Israel has long been regarded in the West as “the only democracy in the Middle East”, a characterisation that underpins its strategic alliances, particularly with nations like Germany and the United States. This narrative, closely tied to shared democratic values, has often been used to justify steadfast support for Israel despite geopolitical complexities, the International Criminal Court’s indictment and the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza.
However, recent developments under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s administration cast doubt on the integrity of this claim. The core pillars of democracy in Israel – judicial independence, press freedom and the right to protest – are under serious threat, undermining the very democratic ideals the country claims to uphold.
The re-election of Donald Trump as US President is also anticipated to significantly influence Israel’s political trajectory. Trump’s previous term was marked by strong support for Netanyahu, including the US recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and support for Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights. These actions were aligning with Netanyahu’s policies and strengthening his position. With Trump’s return to the White House, Netanyahu’s allies are advocating for a consolidation of power, targeting key officials such as the attorney-general and military chief. This political climate is likely to lead to the resumption of controversial judicial reforms, thereby posing further challenges to Israel’s struggling democratic institutions.
The concept of democracy is not monolithic. Depending on the definition employed, Israel’s democratic credentials appear vastly different. Using a minimalist definition – emphasising free elections and political freedoms – Israel may struggle to fit the label of a democracy within its pre-1967 borders. However, when evaluated against a broader definition that includes the equality of all citizens, Israel’s democracy becomes, at best, deeply flawed. For the nearly 21% of its citizens who are Palestinian, systemic disparities in political rights, infrastructure, and economic opportunity reveal a state that fails to meet the inclusive ideals of democracy.
Arab citizens are predominantly descendants of those who remained within Israel’s borders after the 1948 Arab-Israeli war. Despite having legal rights equal to Jewish citizens, Arab Israelis experience persistent discrimination, compounded by historical grievances and the broader Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Moreover, the situation in the territories occupied since the 1967 June War – East Jerusalem, the West Bank, Gaza and the Golan Heights – paints an even bleaker picture. The military occupation, coupled with the ongoing expansion of settlements, has led to governance that denies Palestinians basic human rights. Applying even the minimalist concept of democracy to the entire territory under Israeli control renders the system indefensible as democratic. This long-standing de-democratisation has accelerated under Netanyahu, whose recent actions have pushed Israel further toward authoritarianism.
The Netanyahu government’s judicial overhaul is a glaring example of this decline. At the heart of this crisis lies the government’s move to strip the judiciary of its power, including the “reasonableness” test that allows the Supreme Court to check the executive branch. These reforms undermine judicial independence, leaving key decisions subject to political whims. Netanyahu’s motivations are widely seen as self-serving, aimed at consolidating power and shielding himself from corruption charges.
The Netanyahu-led government is actively undermining the independence of the judiciary through multiple controversial measures. Central to this effort is the reported plan to dismiss Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara, who has resisted endorsing government policies she deemed unlawful. This move aligns with the broader push by far-right coalition members to weaken judicial oversight and consolidate executive power. The government also seeks to limit the powers of the attorney general, with discussions about splitting the role to reduce its authority as a legal gatekeeper.
The judiciary has historically acted as a check on Israel’s right-wing agenda, including settlement expansion and discriminatory policies. By weakening judicial oversight, Netanyahu paves the way for policies that entrench inequality, such as the de jure annexation of parts of the West Bank. This assault on the judiciary is not merely a domestic issue – it undermines the democratic framework that forms the basis of Israel’s international alliances.
A free press is a cornerstone of democracy, but in Israel, this freedom is under attack. The “Al Jazeera Law”, passed in 2024, allows the government to shut down foreign media outlets deemed a “security threat.” Al Jazeera was swiftly targeted, its offices raided, and its broadcasts banned. Domestically, independent outlets like Haaretz face financial and political pressures, including boycotts from government-funded bodies.
Military censorship, too, has reached alarming levels. Journalists critical of the government face threats and violence, while coverage of the Gaza war remains heavily sanitised. The targeting of Palestinian journalists and the restriction of foreign media access to Gaza further illustrate the government’s attempts to control the narrative. These measures stifle dissent, limit public understanding and erode the democratic value of informed debate.
The right to protest has been another casualty of Netanyahu’s authoritarian turn. During the mass demonstrations against judicial reforms and the Gaza war, police employ excessive force, including water cannons, tear gas, and physical violence. Legislation granting the far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir increased control over policing has further politicised law enforcement, raising fears of targeted crackdowns on government critics.
The suppression of protests reflects a broader trend of illiberal governance. The government’s rhetoric, which often frames dissent as unpatriotic anti-nationals or even traitorous, fosters a climate of fear and discourages civic engagement. This erosion of democratic space undermines the very fabric of Israeli society, where the right to dissent among the Jewish citizens has historically played a crucial role in shaping public policy.
The occupation of Palestinian territories is not a peripheral issue – it is central to Israel’s democratic backsliding. The judiciary’s perceived role in obstructing annexationist policies has fueled the right-wing push to curtail its powers. At the same time, the techniques of control honed in the West Bank, including surveillance and the suppression of dissent, are increasingly applied within Israel’s pre-1967 borders.
This dynamic creates a paradox: Israel’s democratic crisis cannot be resolved without addressing the occupation, yet the occupation itself is a major obstacle to democratic reform. The protest movement against judicial reforms has largely avoided confronting this issue, focusing instead on preserving the status quo. However, genuine democracy cannot coexist with systemic inequality and the denial of rights to millions of Palestinians.
Israel’s democratic erosion has far-reaching implications. Domestically, it risks deepening societal divisions and further alienating minority communities. Internationally, it undermines Israel’s standing as a democratic ally and weakens the moral basis of its alliances. The shift toward authoritarianism also sets a dangerous precedent for other democracies grappling with polarisation and populism.
The assertion that Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East has always been fraught with contradictions, and under Netanyahu’s leadership, these contradictions have become impossible to ignore. The ongoing attacks on the judiciary, the press, and the right to protest expose a state in democratic decline, driven by an agenda that prioritises occupation and power consolidation over democratic principles. For Israel to preserve even a minimalist form of democracy, it must confront these challenges directly, adopting reforms that uphold equality, accountability, and the rule of law for all its citizens – both Jewish and Palestinian. Only through such measures can it aspire to fulfill the democratic ideals it claims to embody.
Ashok Swain is a professor of peace and conflict research at Uppsala University, Sweden.
