Ben-Gvir and the Temple Mount: What is he doing and why is he doing it? - analysis

National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir may be many things.

Some say the right-wing firebrand and Otzma Yehudit leader is a bull in a china shop, others that he is a pyromaniac, still others call him a provocateur. But he is not stupid.

When Ben-Gvir publicly and loudly challenges Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his government over the Temple Mount – a government of which Ben-Gvir is a senior partner – saying that Jews now have the right to pray there, that he would like to build a synagogue there, that the Israeli flag should wave proudly on the hill, and that the Heritage Ministry under his party’s direction will fund Jewish education tours at the site for the first time, he knows exactly what he is doing.

Ben-Gvir knows precisely how this will play out in the Muslim world, he knows that the country is in the midst of a war and this does not exactly enhance its international position. He also knows that Iran is contemplating whether or not to attack Israel and words like this may very well be the excuse used to tip the scale toward an attack. Yet he makes the comments anyhow.

Why? What are his motivations?

First, he believes it. His advocacy for prayer at the site aligns with his party’s longstanding goal of asserting greater Jewish sovereignty over the Temple Mount, as both a national and religious imperative. Here he parts company with many other orthodox and religious Zionist Jews who believe Jewish law precludes Jews from going to the Temple Mount because of its sanctity.

Ben-Gvir believes that there is an inherent inequality in the fact that Muslims can pray at their third holiest site, the Al-Aqsa Mosque on the mount, but Jews can’t prostrate themselves and pray at their holiest site. He genuinely feels that there is an inherent inequality in restricting Jewish movement and activity on the site, while allowing Muslims to perform whatever ritual rites there that they desire.

Strategic move to reclaim political relevance

But he is obviously aware of the tremendous sensitivities and the danger of the Temple Mount being the flashpoint that triggers a religious war.  So the question still remains, why now? What is he trying to prove? What is he trying to do?

One thing is to demonstrate relevance.

Netanyahu has effectively marginalized Ben-Gvir within his government, boxing him out of the major wartime decisions. The prime minister refuses to make Ben-Gvir a member of the war cabinet, and has sidelined the security cabinet of which Ben-Gvir is statutorily a member – as the main governmental body directing the war. When it comes to the IDF’s actions in Gaza and in Lebanon, Ben-Gvir is out of the loop.

By bringing constant attention to the Temple Mount, by saying he has determined that Jews can pray there, that he would like to open up a synagogue there, Ben-Gvir is reasserting his relevance in the national discourse, ensuring that he remains a central figure despite being sidelined in other areas.

Do you think the most important thing right now is whether Iran or Hezbollah attacks, or whether there is a hostage agreement, issues in which Ben-Gvir is not a partner? Forget it. By constantly  bringing attention back to the Temple Mount, Ben-Gvir ensures that the media continues to focus on him.  This keeps him in the public eye – a place where he always wants, yearns, and needs to be.

Another reason, and this is closely related to his need for relevance, is because this is good for Ben-Gvir politically, or so he assumes. It is not clear what will bring down the current government, or when it will happen. But at a certain point in time, this government’s shelf-life will expire. In any event, the country will need to go back to the polls by October 2026.

CONTINUOUSLY RAISING the Temple Mount issue helps Ben-Gvir build up his brand. He will be vying for voters with Shas, for whom Ben-Gvir’s ultra-nationalism holds an appeal, as well as with Bezalel Smotrich’s Religious Zionist Party and Likud. He is betting that there is a significant slice of the electorate that agrees with his position on this issue, and wants to see someone articulate it.

Ben-Gvir’s open disagreement with Shas Interior Minister Moshe Arbel on this issue – Arbel called on Netanyahu to call Ben-Gvir to order and said his “irresponsible” statements could cost lives – highlights the differences with Shas, and could attract right-wing Shas voters to his party. His loud advocacy of this issue also sets him apart from Smotrich and his party, which is more low-key on the Temple Mount, and could attract voters from that party as well.

Ben-Gvir’s fierce advocacy of this issue builds him up among his base and solidifies his image as the politician fighting for Jewish rights on the Temple Mount, something that resonates with some on the Right.

It also energizes his base.

The next election will be marked less by pulling voters from the Left camp to the Right camp, or vice versa, and more by pulling voters from one party inside the camp to another. Ben-Gvir’s gamble is that this will pull some voters from the right-wing camp into his party.

Also, beyond getting people and the media to talk about him, the national security minister’s actions on this matter have brought the issue to the public’s attention and led to a debate over whether the current status quo – the one that denies Jews the right to pray at the site and limits Jewish visitation rights – is good policy.

For years no one thought seriously of enabling Jewish prayer on the Temple Mount, but Ben-Gvir has managed to put the issue on the agenda. He is normalizing the idea, making it gradually seem less radical over time. Once the very thought of Jews going to the site was deemed extreme and radical – that is no longer the case. Ben-Gvir hopes to do the same now with the idea of Jewish prayer at the site.

And finally, persistently emphasizing this issue, making it a big issue, gives Ben-Gvir greater leverage in the coalition, as he can use it as leverage in getting his way on other matters. This gives him a card to trade with on other issues. This is a way of signaling his party’s importance to the coalition’s stability.

What seems to be grossly irresponsible behavior to many is for Ben-Gvir a calculated political strategy aimed at maintaining his relevance even during wartime when he is just a bit actor, giving him leverage inside the government, and advancing his ideological agenda. For Ben-Gvir this is not pyromania, it is good, sound politics.