Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is viewed as an all-powerful leader who enjoys a large public of supporters and believers who will follow him anywhere. The “Netanyahu fans” who swear by him ignore police investigations and police recommendations against him, considering them as illegitimate attempts to bring down an incumbent premier elected by the public. The fans close their eyes to all the state’s witnesses, the accumulating evidence and testimonies and close the circle around their leader through thick and thin. The working assumption of Israel’s political observers was, until recently, that Netanyahu enjoys a “captive audience” that is entranced or hypnotized by its leader and will support him unconditionally.

But last week’s events, in which Netanyahu folded in record time vis-a-vis his crowd of supporters on the issue of deporting African work infiltrators from Israel, turned this assumption upside down. The question is, what came first, the chicken or the egg? Are Netanyahu’s supporters really mesmerized by him, or perhaps the opposite is true — perhaps Netanyahu is bewitched or hypnotized by his political base? Is Netanyahu a leader who commands a huge public that has followed him blindly for many long years, or is he perhaps a leader who adapts himself to that specific populace? Maybe he checks which way the wind is blowing within that public on any given day, and then modifies his policies accordingly?

As detailed in an earlier Al-Monitor article, Netanyahu announced April 2 an outline for dealing with the issue of work infiltrators/labor migrants, or asylum-seekers, the latter being the preferred term among Israeli left-wingers. According to the plan, the United Nations would help find Western countries willing to absorb 16,000 migrants while Israel would absorb a similar number within its borders. Netanyahu convened a press conference and invested his talents of persuasion to promote the outline that had been hammered out at the conclusion of the marathon negotiations with the UN. He emphasized that this was Israel’s only logical alternative, now that the agreements that had been made with various African countries to absorb the work infiltrators had unraveled. In its too-short lifespan, the outline presented by Netanyahu had earned accolades from the Israeli left-center camp and praises from the many political commentators who saw it. As Netanyahu himself had explained, this was the only logical deal under the existing circumstances.

Only a few short hours after presenting the outline, Netanyahu announced that he was “suspending the deal”; the next morning, he formally canceled it. This was an unconditional capitulation on his part, and it took place on the heels of mass verbal assaults on Netanyahu — by his supporters. In fact, something astounding happened in the media, the social networks, Likud WhatsApp groups, in southern Tel Aviv and other bastions of strength of the prime minister. The Netanyahu supporters — those who went through fire and water for Netanyahu over the last two years when the prime minister faced police inquiries and testimonies against him, those who consistently ignored the negative revelations regarding the Netanyahu family — united to raise the flag of rebellion. Netanyahu’s popular Facebook page was flooded with protestations, some of them very vulgar and vociferous, against the migrant worker deal presented by him. Even Netanyahu’s traditional media supporters came out against him. Education Minister Naftali Bennett, former Minister Gideon Saar and many others sharply attacked what they called Netanyahu’s “surrender” to left-wing dictates — his violation of his own principles and backtracking from his promises.