Itamar Ben-Gvir's rise in Israeli politics can be attributed to several key factors. First, his alignment with the far-right and his strong nationalist stance resonated with certain segments of the Israeli population who are drawn to his hard-line views . His influence was particularly underscored by his control over Netanyahu's decision to delay the judicial overhaul, highlighting his newfound political leverage . Additionally, Netanyahu's reliance on ultra-Orthodox and ultranationalist factions, due to his traditional allies' departure, opened opportunities for figures like Ben-Gvir to gain prominence . Finally, Ben-Gvir's public relations strategy of moderating his past extremist image and condemning extremists has helped him appeal to a broader base while maintaining his core far-right supporters .

Itamar Ben-Gvir's political approach reflects a complex relationship with his historical affiliations and extremist views. Historically, Ben-Gvir has been linked to extreme right-wing ideologies, evidenced by his admiration for Meir Kahane and his hanging of Baruch Goldstein's portrait, both of whom advocated hard-line measures against Arabs in Israel . Despite his recent attempts to moderate his public image, including replacing the chant "Death to Arabs" with "Death to terrorists" and claiming to protect all citizens' safety , these actions are seen by some as tactical moves rather than genuine ideological shifts. A senior member of his party suggested that his moderation might be an election strategy , indicating a potential discrepancy between his political rhetoric and underlying views.

Itamar Ben-Gvir's stance on minority citizens highlights a vision of Israel's national identity that centers on Jewish supremacy while allowing for limited inclusion of minorities who align with his definition of citizenship. He frames Israel as primarily a Jewish state, asserting strong nationalist sentiments . However, his rhetoric of inclusivity for minorities who are not deemed terrorists depicts a conditional acceptance that aligns with his party's ideological framework. Despite publicly rejecting blanket exclusion, Ben-Gvir's policies, such as advocating for legal immunity for soldiers and deportation of Arab lawmakers accused of terrorism, suggest a vision that prioritizes Jewish identity and security over multicultural integration .

Comparing Itamar Ben-Gvir's political tactics with those of historical ultranationalist figures like Meir Kahane reveals both similarities and differences. Like Kahane, Ben-Gvir has utilized provocative rhetoric and symbolic gestures to garner attention and rally support from far-right nationalists . However, unlike Kahane’s explicit call for the expulsion of Arabs, Ben-Gvir moderates his stance by focusing on "terrorists" rather than ethnic groups, likely to broaden his appeal in a more diverse political climate . This strategic moderation may be a tactical divergence from Kahane’s uncompromising methods, aimed at achieving electoral success within Israel’s political framework that now demands wider appeal. Ben-Gvir’s approach can be seen as both an evolution and adaptation of ultranationalist tactics to contemporary political realities.

Assessing the credibility of Itamar Ben-Gvir's claims of moderation requires careful examination of his historical statements and current political actions. While he has publicly attempted to rebrand his image by moderating his language and distancing from extremist symbols, such as the removal of Baruch Goldstein’s portrait, these actions can be viewed with skepticism . His historical admiration for Meir Kahane and past incendiary remarks have left a lasting impression . Current actions, like advocating controversial legal reforms benefiting soldiers who might shoot Palestinians, suggest continuity in hardline beliefs . Moreover, leaked statements from party associates imply that his moderation may be an electoral strategy rather than a genuine shift in ideology . Therefore, despite these claims, evidence of substantive moderation remains debatable, warranting scrutiny of his underlying motives and policy impacts.

Media representation of Itamar Ben-Gvir plays a critical role in shaping the perception of extremism in Israeli politics by highlighting his controversial past and current influence within the Netanyahu coalition. Coverage often focuses on his extremist affiliations, such as his admiration for Meir Kahane and previous associations with figures like Baruch Goldstein, drawing attention to his far-right ideologies . This portrayal can amplify his image as a polarizing figure, reflecting broader concerns about the shift to more extremist policies in Israeli politics. The media also reports on his public statements and actions, such as moderating chants and distancing from past symbols, which can shape public debate about the balance between extremism and moderation . Thus, media narratives contribute to the understanding of political dynamics and the challenges of integrating fringe ideologies into mainstream politics in Israel.

Itamar Ben-Gvir's influence on Israel's judicial system could have far-reaching implications, particularly if his views continue to shape legal reforms. As a key figure in Netanyahu's coalition, Ben-Gvir advocates for significant changes, such as granting legal immunity to Israeli soldiers who shoot Palestinians, which could undermine judicial accountability and the rule of law . His support for reshaping the judiciary alongside other ultra-nationalists suggests a desire to limit judicial oversight on controversial government policies. If such reforms pass, they may erode democratic checks and balances, potentially isolating Israel internationally and straining relations with allies concerned about human rights and legal equity .

Benjamin Netanyahu's political strategy has significantly impacted the power dynamics within his coalition by relying more heavily on far-right and ultranationalist parties like Itamar Ben-Gvir's Jewish Power. As traditional allies abandoned him, Netanyahu had to form a stronger bond with ultra-Orthodox Jewish parties to retain power . This shift has given Ben-Gvir, once a fringe figure, increased influence as a crucial player in the coalition, capable of affecting major policy decisions such as the delay of the judicial overhaul . Moreover, Netanyahu's dependence on figures like Ben-Gvir reflects a broader trend of increased extremism and religiosity in his political camp, reshaping the Israeli political landscape .

Itamar Ben-Gvir's personal transformation narrative significantly impacts his political strategy and public perception by portraying him as a more moderate and pragmatic leader while maintaining his core far-right base. This narrative is crucial for Ben-Gvir in attracting broader voter support in a diverse political landscape . By distancing himself from past extremist symbols, such as removing Baruch Goldstein’s portrait from his home, and reframing his rhetoric from "Death to Arabs" to "Death to terrorists," Ben-Gvir attempts to soften his public image without alienating his followers . However, the sincerity of his shift is questioned by insiders, suggesting it could be a tactical move for electoral gains . This dual approach allows him to navigate the complexities of Israeli politics, balancing between extremism and broader appeal.

The potential social and political repercussions of Itamar Ben-Gvir's policies on inter-ethnic relations in Israel could be significant, possibly exacerbating tensions between Jewish and Arab communities. His stance on granting legal immunity to soldiers and deporting Arab lawmakers he accuses of terrorism could increase feelings of marginalization and discrimination among Arab citizens . Such policies may also heighten mistrust and resentment, leading to increased social divisiveness and potential civil unrest. Politically, these approaches might galvanize support for extremist reactions within Arab communities, potentially destabilizing efforts at peaceful coexistence. Moreover, Ben-Gvir's prominence might embolden similar far-right rhetoric, potentially influencing wider government policy and impacting Israel's diplomatic standing regarding human rights .