Many people interpreted the political deadlock in Israel, which was led by harsh campaigns and seemed to have no outcome in sight, as the end of democracy.Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was accused of holding on to power, supposedly without a mandate. Yair Lapid even declared that Israel wasn’t democratic any longer, supposedly because Likud closed the Knesset and the courts.Many others claim that Netanyahu has been prime minister for way too long and that he should step aside for this reason alone. The indictments against him are also being used by whomever wants him gone. Even though there is no law that prohibits Netanyahu from running to remain prime minis-ter, his opponents relentlessly urge him to step aside and focus on his trial. Otherwise, they claim, democracy is under attack.One might think that all of these campaigns are fine but no one stands still long enough to think about the consequences of these false claims. The EU, The ICC and anti-Israel NGOs are all watching. After all, Israeli politi-cians are the ones claiming there is no democracy. The outside world is tak-ing notes. None of these claims hold water and here is why:A deadlock is a deadlock. It is not because there is no solution in sight that democracy is finished. This is a real stalemate which means that both sides of the political spectrum acquired more or less equal power and do not agree on how to deal with it. Every concession would mean giving up a bit of power and tip the scales in favour of the other side. Due to the corona crisis, Justice Minister Amir Ohana ordered the courts closed. This move was considered by Netanyahu’s opponents as tak-ing advantage of the pandemic in order to buy Netanyahu more time. But European courts are closed as well due to the virus; that’s hardly related to Netanyahu and his trial.The Knesset was never closed. Yuli Edelstein, the former Knesset speaker, simply closed the session on a Wednesday as usual and exerted his designated and rightful power of setting up the agenda for legislation. The Knesset speaker had the time to set a date to elect a new speaker until a new government was formed.That was not Likud’s order, it was merely what the Knesset’s charter prescribes. Yet the High Court intervened in an effort to relieve the stalemate but in reality, by doing so, it exceeded its jurisdiction. After Blue and White filed a complaint, the High Court ordered Edelstein to hold a vote.EDELSTEIN IN TURN declared that democracy was under attack be-cause the court intervened with the legislative branch of government in an unprecedented manner. He then resigned so that he wouldn’t have to resist a court order and undermine democracy and so he wouldn’t allow the court to fully intervene and undermine democracy. Both actions would have under-mined democracy so he simply quit and made the question disappear.German Chancellor Angela Merkel has been in power since 2005, and The Netherlands’ Prime Minister Mark Rutte has been in power since 2006, yet no one claims their democracies are under attack. In a multi-party sys-tem, every party has the right to choose its own chair for any specific time frame allowed in that country. The party can hold elections but it is not re-quired to do so at all. Contrary to Likud, Yesh Atid isn’t holding primaries and will have Yair Lapid as its chair until he decides to quit; that’s his preroga-tive. No one questions it and no one should.We are taught that separation of powers ensure a thriving democracy. As Netanyahu is sued as a private person, there is currently no law that pre-vents him from remaining prime minister, and if the court intervenes without such a law being in place, then that would mean interference with separation of powers. Using his indictments in campaigns to persuade people not to vote for him is absolutely legitimate, but if in spite of that he gets elected an-yway, then it is up to him to decide if he can fit both his trial and premiership into his schedule.In a weakened democracy, there wouldn’t be three elections in a year. Netanyahu hasn’t been able to form a government without Benny Gantz. So much for his dictatorial skills.In a weakened democracy, the Joint List would be losing ground. Yet we have seen a drastic rise in its number of seats despite the fact they do not recognize Israel as a Jewish state. The Knesset has never been as di-verse as it is today with MKs of different backgrounds that also joined the Zionist parties.Gantz took it on himself to defend Israel’s democracy. But from what? It is Gantz who obtained the mandate to form the next government after the third elections, not Netanyahu. The stalemate was never a symptom of a weakened democracy. On the contrary, it showed that Israel’s democracy was unbeatable. The unity government in the making proves it. Israel is in-deed a super-democracy.The writer is the director of Golden Gate Public Affairs who advises on EU-Israel affairs and works with European Union institutions in Brussels.