Only in recent years has it been allowed for the full name of the head of Shin Bet, Israel’s internal security agency, to be in the public domain while they are still serving. Before this, they were traditionally referred to only by the first letter of their name.

These people operated in the shadows and often inhabited the most shadowy areas of society. They were not widely discussed in the media and simply allowed, for better and worse, to get on with their job.

Not anymore. In the new-reality, upside-down and destructive world of Benjamin Netanyahu’s far-right and populist sixth government, Ronen Bar, the current head of Shin Bet, has become a major story in his own right, and not through his own fault.

He is increasingly accused by Netanyahu, and other members of the governing coalition and their allies in the media, of being one of the main culprits responsible for the disastrous security failures of Oct. 7, 2023.

Not only that but he is, incomprehensibly, portrayed as a traitor who deliberately neglected to warn Netanyahu of an imminent Hamas attack, as part of a supposed conspiracy to smear and oust the Israeli prime minister orchestrated by the “deep state,” of which Bar, according to this version of events, is a leading member. Needless to say, such claims about the existence of a “deep state” are figments of the political right’s imagination.

Bar, unlike Netanyahu, has accepted his personal share of responsibility for the colossal catastrophe of Oct. 7, and has repeatedly stated he will resign from his post before the end of his term, most probably when the war is over and the organization he heads is rehabilitated.

However, Netanyahu wants to appoint as Bar’s replacement someone more “convenient,” whose first loyalty is to him, personally, rather than to the country. Someone who will ignore the corrupt deeds and unlawful behavior of politicians, and turn a blind eye to Israeli settler terrorism in the West Bank.

Moreover, as was revealed this week in the Supreme Court by the government’s own legal representative during deliberations about the dismissal of Bar, Netanyahu was unhappy with the security chief’s refusal to deploy the resources of Shin Bet against those who refused to volunteer for army reserve duty in protest against the government’s judicial overhaul.

In other words, by the admission of his own legal team, Netanyahu was angry with the internal security services for refusing to act, within a democratic system, against those who had legally expressed views that differed from those of the government.

This should be enough to end Netanyahu’s political career, never mind his position as leader of the executive branch.

While it is within the power of the government to fire the chief of the internal security service, his position as head of one of Israel’s seven senior services means any attempt to remove him must be referred to the Senior Appointments Advisory Committee, which by law has the power to prevent a hiring or a firing if it finds an ulterior motive or conflict of interest.

And if ever there was a situation that loudly cries conflict of interest and foul play, it is the attempts to sack two of the main gatekeepers of Israel’s democratic system, Bar and Attorney General Gali Bahrav-Miara, especially during a Shin Bet investigation into several of the prime minister’s closest advisors.

Yet Netanyahu’s attempt to get rid of the country’s democratic gatekeepers by smearing them is a sign of weakness, and probably panic, as the investigations are getting too close for comfort to his inner circle of advisors.

Did the prime minister really think that Bar would go quietly, meekly accepting the allegation that he is someone who cannot be trusted, without exercising his legal rights as an employee? Does Netanyahu, in his growing detachment from reality, already believe that he is omnipotent, invincible and accountable to no one?

The answer, of course, is yes, to both questions. But Netanyahu and those around him — lawyers, political advisors and general panderers — might have underestimated Bar and all those others who have responded by coming to the defense of this fragile Israeli democracy.

In a shocking revelation in his letter of appeal to the court challenging his dismissal, Bar said that the prime minister repeatedly demanded that he inform judges that Netanyahu should not be required to regularly testify during his corruption trial because of security reasons related to the war against Hamas.

If this is true, and there is no reason to doubt Bar, then a defendant in a criminal case clearly abused his power to delay giving evidence in court. This explains why Bar has claimed all along that the attempt by the government to dismiss him was “not about distrust but rather an improper perception of personal loyalty replacing loyalty to the public.”