Random Political Joke - In some places, you vote and they count. In others, you vote so they can say they counted.
Israel
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
Impeachment Estimate
Updated: 2026-01-06
Model Risk: 25%
Public Impeachment Search Heat: 0%
Regime Risk: 43% ? Regime Risk is completely separate from the impeachment estimate and is not used to calculate it. Regime Risk is an assessment of the overall stability of the current government regime, based on factors such as political unrest, economic instability, and social tensions. A high Regime Risk indicates a greater likelihood of significant political upheaval, which could lead to changes in leadership through means other than formal impeachment processes.
30-Day Impeachment Trend
30-Day Regime Risk Trend
Latest News
Why Israel Is Divided Over How to Investigate Oct. 7 Failures - The New York Times
Israel Is Cynically Capitalizing on the Iranian Protests for Its Own Ends - The Intercept
Quick Summary of Israel & Benjamin Netanyahu
Israel has been embroiled in political turmoil in recent years, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the center of multiple controversies. Netanyahu, who has served as Israel’s longest-serving prime minister, has faced persistent legal challenges, including ongoing corruption trials on charges of fraud, breach of trust, and bribery. These cases have fueled calls for his resignation and even impeachment, though Israel’s legal and political systems do not have a formal impeachment process like some other democracies. Instead, pressure has mounted through protests, opposition efforts, and public opinion, with critics arguing that his continued leadership undermines democratic institutions. Despite the legal battles, Netanyahu has maintained a strong political base, leveraging his influence within the Likud party and coalition governments to remain in power. The debate over Netanyahu’s future has intensified as his government has pushed controversial judicial reforms, which opponents claim weaken checks and balances and could shield him from legal consequences. Mass protests have erupted across Israel, with demonstrators accusing Netanyahu of prioritizing personal interests over national stability. While some lawmakers have explored legislative avenues to remove him, such as disqualifying him from office under Israel’s Basic Laws, these efforts have so far failed to gain sufficient traction. Netanyahu’s resilience in the face of legal and political challenges underscores the deep divisions within Israeli society, as well as the complexities of holding a sitting leader accountable in a system where power is tightly controlled by coalition politics. The situation remains fluid, with no clear resolution in sight.Deep Dive Into Israel & Benjamin Netanyahu
International Relations and Diplomatic Standing
Israel’s external environment is structurally tense, given ongoing conflict with Palestinian actors, complex relations with neighboring states, and broader regional rivalries. Netanyahu is a pivotal figure in the country’s international posture: he has shaped long-term strategic choices on Iran, normalization with Arab states, and relations with the United States, Europe, Russia, and emerging powers. Under his leadership, Israel has achieved diplomatic breakthroughs with some Arab and Muslim-majority states, while simultaneously facing heightened criticism over settlement expansion, the Palestinian question, and human rights concerns. Ties with key Western partners remain strong at the strategic level but are periodically strained by disagreements over domestic judicial reforms, conflict conduct, and settlement policies, which are often closely associated with Netanyahu personally. The external environment involves persistent security risks and diplomatic frictions, but also enduring alliances and institutionalized cooperation, resulting in a level of tension that is significant yet not equivalent to full diplomatic isolation or existential crisis.
Media Environment and Public Discourse
The media landscape is pluralistic and diverse, with vigorous debate across television, print, online outlets, and social media. However, it is also highly polarized and personalized, often focusing on Netanyahu as a central figure of contention. Netanyahu and his allies frequently portray mainstream media as biased and hostile, while opponents allege efforts by his camp to shape or co-opt media outlets and to delegitimize investigative journalism. Social media further amplifies hyper-partisan narratives, misinformation, and aggressive rhetoric, contributing to echo chambers and mutual delegitimization between camps. While freedom of expression remains robust, the discursive environment has become more confrontational and less oriented toward cross-camp persuasion. This produces significant, but not yet fully crisis-level, tension: it complicates reasoned debate and undermines shared factual baselines but does not yet amount to systemic censorship or comprehensive breakdown of media pluralism.
Political Polarization and Coalition Fragmentation
Israel currently exhibits unusually high levels of political polarization, both ideologically (left–right, religious–secular, Jewish–Arab) and socio-geographically (center vs. periphery). Benjamin Netanyahu is a central axis of this polarization: political attitudes are often structured as pro- or anti-Netanyahu as much as they are structured around conventional policy cleavages. Years of repeated elections, unstable coalitions, and narrow parliamentary majorities have entrenched adversarial rhetoric and hardened partisan identities. The formation and collapse of anti-Netanyahu 'change governments,' as well as the return of Netanyahu at the head of a right-wing, religiously-oriented coalition, have intensified zero-sum perceptions of politics. While formal democratic procedures continue to function, the degree of fragmentation and personalization around Netanyahu raises the system above normal democratic contention toward sustained, high-intensity polarization.
Social Stability and Protest Dynamics
Israel continues to maintain functioning state institutions, routine governance, and regular electoral processes, and there is no generalized civil war or collapse of everyday order. At the same time, there have been recurrent, large-scale street protests, extensive public mobilization, and occasional episodes of political violence or inter-communal clashes, particularly during periods of heightened conflict or contentious legislative initiatives. Netanyahu’s leadership, especially around judicial reforms and conflict management, has been a consistent catalyst for mass mobilization both supporting and opposing the government. Protest actions have disrupted economic and social life at times (e.g., road blockages, strikes in specific sectors) and generated concerns about long-term cohesion between different segments of society, including between civilian leadership and parts of the security establishment. Despite this, institutional continuity and the absence of generalized armed confrontation within the Jewish majority keep the situation below full crisis, though clearly more agitated and fragile than a typical stable democracy.
Social Tensions and Intra-Societal Cleavages
Underlying social cleavages—between Jewish and Arab citizens, religious and secular communities, Ashkenazi and Mizrahi populations, center and periphery, and between veterans of the old Zionist establishment and newer social groups—have long been present. In recent years, these tensions have become more openly contested, with mass demonstrations, counter-demonstrations, and harsh rhetoric in public discourse. Netanyahu’s political strategy has sometimes relied on mobilizing specific constituencies (e.g., religious, nationalist, and Mizrahi voters) and framing his opponents as an elitist or disloyal camp, which many critics argue intensifies identity-based grievances. Supporters, in turn, perceive hostility from media, judiciary, and parts of the urban middle class, reinforcing a sense of embattled group identity. While these tensions fall short of state breakdown, the degree of mutual suspicion among key social blocs, and the way Netanyahu has become a symbol in these intra-societal struggles, places social strain at a crisis-adjacent level rather than at the level of ordinary democratic disagreement.
Trust in Institutions and the Rule of Law
Trust in core institutions—especially the judiciary, prosecution, police, and political class—has been significantly contested. Netanyahu’s ongoing corruption trial and his prior attacks on law-enforcement and judicial authorities have made him a focal point for debates over the rule of law. His allies frequently argue that he is the victim of politicized legal processes and a hostile bureaucratic and judicial establishment, which erodes confidence in these institutions among his supporters. His critics view his attempts to weaken legal oversight and to reshape the judiciary as a personal power-consolidation strategy that undermines institutional independence. The recent battles over judicial reforms, widespread protests, and public controversies over appointments to key legal and regulatory positions signal that institutional trust is under sustained pressure. Core institutional functions continue, but the open contestation over their legitimacy—often personalized around Netanyahu—goes beyond normal democratic skepticism, approaching a level where perceived impartiality and shared acceptance of institutional authority are at risk.
Impeachment Color Legend
RED >= 50%ORANGE >= 34%
YELLOW >= 18%
GREEN < 18%