the poll; report of the ‘not-a-rebellion’ in Likud. op-ed by probably the chief Israeli conservative pundit, Amit Segal. Google translate seems to be having trouble chewing on the link directly, so I reproduce below its output on the text.

The right-wing victory on Monday is an important public victory over the threats of the pilots’ refusal. The Knesset bent the wing of the rebellion, and future Knessets will thank it for that. But one thing is not: a legal victory. On this, the original front of the campaign, it was dealt a fatal blow. Anyone who looks at the picture through lenses free of panic and anger, will come to the conclusion that after seven months, the right has not been able to achieve any of the goals it set for itself in changing the relations between the authorities. The price was too heavy for the government, the right and of course the state, and the goods did not arrive.

Half a year ago, the right-wing set out with a large majority in the public and in the Knesset that was opposed to excessive legal intervention. This week, while celebrating the annulment in law of a reason that was never written into it - a step whose practical meaning is roughly the same as issuing a death sentence for a fairy - it became clear that the court is actually expanding its limits further and further. The Knesset tries to prevent the court from using reasonableness, but a day later the ombudsman pleads to invalidate a basic law on the innovative grounds of a “quasi-judicial silence”. When it is also repealed in three knesset calls, perhaps the quasi-silent judgment will emerge. The High Court of Justice and the ombudsman until today drew legitimacy from a relatively small elite. Today they are cultural heroes in a certain milieu. Gali Beharev Miara, a semi-unknown figure until recently even in legal circles, is received with rockstar applause in theaters.

Amit Bachar, no less unknown, became a mass leader. Aharon Barak recently said with satisfaction that, thirty years late, he has an answer to who gave the supreme court the authority to invalidate laws in 1995: the crowds in the streets in 2023. And all this is the direct fault of the leaders of the current coalition. They had the opportunity to divert the ship twenty degrees, but they tried to sink it instead. Conservatism is not promoted through revolution, it just doesn’t work that way. Let them ask (former chief justice of the SC Aharon) Barak: he is the true father of the Salami method. Toe by toe, for years. In evolution and not in revolution.

Instead, the right gave the left wind in its sails, values to fight for, a common denominator from liberal religious Zionism to Hadash. Under different circumstances, in 2007 Gideon Sa’ar changed the majority needed for the committee to select judges. If not for the veto power granted to the coalition, Noam Solberg and Alex Stein and their friends would never have been appointed. It was a slow and long but irreversible process. So are some of the judges appointed by Ayelet Shaked.

Levin and Rothman had the ability to promote changes a little faster, a little more effectively. But their perception was that all Supreme Court judges without exception are activists, that all the changes to date are not enough. All the conservative academics are freaking out. The ones who should have lit bonfires in Ayalon are actually the coalition voters. They should ask, as the title of the well-known book, why you choose right and get, in the test of the result, left.