How Israel’s Own ‘Crazy State’ Theory Now Mirrors Its Policies
The article argues that the criteria once used to label hostile states as “crazy” are now applicable to Israel’s own actions and rhetoric.
Yehezkel Dror’s 1971 work described “crazy states” as actors pursuing far-reaching, harmful goals with powerful means while claiming moral superiority, a concept he used to vilify Israel’s Arab opponents. The article shows that Israel’s own political evolution— from Labor’s post-1967 dominance to a Likud-led right-wing coalition—has produced a climate where extreme settlement, pre-emptive strikes and calls for annexation dominate policy.
Figures such as Benjamin Netanyahu, Efraim Inbar and ministers Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich now promote ideas once considered marginal, including a 2025 attack on Iran and the rebuilding of Jerusalem’s Temple. The piece argues that these developments fulfill Dror’s “crazy” criteria, suggesting Israel now justifies any means against perceived threats. It warns that this self-labeling could destabilize regional security and strain U.S. policy toward the Middle East. The analysis draws on historical interviews, party shifts, and recent military actions to illustrate the convergence of theory and practice.
Why it matters
It shows how Israel’s own strategic thinking may be adopting the extreme logic once used to condemn its enemies.
In this story