Netanyahu's Inner Circle Breaks Silence, Threatening His Influence

An interview given by Avi Gilor, former military secretary to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, is being analyzed as a potential turning point that could signal significant shifts within the prime minister's inner circle. While most of the accusations and details Gilor presented have been previously reported, the significance lies in the fact that a high-ranking former official has spoken out publicly while Netanyahu remains in power. Dr. Liraz Margalit, writing for Maariv, suggests this breach of long-held silence by those close to Netanyahu poses a serious threat to his political influence.

Margalit notes that the content of Gilor's interview was not entirely new, but the timing and the speaker are what make it noteworthy. The military secretary is positioned in close proximity to the prime minister, privy to sensitive meetings and observing the leader during stressful times. Typically, individuals in this role maintain silence for years after leaving service, making an open critique of a sitting prime minister a significant event.

Historically, loyalty to political leaders often persists even after they lose power, driven by fear, closeness, and devotion. However, Margalit points out that this silence usually breaks only after a leader's downfall. In Netanyahu's case, the breakdown is occurring while he is still in office, symbolizing the crumbling of his long-standing image.

Drawing on Max Weber's concept of "charismatic authority," Margalit explains that such leaders exert influence beyond their official powers, creating an aura that affects their entourage. This can stem from fear of conflict or a sense of duty, where loyalty becomes intertwined with personal identity. Challenging the leader means challenging one's own self-perception, leading individuals to justify actions even when they contradict personal beliefs.

Economist Timur Kuran's research on public displays of loyalty is invoked to explain how this system erodes. People often perceive widespread support based on outward appearances, leading to a false sense of universal backing and encouraging continued silence. However, when one person breaks this silence, it demonstrates that the cost of speaking out may be lower than anticipated, potentially triggering a domino effect where each subsequent disclosure reduces the perceived risk for others.

Margalit concludes that a leader's strength is measured not only by followers but also by those who remain silent. When this internal silence falters while the leader is still in power, their formal authority may persist, but their actual influence begins to wane. The critical question for Netanyahu, she suggests, is what further revelations might emerge if people cease to fear him, especially if these cracks in loyalty appear before he loses power.