What did you just do, Israel ?
A political gamble deeply divides a nation and there is no easy way out
When asked what he saw as one of his greatest achievements, former prime minister Menachem Begin once said that it was preventing a civil war. He did indeed do that, not an easy feat in a nation that is known for its deep divisions. As his ultimate successor, Bibi Nethanyahu can unfortunately not claim the same. Worse, he has gambled his fifteen year record as prime minister (over three separate terms) and may stand to lose any opportunity to join Begin in the pantheon of truly great Israeli leaders. The name Nethanyahu may now be associated with excessive power and utter political tone deafness while bringing Israel to the brink of almost incurable divisions. In doing so he may also inadvertently have tainted the name of his entire family, including his fallen brother Yoni who was killed during the Entebbe rescue operation in 1976.
With his new coalition, supported by the very far-right of Israeli politics, in place late last year, Nethanyahu went on a pretty fast track to use his parliamentary majority to seek legal reforms that would curb some of the powers of Israel’s judiciary, while increasing those of a sitting government. It was supposed to solve a growing constitutional problem that had existed for a long term – something even opponents of these reforms would agree with – and in the process also address the way a sitting prime minister could exercise his or her powers. Over all his time in office, Bibi did not exactly have an easy relationship with the judiciary. Now even if we assume that there was merit to the proposed reforms, they, on closer inspection, turned out to be so drastic and were put together with next to no input from other parties that Israelis felt they were deceived, a sort of ‘we did not vote for this’ kind of sentiment. What followed was weeks of ever growing protests across the country which, in fairness to the pro-Bibi and pro-reform camp were not always about the judiciary overhaul: they gained a character of opposing the freshly elected coalition for the sake of opposing it. In any case, both sides of the argument were digging in and Israel stood divided.
But there was a breaking point that gave the stand-off momentum and that came from the single most important institution in Israel, or rather an amalgamation of services who together constitute the armed (IDF) and security forces. The use of force and control rests with these entities and in dictatorships they can be pivotal in sustaining a ruler’s power. In Israel they have a different role: they actually ensure the sustainability of the nation itself. So why did the security apparatus openly break with the elected government, something you could argue has the whiff of a soft coup? Well consider this:
Many in the armed forces resented the proposed efforts such that they joined the protests and also many reservists decided not to show up for duty out of protest;
America started to meddle and military support which is vital could start being under pressure from political forces in the US, directly impacting Israel’s security;
The protests were sapping energy away from a focus on security right at the time when local unrest (West Bank) and international tensions (Iran) were growing.
So with pressure from the never-ending protests, the press, the country’s president (a largely ceremonial yet important role), overseas Jews, Joe Biden, Nethanyahu was already being cornered, but with the security apparatus throwing the book at him, his position became a lot more difficult. The straw that broke the camel’s back was last weekend when Defence Minister Yoav Gallant (a former IDF general) threw in the towel by urging a temporary halt to the plans that he as a cabinet minister was of course jointly responsible for. Bibi fired him, but the damage was of course done as Gallant’s move could potentially mean there were not sufficient votes in parliament to push the reform bill through. It all escalated to a general strike and total chaos yesterday and there was almost no more room for Bibi to maneuver and he grudgingly agreed to a temporary standstill on the legal reforms. In doing so he has kicked the can down the road while throwing a bone to his ultra-conservative coalition partner, National Security Minister Ben-Gvir by allowing him to have his own militia which is not a great idea if you want to lower the temperature.
So as you can see, the current reprieve already carries the seeds for a further conflict between government and opposition and between government and the street at large. The issue remains unresolved and positions have no doubt hardened further.
Could this have been handled differently? Yes of course, an open door and joint consultations with the opposition could have resulted in a piece of legislation that would have enjoyed broader support. But it would have been a result that Nethanyahu would not have been interested in and most key opposition leaders have vowed to never ever deal with the man given his utter unreliability. The compromise route was never on the table really. This makes an off-ramp for all parties extremely difficult, as long as the current coalition maintains its 64 out of 120 seat majority it is unlikely they will back down, although some commentators argue that the ‘64’ is dwindling to maybe ‘61’ or less. Only serious disarray Nethanyahu’s Likud Party could result in breaking the stalemate if the party can find the nerve to decapitate itself and find a new leader. That is quite possibly the only route out of this mess and out of the political stalemate that for years has blocked the formation of a balanced centrist government that is insulated from extremes on both the left and right.
So: it is more than just judicial reform in the end, it is really about how Israel is governed. There are three questions to reflect on:
1. Why did Nethanyahu gamble it all on this ill-advised adventure? Is it the power hungry disconnect that sets in after too long in power, away from reasonable input, when only hearing from your closest allies and a somewhat questionable spouse are defining your actions?
2. And what are the Arabs thinking about this, the Palestinians in particular. Glee and enthusiasm at Israel’s possible demise as a unified nation, or maybe a smidgen of respect for the open nature of dissent, protest and debate in a democracy ?
3. Because that is what we have seen: massive protests, but without violence, without a brutal clampdown from the authorities. Can that be sustained and can Israeli’s keep fighting each other towards a workable compromise while facing all external threats?
Each question is a large essay, or even a book onto itself. But the fact that Jews have been arguing aggressively over 3,000 years leads me to believe they will survive this deep schism as well once they find the right levers to move the ship back to the centre. It may take a while though.
There are many commentators that are worth checking out. The expert on everything Bibi is Anshel Pfeffer from the Haaretz newspaper, Neri Zilber is good too. Former Canadian ambassador to Israel Vivian Bercovici has started her Substack with solid updates, I really like Daniel Gordis for his detailed reports. If you want a more pro-Bibi point of view, Caroline Glick is your go-to address, she’s also podcasting. And then there is Lahav Harkov, but she is on mat leave.
Photo: the protests a few weeks ago on Kaplan Street in Tel-Aviv when I was visiting the city. If I had known it would get this interesting I would have stayed a bit longer.