Israelis protesting Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Justice Minister Yariv Levin's controversial judiciary reform have recently made President Isaac Herzog the focus of their criticism.
Many critics of the controversial reforms were expecting Herzog to make an inspirational speech, calming the spirits of the Israelis alarmed by the new government's policies.
Instead, the president seems to be laying low and evading addressing the topic at all - at least publicly - sparking backlash from angry civilians.
It was revealed Tuesday that as part of his mediation efforts, Herzog met privately with Netanyahu last week. Additionally, an Israeli channel revealed that a similar meeting was held with Supreme Court Chief Justice Esther Hayut.
The president is also said to have spoken on the phone with Netanyahu and Hayut several times, and sources claim that both sides are showing readiness to come to terms.
Herzog is also expected to meet with Opposition leader Yair Lapid later on Tuesday.
In the past, presidents in Israel were not shy when expressing their dissatisfaction with laws passed by the Knesset. The most up-to-date example of this took place in 2012, when Shimon Peres refuted the legislation to change the lineup of the Supreme Court, and increase compensation in libel suits.
"I am personally ashamed that rules like this are being contemplated," Peres stated at the time. "Those responsible for this are doing an injustice to themselves and to the state."
It's important to clarify that in Israel, the president's signature is not a necessary condition for a law to take effect, and neither does he have the right to veto.
So what is the strategy behind Herzog's public hush and mediation efforts?
4 View gallery
Prime Minister Ehud Olmert submits his resignation to President Shimon Peres, Sept. 21, 2008
(Photo: GPO)
Herzog is trying to encourage discourse that will lead to broad agreement on the issues included in Levin's plan. He is adopting a softer strategy, one which does not include presenting a tangible presidential document to mediate between the sides.
Despite the protesters' cries of contempt toward the president, even politicians from the Opposition admitted that he has little to no wiggle room when it comes to changing the status quo.
As MK Merav Michaeli said, Herzog is not a "political actor," thus he shouldn't be judged for his silence.
The most he can do for now is try to get the two sides to mull the reforms to make them acceptable to both sides, and he is supposedly still optimistic he can do that. Herzog believes that it is possible to mediate between the parties, and prefers not to speak of what will happen if his efforts fail.
Nevertheless, given the situation in which the mediation efforts do not reap fruits, a public statement on his stance will be expected, and the public would have the legitimacy to be frustrated in its absence.
But for now, Herzog's neutrality is what makes him the perfect mediator. He is the only national "entity" in which both sides place their trust, hence a subjective remark would weaken his power to sway the decision-makers.
On Tuesday, the president addressed the backlash over his lack of public statements on judicial reforms, saying he is only trying not to further deepen the divide.
"We are at the peak of a deep dispute that is tearing the nation apart. I respect the criticism leveled at me, but I am currently focusing on two crucial roles - avoiding a historic judicial crisis and stopping the polarization of the nation."