Sunken Vessel Resurfaces as Political Weapon: Netanyahu and Ben-Gvir Clash Over Altalena Legacy Ahead of Elections

The discovery this week of the sunken arms ship the Altalena, which nearly triggered an Israeli civil war just one month after the fledgling state was established in 1948, has been transformed into a political battleground for right-wing politicians courting support ahead of the October 27 elections.

“There is no more mobilizing ethos on the right than Altalena,” Udi Lebel, a leading scholar of the affair at Bar-Ilan University, told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency.

According to Lebel, the ship’s detection has reinforced what he characterized as efforts by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of the Likud and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir of the far-right Otzma Yehudit to campaign on themes of identity and victimhood rather than substantive policy.

The Altalena had arrived from France in June 1948 carrying approximately 900 Jewish immigrants alongside a substantial shipment of weapons acquired by the Irgun, the more militant pre-state paramilitary organization led by Menachem Begin. Its rival, the Haganah, constituted the largest military force in pre-state Israel and formed the core of the newly established IDF.

Begin demanded 20% of the weapons aboard the Altalena for Irgun forces stationed in Jerusalem, while then-prime minister David Ben-Gurion insisted that all armed forces and armaments fall under the authority of the nascent state. Sixteen Irgun members and three IDF soldiers perished in the ensuing confrontation, during which a shell struck the vessel and set it ablaze as it lay moored off the Tel Aviv shoreline.

Prior to this battle, the Irgun had operated as a force independent from the emerging national army. The shelling of the Altalena cemented the authority of the army over all military organizations, guaranteeing that even the right-most elements of the war effort would remain subordinate to the new central leadership.

The burned-out hulk remained visible for over a year before being towed further out to sea and deliberately sunk. Its exact location was subsequently lost, prompting decades of intermittent searches. The story of the ship has endured in Israel’s national consciousness as a cautionary tale about how internal discord can escalate toward civil war.

Otzma Yehudit Ministers Announce Discovery of Altalena

In a joint statement on Monday, Ben-Gvir and Heritage Minister Amichai Eliyahu, both representing Otzma Yehudit, announced that the vessel had been located at a depth of approximately 1,650 feet, roughly 12 miles offshore.

The search, commissioned by the Heritage Ministry and conducted by the government’s mapping agency, the Survey of Israel, without IDF involvement, employed a specially equipped vessel with advanced sensors and underwater mapping technology, according to the ministers. They added that the wreck had been found largely intact.

Lebel expressed skepticism about whether the entire wreck had been located, noting that the government had yet to produce clear photographic evidence and citing archival records he claimed documented repeated attempts under Ben-Gurion to destroy and sink the vessel. He also observed that no American naval experts had been consulted, despite the ship’s origins as a World War II US Navy landing craft.

Monday’s announcement swiftly became absorbed into election campaigning, with Netanyahu and Ben-Gvir invoking Begin’s legacy to advance competing appeals to right-wing voters.

Ben-Gvir publicized the discovery without first notifying Netanyahu or Defense Minister Israel Katz, surprising both, according to Israeli media reports—a detail that quickly fueled speculation about tensions within the coalition. Netanyahu and Ben-Gvir subsequently delivered separate addresses at Tel Aviv’s Etzel Museum, which commemorates the Irgun, with the prime minister pointedly avoiding a joint appearance with his far-right coalition partner.

This was not the first occasion on which Netanyahu had distanced himself from Ben-Gvir on the eve of an election. In October 2022, less than two weeks before that year’s vote, Netanyahu waited for Ben-Gvir to exit the stage at a holiday event rather than risk being photographed alongside him. Reports at the time indicated that the two were nonetheless meeting regularly and coordinating their campaign and media strategies.

In his Monday remarks, Netanyahu emphasized Begin’s decision not to retaliate after the ship was shelled, asserting that the Irgun leader had “stopped the fight” and averted the new state’s descent into civil war.

“That is the lesson of the Altalena,” he declared, before connecting the episode to his campaign pledge to assemble a “broad national government” following the October 27 election.

“We are brothers. Political rivals, yes, but we are brothers. We are of one nation, one future, one fate,” he stated.

Ben-Gvir framed the Altalena as an emblem of the historical marginalization of Israel’s right, drawing a parallel between his own experience and that of Begin, Ben-Gurion’s bitter political adversary. The recovery of the vessel, he asserted, heals “an open wound.”

“Begin knew the taste of persecution, what it was like when people did not want to be photographed with you on the same stage,” Ben-Gvir remarked.

Begin subsequently founded Herut, the precursor to Likud, and led the party to power in 1977, ending nearly three decades of Labor-dominated governance. Ben-Gvir’s early political trajectory was linked to the extremist rabbi Meir Kahane, whom both Begin and his successor, Yitzhak Shamir, had ostracized from the mainstream right.

