Afrasianet - In a critical article, Israeli writer Merav Patito paints a narcissistic portrait of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his Jerusalem trial session, describing a set of traits and behaviors that shape a leader who poses a threat to Israelis and the regime.

Patito summoned all the stockpiles of criticism and conviction to describe how Netanyahu behaved in the courtroom, which is supposed to mark a new phase of face-to-face interrogation (counter-interrogation) used to push the accused to collapse and confess to the charges against him in court.

Netanyahu was not a statesman facing criminal charges related to corruption, bribery and breach of trust, but rather as if he had summoned from his reservoir of political skills the worst tools of manipulating consciousness: from cynicism to denial and grievance, to promoting an alternative reality that denies the facts.

The article raises real questions about the extent of Netanyahu's disconnect from the Israeli national reality, which has been witnessing a bloody war in Gaza for 606 days, escalating internal protests and strategic retreats. 

10 dangerous traits

According to Patito, the interrogation session appeared to be the opening show of a political circus led by Netanyahu himself, where he resorted to something resembling verbal "juggling games" instead of facing the thick smoke of war in Gaza, and at a time when Israel is preoccupied with the funerals of its dead and faltering hostage exchange deals, Netanyahu did not hesitate to use cheap humor, even going so far as to mock his wife's Sarah's doll, amid laughter in the hall that seemed to emanate from popular mourning abroad.

The author reviewed 10 signs that she said reveal the essence of a leader who turns into a threat to Israel and Israelis, based on Netanyahu's performance during the court hearing:

•    Netanyahu used the judicial platform to respond to his critics, attacking investigators, journalists and even political commentators such as Amnon Abramovich, for saying in a comment to Netanyahu that he would not even be on the sidelines in Israel's history.

•    When asked if he was telling the truth, he replied, "I told the truth, it doesn't mean I wasn't wrong sometimes," and then evaded the accusations of lying by saying, "I said what I remember," suggesting a deliberate desire to shuffle the cards, and even when the attorney general looked at the possibility of memory problems, Netanyahu obscured that "everybody has problems from time to time."

•    Grievance claim: 
He did not hesitate to accuse the court of persecution, saying, "This is persecution, I gave no one anything," and later returned to attacking the media and considering the charges "absurd" and "made out of nothing."

•    Total denial: 
He insisted on his innocence, saying "I was not afraid of anything, I did not commit any crime," denying his connection to decisions that are subject to judicial accountability.

•    Downplaying serious issues: He 
mocked the issue of his possible involvement in the submarine deal with Germany, which was marred by corruption and bribery, saying, "What is a Bibi submarine?When asked about his police treatment during the investigations, Netanyahu himself jokingly compared himself to former Syrian President Hafez al-Assad, and said, "I don't have the capabilities of Assad father, 7 hours without anything, 7 hours without going to the bathroom," in reference to Assad's use of "bladder diplomacy" with his political interlocutors when he was in power.

•    Imposing an absolute reality: 
Netanyahu stuck to his individual vision of the truth, telling the attorney general, "What you say is not true, and what I say is pure truth," denying any possibility of error or confusion.

•    Self-glorification: 
He defended his economic policies, saying, "Even though I developed the economy and made people rich, I didn't help the rich nor was I in contact with them, that's ridiculous."

•    When asked about his relationship with Arnon Milchan (a businessman who accused Netanyahu of taking bribes from him), he replied, "Because I loved him, he wasn't political, sometimes you meet people because you love them, not for political reasons."

•    Personal mood contrasted with national reality: He 
showed no agreement with the general sadness in Israel, but seemed to enjoy the show, amid laughter about personal subjects, at a time when 3 funerals of Israeli soldiers killed in the battles of Gaza were taking place.

•    Lack of sense of collective responsibility: 
By prolonged evasion of accountability for the Gaza war and the October 7 attack, Netanyahu has managed to establish a false sense of victory over  the "deep state," as he describes it, without assuming political or moral responsibility.

