How populist leaders dismantle intelligence agencies from within: New study reveals the 'intelligence cyclone'

BEER-SHEVA and JERUSALEM, Israel, November 12, 2026 -- A new joint study from Ben-Gurion University of the Negev (BGU) and The Hebrew University of Jerusalem reveals how populist leaderships systematically undermine, discredit, and ultimately capture intelligence agencies, transforming vital national security bodies into political echo chambers. The peer-reviewed research, published in Contemporary Security Policy (https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260.2026.2722403), warns that when populist politicians treat secret services as "deep state" adversaries, they disrupt objective threat analysis and leave democracies blind to catastrophic surprise attacks.

The study was co-authored by Dr. Ofek Riemer from the Ben-Gurion Research Institute for the Study of Israel and Zionism at BGU and Dr. Daniel F. Wajner from the Department of International Relations and the European Forum at Hebrew University.

From Intelligence Cycle to 'Intelligence Cyclone'

While the impact of populism on courts, election integrity, and the free press has been widely documented, its corrosive effect on secret intelligence services has remained largely unexamined. The authors argue that populists are inherently predisposed to clash with intelligence agencies due to their anti-elitist ideology, suspicion of secrecy, and hostility toward pluralistic dissent.

By tracking how populist executives interact with spy agencies over time, the researchers identify a three-phase "intelligence cyclone" that replaces objective decision-making:

• Phase 1: Selective Use: Early in their tenure, populist leaders rely on existing intelligence infrastructure to manage foreign affairs. However, they soon begin cherry-picking classified assessments that flatter their political narrative while leaking or sidelining inconvenient findings.

• Phase 2: Systemic Disregard and Slander: When career analysts deliver warnings that contradict government policy, leaders dismiss their input. As friction spills into public view, populist politicians label agencies as part of an illegitimate "deep state" and deploy conspiracy theories to erode public trust in intelligence personnel.

• Phase 3: Institutional Usurpation: With prolonged tenure, populist leaders dismantle checks and balances, push out career officers, and install loyalists through political patronage. Leaders create parallel bodies to produce "intelligence to please," neutralizing independent warnings and blinding the state to emerging crises.

The Case of Israel: The Road to Strategic Surprise

To test their framework, the researchers examined Israel under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu—a "hard case" because security scholars historically regarded Israel as a country where intelligence politicization rarely occurred due to constant existential threats.

The authors trace how Netanyahu’s approach evolved over three decades: from pragmatic cooperation punctuated by selective leaks in his early terms, to systemic disregard for explicit intelligence warnings ahead of the October 7, 2023 catastrophe. In July 2023, for example, when the head of the Shin Bet delivered a direct "strategic alert for war" regarding internal societal divisions, intelligence chiefs were largely sidelined while the government focused on judicial overhauls.

Following the October 7 attacks, this pattern escalated into public blame deflection, attempts to oust career security chiefs, and legislative proposals to create alternative intelligence oversight units directly subordinate to the prime minister.
 

Global Repercussions for Democratic Security

"When populist leaders view expert assessments through the prism of political loyalty, the traditional cycle of objective intelligence breaks down into an uncontrollable cyclone," says Dr. Ofek Riemer from Ben-Gurion University, "Sidelining intelligence agencies does not simply erode democratic norms; it degrades early-warning capabilities and dramatically increases the risk of strategic surprise."

"This dynamic is not unique to Israel," emphasizes Dr. Daniel F. Wajner of Hebrew University. "From intense political pressure within the U.S. security community and its eventual cooptation to similar struggles between populist leaderships and security establishments across Europe and Latin America, the pattern of bringing the people-versus-elites fight into the security realm is universal. Protecting the professional independence of security experts and ensuring pluralism and substantive, merit-based deliberation in decision-making processes is not merely a matter of good governance — it is a prerequisite for national survival."

This work was supported by the Israel Science Foundation (ISF) through the research grant "Populism and International (In-)Security" (Grant No. 2450/22) awarded to Dr. Daniel F. Wajner.