Monthly Archives: October 2008

Israelity

ISRAELI SOCIAL CLEAVAGES: THE BAD NEWS (AND WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT)

Prof. Sam Lehman-Wilzig

Schusterman Visiting Israeli Scholar, Brown University

If my previous post on Israeli (internal Jewish) social cleavages was decidedly upbeat, this one will provide ample counterpoint. The tensions between Israeli Jews and their Arab counterparts have steadily worsened over time. The recent Acre riots were merely an exclamation point on the thickening exclamation itself. True, there have been a few symbolic advances (Israel’s first ever Arab Minister in this government) but overall the news is unremittingly bad. Two questions need to be addressed: who is at fault? and what is to be done?

The first question is relatively easy to answer: EVERYONE has been at fault to a smaller or larger extent. Perhaps it would be best to start with the general situation: the State of Israel has been beset for 60 years by surrounding Arab enemy states, only some of whom have made peace (at least formally) with her. One would be hard put to come up with any world example of a similar situation in which the nation did not view their enemies’ local compatriots with at least suspicion if not outright hostility. Just consider what America did with its West Coast Japanese citizens during World War II to understand the problem.

Having said that, Israeli policy vis-a-vis its Arab citizens has been quite shortsighted — from the Jewish/Israeli standpoint. For if Israel has major defense problems with its external neighbors, the last thing it needs to do is increase the hostility of its internal Arab population! This is not to say that Israel should bend over backwards in some sort of “affirmative action” towards local Arabs, but at the least it should try to guarantee equal resource distribution among its Jewish and Arab citizenry, something that has been far from the case since the establishment of the state. Even when taking into account extra-governmental largesse (Jewish National Fund disbursements from world Jewry), the amount of government money budgeted for education, sewage, etc., in the local Arab municipalities is extremely low by any standard — not to mention the fact that the state has not seen fit to create and nurture even one new Arab-Israeli city for decades.

However, Israeli Arabs have been blameworthy too. For starters, they have only themselves to blame for their political powerlessness. Despite their constituting close to 20% of Israel’s population, their voting record in national elections has been abysmal from two perspectives: voting turnout is significantly lower than among the Jewish population; too many Arab parties split the vote, and as many tiny parties do not overcome the minimal voting threshhold (today 2% in Israel) large numbers of votes are wasted. In addition, the Israeli-Arab leadership seems to be hell-bent on outdoing one another in blasting the government (and worse; some delegitimize the state and even call for its destruction or at least de-Judaization). Little wonder, therefore, that no Israeli government has been willing to incorporate an Arab party within its governing coalition — continuing the vicioius cycle of political powerlessness.

What is to be done? The first step must come from the government: a willingness to build new Arab cities and enable legal building by expanding the zoning within Arab municipalities; an automatic indexing of equal resources disbursed to Jewish and Arab institutions alike. Such a policy must be carried out consistently over several years, at which point the Israeli-Arab sector must make its own conciliatory moves. One such might be the acceptance of an Arab “national (civil) service” whereby all Arab young adults would serve for two or three years in some form of non-military civic institution (e.g. hospital, fire department, local civil guard, schools etc.) in parallel to army service that most Israeli Jews undertake as a matter of civic obligation. At some point, one would also begin to find political pressure building from within the Arab sector for a “non-Zionist” (instead of anti-Zionist) party willing to cooperate with, and be part of, the ruling government. Finally, perhaps the most critical of all: the Arab sector would have to vociferously denounce any and all “secessionist” or otherwise anti-Jewish political activity on the part of individual citizens (who do not represent the broad Arab population) and certainly on the part of its leadership (see: Dr. Azmi Bashara…).

Of course, a final peaceful resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict would go a long way to ameliorating the mutual distrust of these two largest national population groups within Israel. But we need not wait for the Messiah to arrive. Plenty can be done without connection to what occurs outside of Israel’s borders.

Oct. 22, 2008

Israelity

Israeli Social Cleavages: The Good News

Prof. Sam Lehman-Wilzig

Schusterman Visiting Israeli Scholar, Brown University

This topic might seem to be downright perverse. The social news from Israel the past few days has not been sanguine. Arab-Jewish riots in the traditionally co-existing, mixed city of Acre (Akko in Hebrew), set off by an Israeli-Arab driving through a Jewish neighborhood with car radio blaring. So what’s the good news?

           It is hard to focus on what does not make the news – especially if years and years go by and the topic supplies no “news”. But that is highly newsworthy in itself – especially when the subject used to make the papers on a daily basis.

           Israeli political scientists (of which I am one), have been teaching their students for decades that Israel is an over-burdened polity as a result of the large number of serious social cleavages between groups, any one of which would be enough to destroy another democracy. The main ones: 1- Ashkenazi (Jews of Western origin) vs. Mizrakhim (Jews of Arab country provenance); 2- Religious (ultra and national) vs. Secular; 3- Israeli Arab (“Palestinian”) vs. Israeli Jews. To these one can add the central political cleavage of Left (pro-peace process) vs. Right (Greater Land of Israel).