Moral crisis

After more than a year and a half of war and declining popularity in the polls, Netanyahu is still touting himself as a "savior" and "victim," completely ignoring the voices calling for his dismissal and the formation of an official commission of inquiry. 

The continued postponement of accountability and the political umbrella imposed by right-wing allied parties have provided Netanyahu with a sense of immunity, and internal divisions and inflammatory rhetoric have fueled his imagination that "the people are with him," Patito said.

At the heart of these signs lies a political and moral crisis beyond Netanyahu, pointing not only to the danger of an individual to the regime, but to the susceptibility of Israeli society to accept a leader who refuses to acknowledge facts, formulates an alternative reality and invests in division. 

Netanyahu and Iran

Since the nineties of the last century, Benjamin Netanyahu has not stopped warning of the danger of Iran possessing a nuclear bomb, considering it the real existential threat to Israel, and that the only way to prevent it is military force, and throughout the years of his rule, the idea of a comprehensive strike on Iranian nuclear facilities has always been present, studied, discussed and planned. In the early hours of Friday morning, Israel finally carried out the strike.

Netanyahu may be satisfied with the initial results, especially with the assassination of prominent military leaders and Iranian nuclear scientists, but the far-reaching consequences may be the opposite of what he hopes, as this attack may have precipitated the realization of the danger he has long sought to avoid.

His motives are easy to understand, and his latest speech recalled the darkest moments in Jewish history, asserting that Israel would never allow itself to be prey to a "nuclear holocaust." 

One of the factors that may have seriously worried him was the upcoming meeting in Oman between Trump's special envoy and his Iranian counterpart, the sixth meeting between them, did Netanyahu fear that this dialogue would result in a deal similar to the Obama nuclear deal, allowing Iran to enrich uranium under American consent and Israeli rejection? Netanyahu had already persuaded Trump in 2018 to tear up that deal, but repeating the same scenario with Trump signing this time was intolerable.

According to this analysis, Israel rebelled against the wishes of its greatest ally. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio was quick to clarify that the attack was "unilateral" and that Washington was "not a party to it." Trump himself, hours before the strike began, even said, "I prefer to avoid conflict," asserting that negotiations with Iran were close to success, but later added, in contradictory remarks:  "Maybe this attack will benefit them and push them to negotiate more seriously."

When the strikes began, Trump praised them and declared: "They had the opportunity, but they didn't seize it, and now they've been hit hard... And there's more on the way." Perhaps this is his face-saving way, as he seems to prefer to take credit for himself rather than admit that Israel has gone against his approaches.

But the fundamental question remains: Was what Netanyahu did wise? Some believe that Israel miscalculated, and that some of the Arab countries that secretly cooperated with it against Iran will not repeat this time. 

On the other hand, there are those who believe that the strike, despite its accuracy and ferocity, will not succeed in stopping Iran's nuclear project. The Natanz site, although targeted, contains deeply buried structures that are difficult to destroy, as well as the Fordow fortified site inside a mountain, accessible only by depth-piercing bombs, which may not be effective even if used.

But more serious is the psychological and political impact: The attack could reinforce Tehran's hardliners' conviction of the urgent need to acquire a nuclear weapon, as North Korea has done. Libya gave up its nuclear program, its leader ended up dead, Ukraine gave up its arsenal and was later invaded, and Pyongyang kept its bombs, and no one dared to approach them.

This conviction seems to be taking shape, with the Iranian government saying on Friday: "The world now understands the legitimacy of our adherence to enrichment, nuclear technology and missile capabilities." This statement suggests double determination.

Even if Iran does not succeed in acquiring the bomb, the message has reached neighboring countries: Saudi Arabia and Turkey, although they do not immediately seek nuclear programs for fear of being targeted, will not accept being a copy of Libya or Ukraine, and may consider following the path of North Korea. This is how nuclear weapons become more tempting, and the Middle East, already tense, becomes more volatile.

