Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited
by Leonid Tsukanov
[REGNUM] Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, known for his outrageous behavior, has found himself embroiled in a major scandal. He is accused of deliberately torturing detained members of the humanitarian flotilla heading to the Gaza Strip.
The case generated such a strong backlash that both insiders and outsiders turned against the controversial minister; several European leaders demanded a public apology for the "act of aggression." Furthermore, criticism came from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, marking the first public "debriefing" within the coalition in a long time.
Of course, Ben-Gvir is no stranger to finding himself at the center of international scandals. However, the backhanded slap from his superiors apparently really hurt him. And it prompted him to prepare a retaliatory strike—albeit with a delayed effect.
"VARIOUS RABBLE"
The scandal began with the interception of the Sumud humanitarian flotilla by Israeli forces on May 18. The convoy of 54 vessels, with a total crew of over 400, had departed from Marmaris, Turkey, four days earlier but was stopped in international waters approximately 250 nautical miles from Gaza.
Within hours, Israeli speedboats, escorted by large warships, cut through the flotilla's formation, and the boarding parties aboard the largest vessels completely paralyzed its command. The Sumud was escorted to the port of Ashdod.
The detention of "Sumud" was not a big surprise—Israeli authorities had previously used a similar method to break up the "Greta Thunberg flotilla," which was heading to Gaza in October 2025 with a cargo of medical supplies and building materials. The activists were indirectly prepared for both psychological pressure and provocations in Israeli captivity, mindful of previous similar incidents.
However, what happened at the Ashdod port shocked even seasoned resistance fighters. The detainees were handcuffed and escorted into a large room, where they were forced to kneel before National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, who had arrived at the site.
The far-right minister not only looked at the "guests" with relish but also allowed himself several mocking remarks about them. This included the statement that Abu Kashak and Thiago Avila (the key figures of Sumud, who organized the flotilla's current voyage) "were too scared to show up in his country" and sent "all sorts of rabble" in their place.
Interestingly, Ben-Gvir himself published the video of the flotilla participants being abused, without bothering to edit out the portions of the footage showing the unlawful use of force against the detainees.
Specifically, the published footage shows him forcibly lowering the head of one of the activists after she shouted "Freedom for Palestine" and telling her to "shut up." In another clip, he waves an Israeli flag and shouts at the flotilla participants, "Welcome to Israel! We are the masters here." And in a third, he sings the national anthem while standing over activists who are forced to their knees with their hands bound with plastic zip ties.
Ben-Gvir accompanied the selection of materials with the scathing phrase: “The resort is over.”
"A SHAMEFUL PERFORMANCE"
The Ashdod incident sparked a strong public reaction, particularly among Europeans. A total of fifteen EU countries criticized Ben-Gvir. Some European leaders, such as Italian Prime Minister Giorgio Meloni, demanded a "personal apology" from the Israeli leadership for the incident.
Polish officials went even further. Polish Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski initiated a request to the Polish Ministry of the Interior calling for Ben-Gvir to be banned from entering the country.
Moreover, unlike Spain, which closed the door to the Israeli minister back in the fall of 2025, the "Polish option" also includes restrictive measures for his deputies and closest supporters from the Otzma Yehudit party.
However, the Israelis themselves were no less shocked by their ally's actions. After the publication of the provocative images, Netanyahu, according to some reports, convened an emergency closed-door meeting to raise the issue of how to respond to the incident.
And judging by the behavior of the local establishment, there were no supporters of the "defense line" this time. They decided to shift responsibility entirely to Ben-Gvir.
Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa'ar was among the first to speak out. He accused Ben-Gvir of deliberately harming Israel, writing: "You have deliberately harmed the state with this shameful spectacle, and not for the first time. No, you are not the face of Israel."
Netanyahu responded more measuredly: “The way Minister Ben-Gvir treated the flotilla participants is not in line with the values and norms of the State of Israel.”
Interestingly, after the Ben Gvir scandal, Israeli leaders temporarily toned down their previous rhetoric about a "harsh response" to attempts to breach the naval blockade. Apparently, they felt that arguments about such actions boosting Hamas's image would be counterproductive to the baseless harassment of ordinary activists.
Netanyahu limited himself to a cautious mention of the “right to security” and a promise to “deport the detainees as soon as possible,” but did not elaborate on the topic.
Over time, opposition forces also joined the criticism, albeit with their own emphasis. Opposition leader Yair Lapid, for example, placed full responsibility for the incident on Netanyahu, who had decided to include "a man with a criminal past" in the cabinet.
Naftali Bennett and Yair Gollan later developed this idea, noting that the prime minister himself created the problem by turning a blind eye to his ally's antics.
DEFERRED PUNISHMENT
Ben-Gvir has yet to publicly respond to the numerous attacks directed at him. Representatives of the Minister of National Security have also refrained from commenting to the press, only occasionally offering brief responses calling for people "not to believe the detractors."
The Minister of National Security is reluctant to engage in open conflict with Netanyahu right now. There are several reasons for this. First, the coalition would lose nothing from Ben-Gvir's ouster, which could very well follow his attempts to "assert his rights" in response. Netanyahu, on the other hand, would gain a boost in his approval ratings for removing one of the most controversial figures in the current parliament.
Moreover, by challenging the authorities, Ben-Gvir will likely lose his advocate in his litigation with the Supreme Court. And under pressure from the legal establishment, he could quickly not only lose his seat but also be sent to prison for fraud and multiple abuses of power.
However, as the elections (scheduled for October 2026) approach, Ben-Gvir's value to the system will grow. Especially since he hasn't lost his influence on political processes.
According to recent polls by public opinion centers, his Otzma Yehudit party could win at least 10 seats in the upcoming elections, thanks to votes from social groups "disgruntled by the government" and those advocating a tougher response to "foreign provocations." This would strengthen its position in the Knesset by at least four seats.
And although this is three times less than Netanyahu's Likud Party predicted, Ben-Gvir could very well ruin the current prime minister's multi-move plan, regardless of the election results.
If the coalition manages to cling to power, without the far-right forces, their position will be unstable, and Ben-Gvir will retain a universal lever of blackmail. If he loses and goes into opposition, the odious minister will retaliate by splitting the former government camp in two, depriving Netanyahu of the opportunity to speak face-to-face with the government.
Especially if Ben-Gvir's parliamentary rebellion is supported by another hawk—Religious Zionism party leader Bezalel Smotrich (7 seats). The outcome in both cases is the same: the far-right will cease to be Netanyahu's crutch.
Those close to the Israeli Prime Minister see this threat, and therefore are refraining from taking any real action against Ben-Gvir and are not raising the issue of his removal from office or imposing a disciplinary sanction on him.
This is partly based on the expectation that the scandal surrounding Sumud will eventually subside and the coalition heading into the elections will be able to maintain its previous contact with the "far-right flank." At least for now, that's necessary.
# id) ?>
|
