At the heart of Israel’s present round of domestic strife are its ill-defined constitutional arrangements, which leave unclear the relationships among different parts of the government. The proximate cause is the cabinet’s decision to fire the head of the Shin Bet, Ronen Bar, for his failures in the run-up to the 2023 Hamas invasion (recently laid bare in the Shin Bet’s internal investigation) and for his alleged attempts to undermine Benjamin Netanyahu. The Shin Bet, meanwhile, is investigating Netanyahu.

A significant number of Israelis believe the prime minister does not have the prerogative to remove the head of the Shin Bet (considered a “professional” rather than “political” position), even with the assent of the cabinet, and the issue is now being referred to the Supreme Court. Complicating matters is the role of the attorney general, who does not act as the government’s lawyer but as a representative of the judicial branch within the executive. The cabinet met yesterday (without Netanyahu, who recused himself) to remove the current holder of that post, Gali Baharav-Miara. Amit Segal, an Israeli pundit known as a supporter of Netanyahu, argues that the prime minister has played his hand poorly:

‏A few months ago, when Baharav-Miara attempted to force the establishment of a state commission of inquiry on the government, she cited a letter from Bar asserting that hostilities were essentially over. Yet this week, explaining why he wouldn’t resign, Bar justified his stance by pointing to “high security tensions and the genuine possibility of renewed fighting in Gaza.” Such maneuvering isn’t likely to enhance Bar’s legacy. And if democracy truly is at stake, as he seemingly believes, clinging onto his position won’t save it.

Nevertheless, ‏Prime Minister Netanyahu’s recent decision to dismiss Bar turned lemonade back into lemons. Instead of firing Bar at a more logical time—such as during the cease-fire or shortly after the IDF chief of staff’s resignation—Netanyahu waited until the cease-fire itself was on the brink of collapse.

Addressing a recent meeting of the Palestine Liberation Organization’s Central Committee, Mahmoud Abbas criticized Hamas more sharply than he has previously (at least in public), calling them “sons of dogs.” The eighty-nine-year-old Palestinian Authority president urged the terrorist group to “stop the war of extermination in Gaza” and “hand over the American hostages.” The editors of the New York Sun comment:

Mr. Abbas has long been at odds with Hamas, which violently ousted his Fatah party from Gaza in 2007. The tone of today’s outburst, though, is new. Comparing rivals to canines, which Arabs consider dirty, is startling. Its motivation, though, was unrelated to the plight of the 59 remaining hostages, including 23 living ones. Instead, it was an attempt to use an opportune moment for reviving Abbas’s receding clout.

[W]hile Hamas’s popularity among Palestinians soared after its orgy of killing on October 7, 2023, it is now sinking. The terrorists are hoarding Gaza aid caches that Israel declines to replenish. As the war drags on, anti-Hamas protests rage across the Strip. Polls show that Hamas’s previously elevated support among West Bank Arabs is also down. Striking the iron while it’s hot, Abbas apparently longs to retake center stage. Can he?

Diminishing support for Hamas is yet to match the contempt Arabs feel toward Abbas himself. Hamas considers him irrelevant for what it calls “the resistance.”

[Meanwhile], Abbas is yet to condemn Hamas’s October 7 massacre. His recent announcement of ending alms for terror is a ruse.

Abbas, it’s worth noting, hasn’t saved all his epithets for Hamas. He also twice said of the Americans, “may their fathers be cursed.” Of course, after a long career of anti-Semitic incitement, Abbas can’t be expected to have a moral awakening. Nor is there much incentive for him to fake one. But, like the protests in Gaza, Abbas’s recent diatribe is a sign that Hamas is perceived as weak and that its stock is sinking.