Allies of Ben-Gvir explicitly connected the photo-op snub to his recurring claim that Netanyahu intends to form a post-election government with Gadi Eisenkot, leader of the centrist Yashar party and the prime minister’s principal challenger in recent polls, stating that this was “exactly what they did to Menachem Begin,” according to the right-wing Israel Hayom newspaper.

Netanyahu and Ben-Gvir Compete for Right-Wing Voters in Altalena Dispute

The confrontation has been widely interpreted within Israel as part of the ongoing contest between Netanyahu and Ben-Gvir for the same constituency of right-wing voters. Haaretz political columnist Yossi Verter characterized Ben-Gvir’s handling of the Altalena discovery as “genius.”

Veteran political commentator Ben Caspit offered a parallel assessment, writing in Maariv that Ben-Gvir had effectively appropriated one of Likud’s most potent historical symbols and wielded it against Netanyahu, “snatching from under the prime minister’s nose” the legacy of Begin. Caspit observed that Ben-Gvir was visibly relishing his appearance at the museum, while anyone familiar with the prime minister could discern “how much he was suffering” by being present.

Gayil Talshir, a political scientist at Hebrew University of Jerusalem, rejected this interpretation entirely, describing the apparent rift between Netanyahu and Ben-Gvir as a coordinated political stratagem designed to mislead voters and consolidate support for another right-led government.

“This is not a genuine fight, and there is no real estrangement,” Talshir told JTA. “They are coordinating with each other because they share the same goal of increasing turnout on the right.”

Talshir argued that the apparent split enables Netanyahu to project a more moderate image to wavering Likud voters, whom she characterized as “very troubled” by the nation’s political divisions, while allowing Ben-Gvir to portray himself as the right-wing partner being marginalized.

“Netanyahu is employing the rhetoric of a broad national government to create the illusion among right-wing voters that he wishes to repair the divisions within the country,” she said, noting that he was deliberately eschewing the term “unity,” which would imply a commitment to governing alongside opposition parties.

She added that there was “no chance in the world, under any possible election outcome, that Netanyahu would prefer a government containing even a single element of the current opposition over an extreme-right coalition like the one he has had and continues to have.” One factor, she argued, is Netanyahu’s ongoing criminal trial, which makes him unlikely to align with coalition partners for whom the rule of law represents a core principle.

Michael Oren, a former Israeli ambassador to the United States who served under Netanyahu, dismissed the notion that the Altalena clash constitutes a coordinated ruse. He also contested Talshir’s assessment of Netanyahu’s coalition preferences, asserting that the prime minister has historically favored broader governments that enable him to occupy the political center. Oren cited Netanyahu’s 2009 government, which included former prime minister Ehud Barak’s Labor Party and endorsed a demilitarized Palestinian state, characterizing such ideologically diverse coalitions as “comfortable” for him.

“The nightmare of the past four years is that he has been the leftmost person in his own coalition,” Oren said. “He would love to remove [Finance Minister Bezalel] Smotrich and Ben-Gvir” from his government.

Oren suggested that Netanyahu would ideally pursue what he termed a “Zionist government” that excluded both Arab and ultra-Orthodox parties. The challenge, he noted, lies in the fact that opposition parties have declared their unwillingness to join a government led by Netanyahu, raising questions about what role he could assume in such a coalition.

“He needs to remain prime minister because it is existential for him,” Oren said, particularly given his ongoing corruption trial. “If he is not prime minister, he will have to appear in court as citizen Netanyahu. That is a potentially dangerous situation for him.”

Altalena Deployed to Manipulate Right-Wing Electorate

Lebel contended that the Altalena narrative is being weaponized to rekindle among right-wing voters a perception that they are once again being delegitimized and persecuted.

He also characterized Netanyahu’s invocation of Begin’s pledge to prevent civil war as “politically manipulative,” arguing that Begin made that statement during a genuine internecine conflict in which his movement was treated as illegitimate—a reality Lebel said bears scant resemblance to Israel’s present political divisions.

“Begin made his pledge during a confrontation in which there truly was another side that did not wish to see him or his supporters in power and regarded everything he represented as illegitimate,” he explained. “Netanyahu today is not confronting another side that refuses to accept him, because he himself is the elite and controls the entire public administration.”

Talshir argued that Netanyahu’s invocation of Altalena also betrays the very principle at the heart of the original confrontation. Netanyahu, Talshir asserted, has granted Ben-Gvir control of the police and empowered him in ways that fundamentally undermine that principle.

“Netanyahu can continue saying until tomorrow that he opposes civil war. But in practice, he is the individual who created Ben-Gvir politically and furnished him with the power to establish militias personally loyal to the minister, militias that frequently challenge the police’s professional chain of command,” she said.

“Netanyahu’s presentation of the Altalena is merely another facet of a deceptive campaign he is attempting to sell to the public, and specifically to Likud voters,” she concluded.

Source link