enjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s longest-serving prime minister, has been characterised by a robust conservative and nationalist agenda. He is known for an unwavering commitment to national security and Israeli interests, particularly in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. His leadership has been marked by a staunch stance on issues like Iran’s nuclear programme, often resulting in disagreements with the international community, notably the United States.

Netanyahu’s resolute approach emphasises Israel’s security and the protection of its interests. He has consistently advocated for a tough stance on Iran’s nuclear ambitions and has garnered strong support from certain segments of the Israeli population. His approach to the Palestinians has been widely perceived as inflexible. He has championed a military response to threats and has staunchly supported the maintenance of Israeli control over disputed territories. This has led to tensions with the international community and strained relations with Palestinians.

Public perceptions of Benjamin Netanyahu have been polarised. In recent times, even in Western nations, he has increasingly been viewed as an obstacle to peace in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict due to his reluctance to engage in negotiation and his assertive policies in the West Bank. Critics argue that his approach has contributed to the ongoing tensions and instability in the region.

Given his pivotal role in Middle East politics, understanding Netanyahu’s thinking pattern, which is influenced by his personal history and life experiences, is crucial. Expert insights from scholars like Prof Walid Abd al Hay at the Al-Zaytouna Centre in Beirut, as well as Shaul Kimhi, Sagit Yehshua and Yarden Oliel in Israel, have been instrumental in producing a comprehensive article in the Annals of Psychiatry and Mental Health.

Psychologists assert that an individual’s life experiences significantly shape their behavioural tendencies, often with profound implications that may be concealed in their conscious awareness. These formative events, particularly those occurring in early life, often remain in the domain of the unconscious mind. Establishing a connection between these subconscious realities and later actions requires the application of psychoanalysis and the mechanism of free association.

A comprehensive examination of studies on Benjamin Netanyahu reveals four key dimensions that have significantly influenced both his public and private conduct:

Parental influence

Benjamin Netanyahu was born in 1949 to Benzion Mileikowsky, a secularist of Polish descent, and a close associate of the Zionist extremist Ze’ev Jabotinsky. His early familial environment was marked by a fervent commitment to the creation of a purely Jewish state in Palestine, entailing the displacement of Palestinians. Notably, despite his position at Cornell University, Benzion, a historian, faced challenges integrating into the American society and realising his ambitions.

His right-wing Zionist views, expertise in Judaic history and an unwavering belief in Greater Israel were marred by a rejection for an academic post at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. This setback prompted him to relocate to the United States, harbouring lasting resentment towards Israel’s Labour Party and its intellectual elite. Crucially, Benzion imprinted upon his children the notion that everyone was their adversary. This early indoctrination left an indelible mark on Benjamin, fostering a pervasive belief in omnipresent conspiracies and a harsh, unforgiving world. Furthermore, Benzion instilled in his offspring the belief that altruism, philanthropy and genuine friendship held no place in reality, shaping their perspective to perceive life as an unrelenting Darwinian struggle for survival.

Benjamin Netanyahu’s upbringing, strongly influenced by his father’s Zionist and right-wing beliefs, fostered a sense of outsider status within the political establishment. This isolationist perspective led him to view his political colleagues as rivals and seek revenge against those who opposed him.

Netanyahu’s deeply ingrained belief in a Darwinian worldview may elucidate his perception of an existential threat from a majority of Arabs, including those in the 1948 occupied territories, extending to a global scale. This notion, recurrent in his speeches and writings, encompasses key elements in his knowledge system, including concerns about Israeli security, Palestinian terrorism, anti-Semitism, the Iranian threat, UN hostility towards Israel, references to the Holocaust and Europe’s failure to comprehend Israel’s perceived threat.

Psychological analyses suggest that these ideas, prominent in Netanyahu’s discourse, have their origins in the fundamental belief instilled by his father that “the whole world hates us.” Consequently, any critique of Israel becomes synonymous with animosity.

Netanyahu’s mother Celia’s impact primarily revolved around instilling discipline, strength and a sense of future success in her children. Nevertheless, as a whole, the family lived under a pervasive backdrop of isolation, persecution and suspicion. Benjamin gravitated towards isolation and an unwavering pursuit of excellence. This disposition crystallised upon his return to the United States with the family and later, at the age of 18, when he resumed military service in Israel.

Netanyahu’s parents imprinted upon him two core beliefs: a deep-seated animosity towards non-Jewish others and the acceptance of conflict, in its Darwinian sense, as an inherent and normative facet of the universe. Consequently, the use of force against these others was normalised, irrespective of the “legitimacy of this force,” as underscored by Jabotinsky, who maintained close ties with Benjamin’s father and subscribed to the notion that history was shaped by “heavy shoes.”

Sibling dynamics

Benjamin Netanyahu’s early family dynamics were marked by his parents’ primary attention to his older brother, Yonatan. Such favoritism towards the eldest child is a common phenomenon, with subsequent children often affected. This pattern changed when Yonatan tragically lost his life while leading an Israeli mission to rescue hostages in Uganda in 1976.

Benjamin, who was studying in the United States at the time, capitalised on this event in three ways: he exploited it to further his personal objectives and advance his political career; intensified his animosity towards Arabs for his brother’s death; and reinforced his Darwinian perspective that only the fittest survive.

Military engagements

Netanyahu’s military history is punctuated by his involvement in several military operations against Arab countries following the 1967 war. Notably, he participated in the Battle of Karameh (1968); the attack on Beirut airport (1968); and the war of attrition on the Egyptian front. Additionally, he faced life-threatening situations, including a near-drowning incident in the Suez Canal during an Israeli military infiltration operation in 1972.

These experiences occurred despite his father’s desire for his sons to pursue careers in the diplomatic corps, particularly at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. This contradiction in his father’s strong advocacy for Zionism and his determination to live in the US was not lost on Netanyahu and his more extremist brother.

Emotional disorder

Benjamin Netanyahu’s relationships with his wives were marred by disloyalty, falsehoods and duping not only his spouses but also the society at large, as exemplified by the ongoing corruption cases against him. His first marriage to Miriam Weizmann was overshadowed by infidelity, culminating in divorce after he engaged in an affair with a British woman during Miriam’s pregnancy. Subsequently, he married this mistress in 1981, only to divorce her three years later.

His third marriage to Sara Ben-Artzi, a flight attendant, produced two sons. However, studies have indicated Sara’s erratic behaviour and strained relationships with staff and Israeli newspapers. It has been suggested that she concealed her pregnancy from Netanyahu, intending to “hunt” him after realising he had no intention of marrying her.

Throughout these relationships, treacherous conduct on Netanyahu’s part was palpable. It is exemplified in evasiveness when confronted about an affair during his first wife’s pregnancy and his subsequent divorce. These aspects of Benjamin Netanyahu’s life provide insights into his personal and political development.

In 1993, a false claim of a compromising video involving Netanyahu and his public relations advisor, Ruth Bar, was used as a political ploy. Faced with the threat that this video would be released to the press unless he withdrew from the Likud leadership race, Netanyahu confessed to infidelity on national television, even though no such video existed. This strategic move successfully thwarted his opponents’ plan to derail his leadership aspirations and helped repair his relationship with his wife, Sara.

The writer is Professor in the faculty of Liberal Arts at the  Beaconhouse National University, Lahore