Ben-Gvir took one of Likud's strongest symbols and turned it against Netanyahu - opinion
Summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.
At a glance
- National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir used the Altalena commemoration to politically challenge Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
- Ben-Gvir appropriated the Altalena symbol, historically significant to the Likud and Revisionist movement, for his own political gain.
- The event highlighted a deep political rift, with Netanyahu attempting to distance himself from Ben-Gvir during the commemoration.
National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir has been accused of hijacking the Altalena commemoration, a historically significant event for the Likud party and the Revisionist movement, to politically undermine Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Ben-Gvir's actions at the Tel Aviv commemoration are described as appropriating one of the most powerful symbols associated with Menachem Begin, the Likud, Herut, and Jabotinsky's ideal of "hadar."
The holy cannon, as it was called, was the artillery used by the fledgling IDF after receiving the order to fire on the Altalena. The argument over that episode will never end, as is the way with old historical disputes. What matters is that the event did not turn into a civil war.
The article frames Ben-Gvir as the modern-day "Davidka," a noisy but not particularly effective weapon from the War of Independence, suggesting he excels at creating commotion and political maneuvering. It contrasts this with the historical significance of the "holy cannon" used on the Altalena, which, despite controversy, prevented civil war thanks to Menachem Begin's decision.
What a disgrace: From Ben-Gurion's "holy cannon," nearly eight decades later we have arrived at the Davidka. For those who do not remember, the Davidka was a typical Palmach invention from the darkest days of the War of Independence, when there were no real cannons. It did not cause much damage, its range was short, and the destruction it caused was limited, but it made an enormous noise that sometimes succeeded in driving away the Arab gangs.
Netanyahu is depicted as scrambling to salvage the situation, attempting to distance himself from Ben-Gvir. The prime minister reportedly kept his distance from the commemoration, clearing swimmers from the beach and delivering his own speech separately. This is portrayed as a "disgrace" and a sign of Netanyahu's discomfort and political struggle against Ben-Gvir, who is characterized as the "heir to Meir Kahane."
To see the prime minister of Israel rushing around, armed with an army of security guards, clearing swimmers from the Tel Aviv beach, positioning himself outside so as not to encounter Ben-Gvir inside, and trying to parachute his own spin into the heart of the stolen celebration and the hijacked ship taken over by the heir to Meir Kahane. What a disgrace.
Inside the Irgun Museum, Ben-Gvir reportedly reveled in the moment, even hinting at parallels between his own perceived "persecution" and Begin's experiences. The narrative emphasizes the stark contrast between Ben-Gvir's enjoyment and Netanyahu's evident suffering during the event, highlighting the deep political tensions and Ben-Gvir's successful maneuver to seize a potent historical symbol.
Anyone who knows Ben-Gvir knows how much he was enjoying those moments. Anyone who knows Netanyahu knew how much he was suffering at that hour.
Originally published by Jerusalem Post. Summarized and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.