It is true that Netanyahu may run in the next election as the leader who has symbolically defeated Israel's worst enemy. He will find this a trump card. But the price may be the approach of the nuclear nightmare to Israel's borders. And that's what Netanyahu feels at risk. 

 Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had previously tweeted on the X platform that he blamed intelligence chiefs for the October 7 failure after Operation Al-Aqsa Flood. The tweet led to a sharp attack on Netanyahu from inside and outside his government, as it only appeared as if he was trying to evade any responsibility for the matter at a critical time, but Netanyahu was eventually forced to delete the tweet and apologize.

 The imbalance we observed in Netanyahu's various statements after the Al-Aqsa flood in turn leads us to an important question that reveals part of his personality: What do we know about Benjamin Netanyahu's personality? A study by Tel Aviv University psychology professor Shaul Komkhi attempts to investigate Benjamin Netanyahu's personality traits. This study is based on an analysis of publicly reported behavior, such as books written by Benjamin Netanyahu himself, and news and statements related to him published in Israeli newspapers. Including interviews he gave to newspapers and television. This method uses measures of thoughts, feelings and actions that have continuity over time, and the study has emerged with some features of Netanyahu's personality, which we present in turn.

 Wrapping around oneself 

According to the paper, Netanyahu has scored high at the point of self-rallying where personal success is more important to him than the ideology he says he seeks to achieve, and even does not hesitate to exploit others, including his colleagues, for personal success. Several scenes attest to this, including the testimony of an interviewed journalist, in which Netanyahu claimed to distinguish historical processes that others do not.

In this context, his attitude towards the people who work closely with him clearly shows his self-centeredness, and some behaviors even reveal a preoccupation with himself to the extent that others receive no consideration, and this characteristic is evident in Netanyahu's dealings with fellow politicians, where the man has trouble understanding and appreciating any other point of view that differs from his own. As proof of this, the study notes that Netanyahu did not provide in his books any examples of attempts to understand or present views A view other than the one that expresses his point of view, and this is also clearly shown in his speeches.

In this type of person, who are preoccupied with their own world, it is difficult to distinguish between the personal or political dimensions of his life, because everything revolves around them in the end, and the study shows an example that in a meeting with senior members of the Likud party after the Bar-On affair (an internal administrative scandal in Israel) he commented with sentences that express only himself such as "I receive a lot of support from all over the country," "They tell me to be strong and steady," and We are with you," and "because that's what the success of the Jewish people depends on."

 The desire to control 

The study indicates that Netanyahu achieves high scores on the scale of ambition and determination, and says that they are the two most prominent traits in his personality, and these measures do not indicate the morality of the act, as we will see in the following lines. As the study indicates, this means his continuous pursuit to reach the top at all costs, concessions and excesses that he can make to reach his goal and remove his competitors, which may explain his continuation for the longest period in the premiership of the occupying state, as we can see in His alliance with the extreme right, which until recently was one of Israel's fiercest enemies after killing former Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, but Netanyahu turned towards this alliance in his quest to remain in power even if it harmed the "democratic" process, as an Israeli writer opposed to Netanyahu describes. In this context, he continues to set big goals that may not be realistic, does not accept partial successes, especially if they threaten his position, and never abandons his goals.

 The study believes that Netanyahu is usually characterized by "nervous coldness" in dealing with problems, no matter how large, he is unlikely to think casually, and he also puts alternative options for all his plans, but he faces a problem with unexpected tension, in which case he does not feel control over himself and his surroundings. In the event of sudden tension, this type of personality is dominated by hidden feelings of insecurity, shame, humiliation and fear of being exposed as a failure, even if He is not, and therefore reacts in a terrified and confused way, and in such cases he is willing to promise anything and sign any special document when he is blackmailed. Military analyst Amir Oren, for example, reported that Netanyahu was extremely terrified of the arrest of two Mossad spies in Amman, and paid a high price for them that would have been lower had it not been for his confusion.

