(Political) Resurrection in the Holy Land

Isreality

(Political) Resurrection in the Holy Land

Prof. Sam Lehman-Wilzig

Schusterman Visiting Israeli Scholar, Brown University

When an American President or British Prime Minister leaves the scene after a political defeat, it marks the end of a political career (see: Jimmy Carter, George Bush the Elder, John Major, et al). The Land of Israel, however, is used to resurrections of all sorts – especially the political type.

How else to explain the incredible comebacks of Yitzchak Rabin (15 years after leaving the office after a minor financial scandal) and now Binyamin Netanyahu (after a disastrous electoral defeat in 1999 and an even worse election debacle in 2006), who has just been officially nominated by the State President to try and form a governing coalition? What does this say about Israeli society, the Israeli system, and/or the Israeli electorate?

First the good news: the Israeli public demands a long comeback and some proof of continued capability. As mentioned above, Rabin had to wait 15 years, in the meanwhile (re)proving himself as Defense Minister; Bibi has had to wait 10 years since the end of his former prime ministership, in the meanwhile serving as an excellent Finance Minister.  Moreover, Israelis do not automatically enable political resurrection. Thus, despite Ehud Barak’s professional work recently as Defense Minister (at least militarily-tactically, the Gaza campaign was carried out in almost exemplary fashion), the Labor Party with Barak at its head collapsed electorally in the recent election to the lowest point in the party’s history.

The bad news: such resurrections are further evidence of Israel’s broken election (and representation) system. Forget for the moment that coalition building has become an almost insuperable problem with so many parties needed to form a government, and that once formed the lifespan of recent governments has been short indeed. Beyond this is the underlying problem in which the Israeli electorate has no direct way of voting for its leaders and representatives. True, there are party primaries in which the candidates for the party list are chosen, but only a very small percentage of Israelis bother to register as party members (and it also costs some money to register as a party member), so that these lists are not very “representative” of the wider party’s constituency. And if a specific candidate does not function properly in the eyes of the broad electorate, as long as that party leader maintains party popularity among the narrow membership base, s/he can continue serving “forever”.

Put another way, it is extremely difficult for Obama-type new faces to make it relatively quickly up the ladder to a position of leadership. Even Tzippi Livni – a relatively “new face” – has been in the Knesset for ten years! And she became a candidate for prime minister only due to completely unexpected circumstances: PM Sharon’s coma and then PM Olmert’s corruption investigations.

This is not to say that only “the system” is to blame. One can well understand Israelis, constantly faced with existential threats to the nation, gravitating back to the tried and true (albeit flawed) – instead of the fresh but unknown (and perhaps even more flawed?) – leader.

So if you think that you have seen the last of Ehud Olmert, get ready for a surprise. Assuming that he can finalize the Gilad Shalit return to Israel before leaving office, and then can overcome his judicial problems, we might well see him running for the prime ministership in 2012 or 2016 at the head Kadima. If that thought does not get the new government moving seriously in the direction of major election reform, then nothing will!

Feb. 20, 2009

Israeli Coalition Building: There’s (Much) More than the Peace Process

Isreality

Israeli Coalition Building:

There’s (Much) More than the Peace Process

Prof. Sam Lehman-Wilzig

Schusterman Visiting Israeli Scholar, Brown University

The American media may be forgiven for having focused on the national-security / peace process aspects of Israeli party platforms during the recent election campaign, and now during the complex negotiations to form a new government. But if the matter were merely “Right-Left” regarding the Palestinian conflict (Syrian negotiations too), the new government could be formed tomorrow with a coalition of 65 (out of 120) Knesset seats belonging to what is generally called the “national(ist) camp”. However, there is a lot more involved than this centrally salient issue – which is why there are going to be some “surprises” up ahead. Here, then, are some of the other important issues that will complicate the coalition-forming process.

1) Election Reform: I have already written about this issue in a previous post (http://profslw.com/?m=200812 – Dec. 1) and predicted there that this would be an important issue for the coming government. I was “wrong” – it is THE central issue, if one can judge by the pronouncements of almost all the important parties once the election results became clear! Israel simply cannot continue on the path of fragmented politics with elections held once every 30 months or so. Who is against such reform? The smaller parties (e.g. MERETZ; Bayit Yehudi) and the sectoral ones (Arab; SHAS). As the entire right-wing has only 65 seats, this essentially gives SHAS and other smaller right-wing parties veto power over electoral reform – something that Lieberman’s party has clearly said that it will not countenance (it strongly supports electoral reform). Thus, there is very serious disagreement on this critical issue within the right-wing camp.

2) Child Allowance: I have discussed this profoundly important issue in a previous post as well (same URL – Dec. 9). Briefly, SHAS demands the return of the child allowance cuts; both Netanyahu and Lieberman are dead set against it. So once again, it will not be easy at all to get SHAS to join this coalition. Moreover, most of the right-wing parties have a relatively strong capitalist bent, as opposed to SHAS’s Socialist-type of governmental largesse. After having saved the Israeli economy from disaster in 2003 as Finance Minister, Netanyahu will not want to jeopardize his image by going on a spending spree – especially with the economic tsunami hitting the world and catching Israel in its backwash.

3) Conversion and Civil Marriage: If there is one issue that Lieberman’s constituency demands to be dealt with immediately, it is the problem of hundreds of thousands of former-Russian “Jews” who need to somehow be formally incorporated into Jewish society through an easier conversion process and/or legislation enabling civil marriage. On the other hand, the ultra-Orthodox parties (SHAS; Yahadut Ha’Torah) have drawn a line in the sand on this issue. Both sides see it as central to the continuation of the Jewish State – the Russian immigrants in order to strengthen the State with more “newly minted” Jews; the ultra-orthodox by maintaining Jewish “purity” through conversion exclusively by way of the traditional (and very arduous) process. One should also keep in mind the personal animosity that this election campaign engendered, with SHAS’s spiritual leader Rav Ovadia Yosef lambasting Lieberman’s supporters for their “pig-eating tendencies”.

           Therefore, left to their own devices, Netanyahu and Livni have the task of squaring the circle inside a triangle – an almost insuperable task without combining forces to form the core of the new coalition. If, on the other hand, they form the government’s foundational structure with their collective 55 seats, perhaps also adding Lieberman’s 15 seats to reach 70 in total, then they can turn to the other right-wing parties with a “take it or leave it” offer – and be certain that enough of the smaller parties will swallow hard and accept the Likud-Kadima(-Lieberman) principles of government that will call for election reform, civil marriage, and economic sanity. And if the smaller parties refuse? Even a coalition of 70 seats with three parties is more than enough to maintain a somewhat stable government for the foreseeable future, and certainly more stable than a 65 seat “right-wing” coalition spread over six parties!

Feb. 11, 2009