percent of the votes in late 2022. However, rather than seeking to bridge the divides within a polarized society, he formed a sectarian coalition with extremist factions: far-right messianic settlers and ultra-Orthodox groups. The necessity of these groups’ support for his government has allowed them to extract extensive concessions and political advantages from Netanyahu, resulting in his administration prioritizing the interests of merely 30 percent of the population.
[Anshel Pfeffer: Benjamin Netanyahu is Israel’s worst prime minister ever]
Consider the current cease-fire negotiations in Gaza. Polls consistently indicate that approximately 70 percent of Israelis support the extension of the cease-fire until all hostages are released, even if this entails the release of convicted terrorists and an unresolved conflict with Hamas. A substantial majority of Israelis oppose any plans to resettle Gaza. Yet, Netanyahu is beholden to the radical minority that not only wishes to reignite the war but also to ethnically cleanse Gaza to establish Jewish settlements. Consequently, the hostage negotiations are precariously balanced.
Another critical issue is the enlistment of ultra-Orthodox individuals in the Israeli military. The IDF is not a volunteer force; it relies on universal conscription. However, since the state’s inception, the ultra-Orthodox community has been exempt from service, with young men attending state-funded religious institutions while others defend the nation. This arrangement, though unpopular, was tolerated in exchange for ultra-Orthodox cooperation on other political matters. However, as Israel now confronts multiple threats, the absence of this rapidly growing demographic from national defense has become untenable. Since October 7, polls indicate that around 70 percent of Israelis, including a majority of those who supported the ruling right-wing government, oppose the exemptions for ultra-Orthodox individuals. A similar percentage disapprove of state funding for their community and religious institutions. Nevertheless, these public preferences have not influenced government policy.
Netanyahu’s neglect of majority opinion predates October 7 and may represent the fundamental flaw of his administration. In January 2023, his coalition proposed a sweeping overhaul of Israel’s judicial system, aiming to significantly diminish the power of the supreme court. This drastic reconfiguration of Israeli democracy was not achieved through public discourse or consensus-building but was instead driven by a conservative think tank and pushed through Parliament on a narrow party-line vote. Polls showed that this initiative was opposed by nearly two-thirds of the Israeli public. For a time, mass protests against it gripped the nation, becoming the largest sustained protest movement in Israeli history. The catastrophic events of October 7 temporarily shelved the overhaul, but now Netanyahu’s coalition is reviving it.
The prime minister’s refusal to heed the will of the Israeli majority has also extended to high-level personnel decisions. On November 5, 2024, Netanyahu dismissed his defense minister, Yoav Gallant, who, according to polls, was the most popular elected official in Israel. Gallant opposed the judicial overhaul, rejected the idea of Jewish settlements in Gaza, advocated for the territory to be returned to non-Hamas Palestinian governance, called for an earlier cease-fire agreement, and consistently pressed for the drafting of ultra-Orthodox individuals into the Israel Defense Forces. Essentially, Gallant represented the consensus positions of Israeli society—which is precisely why he was dismissed. On January 1, he resigned from Parliament entirely.
[Read: The Israeli defense establishment revolts against Netanyahu]
These issues are not merely incidental; they highlight the fundamental divisions within Israeli politics, as they will shape the nation’s future. On each of these matters, Netanyahu and his government stand in stark opposition to the overwhelming majority of the Israeli populace. Technically, this governance is permissible within the existing political framework. Although the prime minister’s coalition did not secure a majority of the votes, it obtained a majority of seats in Parliament due to a quirk of the Israeli electoral system, allowing it to govern until the next election in 2026, barring a collapse. However, Netanyahu’s blatant disregard for public preferences poses a significant threat to Israeli democracy, as it erodes trust in the system’s ability to serve its citizens.
In this context, it is unsurprising that polls conducted since before October 7 have consistently indicated that the current administration would lose the upcoming election. The conflict has momentarily redirected the public’s anger towards national security needs. However, once the fighting with Hamas subsides, Israelis are likely to refocus their scrutiny on their leadership.
