Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s push to dismiss Ronen Bar, the head of the Shin Bet security agency, has ignited a political and legal battle that extends beyond security concerns. Coming just weeks after efforts to remove Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara, the move has raised questions about whether Netanyahu is systematically sidelining independent officials to shield himself and his government from scrutiny.
Critics argue that Bar’s potential dismissal is tied to ongoing Shin Bet investigations into corruption allegations involving Netanyahu’s closest aides, including suspected illicit ties to Qatar. Simultaneously, Netanyahu’s allies have long sought to oust Baharav-Miara, who has resisted government attempts to weaken the judiciary and has played a central role in corruption cases against the prime minister. The simultaneous targeting of both officials has intensified concerns that Netanyahu is attempting to consolidate power and dismantle institutional checks on his authority.
Bar was appointed as the head of the Shin Bet in October 2021 by then-Prime Minister Naftali Bennett. The appointment process for the Shin Bet chief involves nomination by the prime minister, followed by approval from the Israeli cabinet.
Baharav-Miara was appointed as attorney general in February 2022, also under Prime Minister Bennett. Then-Justice Minister Gideon Sa’ar nominated her, and the cabinet subsequently approved her appointment.
The move against Bar is the latest in a series of high-profile dismissals since the Hamas-led attack on Israel on October 7, 2023. Netanyahu has already pushed out or forced the resignation of several top security figures, including Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Herzi Halevi, and military spokesperson Rear Adm. Daniel Hagari. These officials had either clashed with Netanyahu over the war’s direction or questioned government policies.
Now, both Bar and Baharav-Miara find themselves at the center of similar power struggles. The Shin Bet, under Bar’s leadership, has been investigating allegations that Netanyahu’s aides received payments from Qatar while the Gulf state acted as a mediator in hostage negotiations with Hamas. The so-called “Qatargate” case has reportedly implicated senior figures in Netanyahu’s inner circle.
Meanwhile, Baharav-Miara, Israel’s top legal authority, has opposed Netanyahu’s efforts to fire Bar, warning that such a move could be legally questionable and tainted by conflicts of interest. Netanyahu has responded by accusing her of abusing her authority and politicizing the Qatar investigation. This clash reflects the broader struggle between Netanyahu and Israel’s legal system, with the prime minister’s allies openly discussing plans to replace Baharav-Miara with a more compliant figure.
Netanyahu’s asserted right to choose trusted officials
Netanyahu and his supporters contend that the prime minister’s authority extends to selecting those he deems fit to lead key national institutions. They argue that trust is paramount—especially in times of war—and that the ability to appoint or dismiss high-ranking officials such as the Shin Bet chief or the attorney general is not only legal but essential to maintaining effective national security. “At all times, but especially during an existential war … there must be full trust between the prime minister and head of the Shin Bet,” Netanyahu said in a video message, emphasizing that his decision is driven by this imperative.
This perspective holds that an elected leader must be free to choose his trusted advisers without interference. Supporters argue that the legal framework grants the government the authority to end an official’s tenure if they fail to meet the prime minister’s confidence—an assertion that the finance and communications ministers have backed in recent statements. They dismiss claims of a “power grab” as a necessary step to ensure that the country’s security apparatus operates in close alignment with the policies of the democratically elected government.
One of the most significant concerns surrounding Bar’s potential dismissal is the possible link to the Shin Bet’s investigation into Netanyahu’s aides. The probe is examining whether these aides received money from Qatar in exchange for policy decisions favorable to the Gulf state, including Netanyahu’s long-standing approval of Qatari cash transfers to Hamas-controlled Gaza. While these payments were publicly described as humanitarian aid, critics argue they also helped strengthen Hamas financially and militarily in the years leading up to the October 7 attack.
Bar has reportedly insisted on continuing the investigation, even as political pressure mounts against him. Opposition leaders and security officials warn that removing him now could undermine the probe and allow Netanyahu to install a more loyal Shin Bet chief who would not pursue the case.
The situation is eerily similar to the pressure on Baharav-Miara. Since taking office, Netanyahu has repeatedly clashed with her over legal matters, including his ongoing corruption trial. His coalition’s previous judicial overhaul plan, which sought to weaken the judiciary, directly targeted her authority. Now, with Netanyahu’s allies seeking her removal, critics argue that he is systematically working to eliminate officials who could pose legal threats to him or his inner circle.
Public outrage and protests
The simultaneous moves against Bar and Baharav-Miara have sparked widespread public backlash. Protest groups have called for mass demonstrations on Tuesday in Jerusalem, warning that Netanyahu’s actions threaten Israeli democracy. The Israel Business Forum, representing many of the country’s largest private-sector companies, has condemned Bar’s potential dismissal as a “destructive” move, warning that Netanyahu is repeating past mistakes that left Israel vulnerable before October 7.
Former security officials have also spoken out, accusing Netanyahu of prioritizing personal loyalty over national security. Members of the Defensive Shield Forum, a group of ex-military and intelligence officials, warned in an emergency press conference that the country is at risk. “The effective ousting of the president of the Supreme Court, the impending dismissal of the attorney general, and the firing of the head of the Shin Bet are exactly the steps one takes when trying to establish a dictatorship in Israel and put an end to democracy and rule of law,” said Carmi Gillon, a former Shin Bet chief.
Adding to the turmoil, Education Minister Yoav Kisch threatened to withhold funding from a Tel Aviv school after its principal encouraged students to join the protests. The growing unrest underscores how the battle over Bar’s and Baharav-Miara’s futures has become a flashpoint for Israel’s broader political crisis.
Legal and political fallout
Netanyahu’s move to fire Bar is now on a collision course with Israel’s legal system. Baharav-Miara has warned that he cannot legally proceed without justifying his decision, a position Netanyahu has outright rejected. Justice Minister Yariv Levin, a close Netanyahu ally, has insisted that the government has full authority to remove the Shin Bet chief, setting the stage for a possible Supreme Court battle.
If Netanyahu ignores Baharav-Miara’s objections and pushes forward with Bar’s dismissal, it could deepen the political rift between the government and the judiciary. Some analysts suggest that this may be precisely what Netanyahu wants, as it would provide further justification for his coalition’s long-standing effort to remove Baharav-Miara and restructure the legal system.
Opposition leaders are already framing the fight over Bar and Baharav-Miara as an existential test for Israel’s democracy. “With a submissive coalition of yes men, Netanyahu is on his way to dismantling all of Israel’s gatekeepers,” wrote Barak Seri in the Israeli daily Maariv.
The fight over Ronen Bar’s dismissal is not just about Israel’s security leadership—it is deeply intertwined with Netanyahu’s broader political and legal struggles. His push to remove both the Shin Bet chief and the attorney general has raised concerns that he is attempting to eliminate independent oversight while shielding his allies from investigations.
As protests grow and the legal battle escalates, the outcome of this confrontation will likely have long-term consequences for Israel’s democratic institutions, its security services, and the future of Netanyahu’s leadership.
