Netanyahu, Jabotinsky and Begin: When statism is eroded, power is also eroded

Benjamin Netanyahu adopted from the home in which he grew up the concept of security, deterrence, and the need for a strong state. However, as his tenure lengthened, he moved further and further away from one of the fundamental principles of Revisionism – statism. In doing so, the Prime Minister not only deviated from the path of Ze'ev Jabotinsky and Menachem Begin, but also led to the erosion of one of the most important sources of strength of the State of Israel.

Ben-Zion Netanyahu – Benjamin Netanyahu's father, a historian and personal secretary in the United States to the leader of the Revisionist movement Ze'ev Jabotinsky – instilled in his son a worldview according to which the security of the Jewish people is not taken for granted, and that leadership is tested by its ability to identify threats and act against them with determination. In this sense, Netanyahu the son was a faithful student of the home in which he grew up. For decades, he placed the Iranian threat at the center of the agenda, strengthened Israel's military power, deepened its relations with the USA and other countries, and led an economy that became a hub of innovation and growth.

However, Revisionism never consisted only of security and deterrence. Jabotinsky and Begin understood that a strong state relies not only on an army, but also on the rule of law, independent institutions, a professional civil service, and public trust. Jabotinsky called this "Hadar" (dignity); Begin expressed this by respecting state institutions even when he disagreed with their decisions. For both of them, statism was not a complementary value, but a condition for national power. They understood the fragility of power that does not rely on statism.

Statism is not only a moral value, but also a strategic asset. It is what allows a state to make professional decisions over time, to mobilize the trust of its citizens in times of crisis, to operate a high-quality civil service, to maintain the independence of its institutions, and to strengthen the trust of its partners in the world. When institutions are eroded, public trust is damaged, professionalism is weakened, and loyalty is preferred over competence – not only is the quality of governance damaged, but also the state's ability to deal with crises, make complex decisions, and maintain its strength. In this sense, statism is not a luxury of routine days, but one of the most important force multipliers of a state.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (Photo: Flash90/Haim Goldberg)

Anyone who has managed large organizations knows that the strength of an organization is measured not only by its resources, but also by the degree of trust its people have in the system and in the decision-makers. So it is with a state. Complex decisions are made better when the public believes they are made professionally, substantively, and fairly. When this trust is eroded, not only is the legitimacy of the decisions damaged, but also the ability to implement them quickly and effectively, and thus the state's power is effectively eroded as well.

During Netanyahu's long tenure, a trend of undermining the status of state institutions and the professional echelon deepened – and here began Netanyahu's deviation from the Revisionist legacy. The attacks on the judicial system, the erosion of the status of gatekeepers, the lack of appointments to senior positions, and the increasing penetration of political considerations into professional appointments are not separate events. They reflect a perception according to which state institutions, which in the eyes of Jabotinsky and Begin were a source of strength, have become an obstacle that must be bypassed.

Netanyahu did not create the rifts in Israeli society, but as the Prime Minister who served longer than all his predecessors, he had a decisive influence on their deepening. Time and again, he amplified the division between "us" and "them" and turned polarization into a central political tool. At the same time, the status of the civil service was eroded, and public trust in state institutions and social cohesion were damaged – all of which are strategic assets of any state.

October 7 was not born from political disagreement or the struggle over the judicial system. It painfully demonstrated that military power, economic achievements, and international ties are not enough when national resilience, public trust, and statism are eroded. A strong society needs not only a strong army, but also strong institutions and leadership that strengthens the foundations of the state.

Perhaps it is here that Benjamin Netanyahu's historical legacy will be written. The leader who grew up in the Revisionist habitat, absorbed the security concept of Ze'ev Jabotinsky, and dedicated a significant part of his life to strengthening Israel's military, economic, and political power, may also be remembered as the one under whom the statism that constitutes one of the most important sources of the state's power was eroded.

*The author is Yair Avidan, a director and social activist; a senior research fellow at the Institute for Policy and Strategy (IPS), Reichman University.