"Israel’s" governing coalition, led by Netanyahu, is moving aggressively to establish political and security structures in the West Bank that will foreclose on the possibility of a two-state solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. 

The strategic goal is to reshape the Israeli state, so as to assert Jewish primacy over all of "Israel" and over the Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories. This would mean attenuation, or even elimination, of Palestinian civil rights.

Finance Minister Smotrich has taken to referring to the two-state solution as a ‘fantasy’ -- one that must be crushed "willingly or by force (i.e. ‘with deeds’: through a massive increase in settlements)." Thus, to "make it clear to all, … [he underlines] the Arab dream of a state in Judea and Samaria [the West Bank] - is no longer viable."

Co-minister Ben-Gvir has amplified, "My right, the right of my wife and my children to move around Judea and Samaria is more important than freedom of movement for the Arabs."  This is the consolidation of apartheid in occupied Palestine.

To further make his point, Ben-Gvir provocatively invited ministers to oversee the demolition of houses in an impromptu Bedouin village in the Negev: "They should understand that we govern here - and that this country has a landlord." (There are 100,000 Bedouins in Negev – there, from the days before Turkish or British rule).

Again, to underline the point about ‘who governs,’ Smotrich has moved quickly to urge government agencies to prepare for an additional 500,000 settlers in the West Bank - which would bring the current estimated population of 700,000 settlers up to more than 1 million within the next decade.

Just to be clear, these are not disparate utterances by a couple of ‘hothead’ ministers. The comments reflect a concerted Coalition stance. These utterances clearly are intended to provoke -- and not just the Palestinians. They are provocative too towards that liberal Israeli constituency that has been protesting en masse against the Netanyahu government for months.

That it represents a concerted government position is fully evidenced by the Israeli cabinet holding its 21 May 2023 meeting in the tunnel excavated directly under the Al-Aqsa mosque, in an attempt to spotlight "Israel’s" claim to sovereignty over the site on which stands Islam’s Third Holiest Site.

What is going on? Why the gratuitous provocations? One answer is that the more the iconoclastic and radically Zionist the pronouncements, the more the Mizrahi-Settler-National Religious faction’s support grows.

Of course, the other side of the coin is greater fury amongst Israeli secular liberals. But the point is that the Coalition leaders (and the Leftist media concur) that “a military coup is underway in Israel. This is the unvarnished truth”. 

"Israel" has been long-described as an ‘Army with a state’, and although that may be less true today, the mass demonstrations are indeed managed in a distinctly military fashion, and former Ashkenazi generals are prominent amongst its leadership.

But the IOF is much changed. Once, it was ‘run’ by the secular Kibbutzim class, but all that changed two decades and more ago. The Settlers have the field command, and the Mizrahi Israelis now are prominent amongst the ranks.

Simply put, this polarisation (provocation) strategy is also intended to undermine the threat of a military take-over of the State on ‘national security’ grounds. The ‘worry about Israel’s preparedness for war’ is a part of this strategy. The Smotrich--Ben-Gvir riposte, however, seems to be working: Already, there is reportedly a rise in support for the Jewish Power party among the IOF’s rank and file, with an estimated 20% of IOF soldiers voting for Ben-Gvir’s party.

In short, the polarisation is reaching into the IOF, and undercutting the potential for the army to opt to displace the Netanyahu government on some national-security pretext. 

It is true, however, that the turmoil in "Israel" is making its supporters worry that "Israel" today may appear weaker and more vulnerable militarily. The security anxieties amongst some of "Israel’s" professional military caste, nonetheless, are very real. There is tension in the north with Lebanon, with a stand-off with Hezbollah that could ignite quickly into conflict. There are rising tensions with the Palestinians -- and Syria is edging towards major ruption.

To be clear, little of this has to do with Israeli weakness -- but rather, to American self-perception of its own weakness, as its Ukraine policy implodes. As Ukraine radiates Western failure, it appears that the US is seeking to compensate via Syria, through re-launching an uprising that would see President Assad ousted (the original objective) by a re-kindling of some of America’s former proxy Islamist movements, and by the continued (Israeli) air-force attrition of Iranian personnel and their allies in Syria.

The paradox of this US escalation (enacted in counterpoint to Russia’s successes in Ukraine) is that the US could easily light a fire in Syria that spreads to Lebanon and Iraq. The paradox of such an outcome is that it is precisely this (flames spreading across the region out of Syria) which might place "Israel" at existential risk.