The Deep State: Between sociological reality and Israeli irony

The term "deep state" often triggers immediate ridicule or dismissal among some Israelis. To them, it seems like yet another fringe conspiracy theory, perhaps a direct import from the U.S. But in truth, there is nothing conspiratorial about the concept itself. On the contrary — it is a well-established sociological, historical, and institutional description of how a bureaucratic-technocratic layer of governance can emerge, often operating above within or around elected officials and their parties.

One need only look at the works of major scholars to see this clearly. As early as the 1950s and 60s, Professor Carroll Quigley analyzed the formation of managerial elites in America and Europe. Later, British and European thinkers expanded on the discrepancy between formal centers of power and the actual decision-makers — the advisors, experts, institutional operators, and entrenched interests who often steer the state in the name of "expertise," "security," or the "national interest."

Jean-François Lyotard, writing in the late 1970s, described the rise of the “expert society,” where decisions of moral and political consequence are delegated to technocrats. Michel Foucault and Noam Chomsky, each in his own way, examined how regimes of knowledge, discourse, and language serve as tools of control — well beyond what is visible or formally legislated.

So how did it happen that in Israel, of all places, the idea of the deep state is denied by so many? Perhaps because Israel remains, in many respects, an intellectual province — marginal, noisy, and often confused — where complex and nuanced concepts are instantly flattened into caricatures. In Israel, if it isn’t simplistic, loud, and clearly tied to a one-dimensional political map, it’s probably labeled a “conspiracy.”

The greater irony, however, lies not in the deep state itself — but in the way Israel’s political right, and especially supporters of Benjamin Netanyahu, perceive it. Many of them view the deep state as a leftist, elitist beast designed to sabotage right-wing governance. But reality, as always, is far more ironic.

The Israeli deep state — meaning the coalition of the judicial system, senior bureaucrats, security agencies, attorney generals, and other apolitical decision-making circles — reached unprecedented strength and influence precisely under Netanyahu’s leadership. From 1996 to 2019, he wasn’t merely a passive observer; he was a primary architect of these systems. He strengthened the powers of the Attorney General, entrenched the authority of the Supreme Court, and forged both open and covert alliances with heads of the security establishment, enforcement bodies, and the state bureaucracy.

Just as Netanyahu spent years cultivating Hamas as a tool to divide the Palestinian political front (thereby paralyzing diplomatic pressure), so too did he nurture the Israeli deep state when it suited his political needs. This is not an accusation — it is a sober reading of history.

Thus, when a Netanyahu supporter yells about the deep state or condemns the "hidden regime," he is effectively railing against the very allies of his own political patron. That’s not just ironic — it’s genuinely amusing.

In the same way, when leftists deny the existence of the deep state, they are also denying the fact that this very apparatus was not only constructed — but constructed with the active help of their primary enemy, Netanyahu.

The deep state exists. Not as a conspiracy, but as a natural result of the modern nation-state — where institutions, once empowered, tend to preserve and expand their own authority. But to have an honest conversation about it, one must acknowledge that it is not a leftist invention, nor a right-wing victim. It is a structure of power — and as history teaches us, power has no ideology.