Israel went to war Dec. 23. Yes, war. That was the term Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu used to describe the campaign waged against Israeli settlements at the UN Security Council in New York. 

Haaretz reported that Netanyahu threatened New Zealand’s foreign minister, Murray McCull, telling him, “If you continue to promote this resolution, from our point of view it will be a declaration of war.” Netanyahu probably wasn't intending to launch long-range missiles at Wellington, so one could assume that the prime minister was referring to a diplomatic war on New Zealand. Thus the day after the passage of UN Security Council Resolution 2334 affirming the illegality of Israeli settlements, Netanyahu set out for diplomatic battle — and not just against New Zealand's far-off islands. Netanyahu embroiled Israel in a diplomatic world war.

Even Netanyahu’s harshest critics agree that he was blessed with keen intelligence. He is undoubtedly aware of the heavy price Israel is paying, and will keep on paying, for his settlement policy. One cannot accuse Netanyahu of inexperience. With Shimon Peres’ recent passing, there isn’t a single Israeli politician who has accrued richer diplomatic experience. This leaves one to seek an explanation in the realm of mental health for the prime minister’s bizarre conduct. A former top official who requested anonymity said that in a conversation about the conflict with the Palestinians, Netanyahu told him that he actually likes conflict. “That’s where I’m in my element,” he was quoted as saying.

In a 2001 article based on long, in-depth observation of the prime minister’s actions and pronouncements, Shaul Kimhi, of the Department of Psychology at the Tel-Hai Academic College, diagnosed Netanyahu as having a narcissistic personality. The renowned political psychologist — Kimhi is a member of several prominent international research organizations — noted that narcissistic leaders are characterized by megalomaniacal behavior, perceive themselves as saviors of their people from tragic mistakes and are lacking in interpersonal skills and credibility. They come across well in the media, are good at manipulating people, lack commitment toward partners and aides, have a limited capacity for empathy (if at all), are constantly busy going after rivals from within and are devoid of democratic values, which they regard as a mere “necessary evil” in order to get elected. In addition, such leaders promote a public image of themselves as “strongmen” who know how to command respect and mercilessly attack their enemies (real and imagined, alike).