 Manipulation is a lifestyle 

On the other hand, Netanyahu seems to be a manipulative person, and according to the study, he does not see this manipulation as any immoral characteristic, but rather sees the game of politics governed by the "laws of the jungle", where the strong remain and the weak fall, and therefore achieving the goal justifies any means and at any cost, and the study indicates that when he was forming his government, members of the Likud party indicated that he was crushing people who posed a threat to him, and even attacked anyone who realizes that he is a competitor. Potentially, it reduces and minimizes allies that may pose a threat to it, and it forms and breaks alliances accordingly, because today's ally is tomorrow's competitor.

Netanyahu therefore tends to be practical: he is not good at socializing and has a limited amount of empathy, so most of the people he socially relates to are those he needs or who help him, and when these people become unhelpful to him, he ends the relationship with them.

 Lack of credibility 

The testimony of others portrays Netanyahu as someone who makes promises that he does not keep, and therefore is considered untrustworthy, and the study cites several situations, such as that Bill Clinton and his advisers were angry that Netanyahu did not fulfill the promises they claimed to have made during his visits to Washington.

This is consistent with the above in the point of the laws of the jungle, as the man has a position that considers treachery an agreed and accepted standard in politics, and some opinions even believe that Netanyahu was an entrance to make "scheming" an acceptable form of deception among some politicians, according to the study, this stems from his conviction that in politics any means can be accepted as long as the goal is achieved, and therefore when he says different things to different people, and when he lies fully, he does not face any psychological difficulty or guilt.

 This attitude is based on his dealings with the media, as the man has a great ability to speak and tamper with words in favor of the novel he wants to present, this was evident during his explanation of the position of the occupying power in front of an American audience in proficient English, and this served him well during the race for the presidency of the Likud Party and later for the post of prime minister.

Therefore, his personality suits the media, especially because he always tries to fake a striking appearance, and he knows how to make the most of topics that frighten the West such as terrorism, He understands very well that manipulating the press is a manipulation of facts that are not facts except in the context of his personal or political goal, and according to the study he is very interested in the media, for example, he enters the conference room at the time when the main news bulletins begin, and in this context he treats the television studio as a battlefield.

 Challenge 

From the above, it can be concluded that one of Netanyahu's other distinctive features is suspicion (doubt), and even according to the study, he thinks that "the whole world is against him", and it seems that when he is attacked, he feels more comfortable, because feelings of vulnerability enhance his inner emotions, which enables him to fight and always strive for victory, and these paranoid features increase when he feels threatened by his position, so he automatically suspects individuals who belong to a team other than his team, and here the threat is from the point of view His gaze is completely personal.

 And if you believe that the whole world is against you, then we must expect you to think that there is a conspiracy against you, and in this context the study shows that Netanyahu promotes the conspiracy everywhere from the premise that whoever disagrees with him is not just someone who "disagrees with him", but a person who is "wrong" or someone who has an interest in his fall, but that in turn generates some authoritarian personality traits, he tends to deny his weaknesses and blame others when he fails, Netanyahu in this context does not He never makes mistakes, always wrong with others, because at least they didn't carry out his directives properly.

 Out of suspicion, Netanyahu is an organizational official who tends to work alone, does not consult experienced key advisers, does not think he will need them one day, and if his aides are assigned tasks, he demands that they report frequently on their activities, in which context the staff must be loyal and disciplined. It is worth noting that the study indicates that his management style is aggressive, undemocratic, and this is what some of his ministers and members of his government have previously admitted, and he has even been accused of asylum before. to manipulation of the tendency to balance the Likud party.

Overall, the study concludes that Benjamin Netanyahu possesses many narcissistic personality traits, including a tendency toward self-aggrandizement, with strong ambition, opportunism, and complete dedication to achieving his goal, failure to acknowledge weakness, rejection of blame, manipulative relationships, using other people to achieve his goals, lack of integrity in politics, lack of personal and political ethics, great sensitivity to criticism, and an acute awareness of his appearance.