           But most of these no longer exist as deep-rooted splits in Israel. Mizrakhim have made it to the highest echelons of society and politics (several Israeli Presidents and Army Chiefs of Staff; the present Speaker of the Knesset; many of the richest tycoons). Partly as a result, there are no more virulent campaigns like that addressed to Shimon Peres in 1981 with rotten vegetables and curses slung at him during election stops. The ultra-Orthodox are slowly entering Israeli society with nascent Haredi units existing in the Army and even a few (secular studies) colleges for the ultra-Orthodox population that has come to realize that it has to work in order to make a living. Moreover, Israel no longer suffers from massive religious demonstrations like the stone throwing on the Ramot Road in Jerusalem that went on for years every Sabbath back in the 1970s. And as to the political Left-Right split, while some animosity still exists, most of Israeli society has moved to the Center as the last election results illustrated and as constant polls show regardless of which politician is up and which down.

           In short, Israeli society has decidedly come of age. This is not to say that there are no tensions in these areas and that an unusual outburst could not still occur. But it is to say that these topics no longer have the political resonance that they once had, in part because Israelis have found the way to finesse the problems, in part because they have solved the most egregious aspects of these cleavages, and in part out of pure social exhaustion.

           So the social “non-news” is actually quite good. That leaves the major societal area of bad news that is reported on by the media. And here – completely against the grain of the other domains of Israeli life – the news is indeed bad. In fact, the split between Israeli Arabs (not just Moslems; Bedouin too) and the Jewish majority is getting palpably worse. Why this is so – and what Israel could (and should) do about it, I’ll discuss in next week’s post. Meanwhile, it would behoove Israelis and their supporters alike to bask just a little in the significant progress that has been made – the lack of “news” on this score notwithstanding.

Oct. 12, 2008

Israelity

Leadership in Uncertainty

Prof. Sam Lehman-Wilzig

Schusterman Visiting Israeli Scholar, Brown University

Over the past year, Americans are getting a lesson in what Israelis have been living for six decades: public life in an environment of great uncertainty. Both in economics and in politics, the U.S. has recently undergone (and continues to go through) a wild roller coaster ride with unforeseen stomach wrenching twists and turns.

           In such a period of turmoil, election campaigns tend to focus more on “personality” than on “policy” because while the latter cannot be a prescription for what to do when the unexpected occurs, the former does offer a pretty good indication of how the leader will make decisions under stress.

           In that regard, the two leading candidates to be Israel’s next prime minister could not be more different. Bibi Netanyahu is easier to parse, as he already was a prime minister and later finance minister in times of great tension and pressure. In both cases he proved to be the same individual with strikingly different outcomes. Netanyahu is a man of clear principles and overall ideology, but tends to be somewhat of a loner when making important policy decisions. Without getting into too many details, these traits were disastrous for him as prime minister but enabled him to function heroically as finance minister. Ideological consistency is fine as far as it goes but when you have to lead a motley crew of disparate parties within a coalition it turns into a recipe for paralysis or unnecessary antagonism. However, when running one’s own bailiwick (Finance Ministry), there is not that great a need for consultation – and Netanyahu’s “inflexibility” vis-à-vis other parties’ demands and warnings served the country in good stead as his budget-cutting policies enabled Israel to survive a very deep recession and go on to produce several years of excellent economic results.

           Tzippi Livni is more of a question mark, if only because she has not yet been prime minister and of the other two major ministries (defense and finance), the foreign ministry has the least “crisis management” to deal with. Yet, what we do know about her decision-making is quite the reverse of Netanyahu’s: she tends to ask for lots of advice and is a very good listener. On the other hand, the most serious criticism of her on the part of those who have seen her in action, is that she does not like to make tough decisions – precisely the opposite of Netanyahu whose self-confidence leaves no doubt (in his own eyes) as to the wisdom of whatever he decides to do.

           Livni’s approach is not surprising, given that it matches well with what the latest research has found regarding the different management styles between men and women (as a generalization, of course – for every 5 Livnis there’s one Margaret Thatcher type too). In Israel, the differences are even more pronounced, given that most prime ministers come from the Israeli Army where “gung-ho!” is the operative term.

           The parallels in the current American election campaign are striking: McCain is a Netanyahu type of leader; Obama a clone of Livni. Thus, the outcome of the American elections and Israel’s coalition formation – or Spring elections if a new Israeli government can’t be formed – will go a long way in determining what sort of relationship the two allies will have, depending on the clash or match of leadership styles in both nations.

And if you can’t wait, try this: Ha’aretz, Israel’s elite newspaper, has just introduced a “simulation game” that enables you to “play leader” in Israel based on your knowledge of the news and the political environment (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1025853.html). Do you have what it takes? We’re all asking the same question regarding McCain, Obama, Biden, Palin, Livni and Netanyahu…

Oct. 5, 2008