• Recent Posts

  • Recent Comments

    Goose on The Lesser of Two Evils
    Sky Lord on The New Anti-Semitism—Jews Aga…
    Judah Rosen on Will AIPAC Learn From Its Big…
    Teven Laxer on New Year; Old Hope
    Goose on ‘Deal of the Century’ Rev…
  • Top Posts

  • Search by Category

  • Archives

  • Pages

  • Twitter

  • Meta

The Lesser of Two Evils

timesofisrael.com

The announcement and signing of the agreement to form a unity government in Israel early this week, between interim Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu and his main rival, the leader of the Blue and White party Benny Gantz, did not surprise me. Since Gantz’s speech to the nation the previous Thursday, which I found—unlike many observers and pundits—to be truthful and inspiring, I expected the result of that speech to bring home to Netanyahu the inevitability and urgency of such a deal. A deal that, with all its shortcomings and dangerous elements, I support.

Now how a ‘leftist/peacenik’ like me, you may ask, who detests everything Bibi Netanyahu’s stands for, and sees in him a real and present danger to Israel’s democracy and future; a longtime supporter of the Two-State solution such as myself, in opposition to the settlers movement since its inception following the Six-Day War, is now breaking ranks with his camp and supports Benny Bantz’s move in forming this unity government? In one word: Realpolitik. But of course, that’s not enough of an answer, and demands a further explanation. So allow me to elaborate.

I’ll start with what could have happened, or the ‘evil’ that was about to take a firm hold in Israel had Gantz not agree, and indeed pushed for the successful completion to this broad coalition deal. But before that even, one thing must be said at the outset: The unforeseen outburst of the coronavirus pandemic, and the grave danger to life and livelihood had dramatically changed the equation. Count me among those who believe that an emergency government WAS necessary in Israel in order to properly deal with it. And that to leave it all at the hands of Netanyahu and his cronies WAS a grave danger to the health of Israel’s citizens, and its democracy and freedom.

Following the signing of the agreement Gantz tweeted this (that’s the world we live in, ain’t it?): “We prevented fourth elections. We’ll safeguard democracy. We’ll fight the coronavirus and look out for all Israeli citizens. We have a national emergency government.” Again, I support these goals. And I believe he is sincere in his wish to achieve them. Of course, opposite him stands a fierce rival, a political animal like no other in Israel’s modern history, much more experienced and unprincipled than him. Also, against this tide, there exists a reality with strong currents that can topple this ship before it can sail into clear waters. But Gantz, who was the IDF chief-of-staff, is a fighter first and foremost. And he already achieved, entering Israeli politics a little over a year ago, more than most who spend a lifetime in it.

Now let’s examine the first evil: i.e. what would’ve happened had Gantz not soldierly marched on into this ‘lion’s den’ that is Netanyahu’s government. Netanyahu became the longest serving Israeli Prime Minister while serving as a caretaker, which is longer than a your now, following three inconclusive general elections. Sans a deal, he would be primed to continue serving in this capacity as PM. It thus provides him with the power to rule unopposed. There was a proposal, from the opposition actually, to freeze all political process and elections for six month in order to fight the pandemic. And so, it’s entirely possible that he would’ve remained in power for another year or so, even without forming a new government.

In that period of time, who knows what more he could’ve done in order to prevent his day in court, on bribery and breach of trust, and to subvert the fragile democracy and the rule of law to his will and dictatorial ambitions. (Remember, his mentor and teacher is not Trump, but Putin. And just like Putin, Netanyahu may use Gantz to stay in power for the long run.) Furthermore, the latest polls indicate he’s gaining ground significantly, with projection of 40 Knesset Members to his Likud party in the next election. This is a real threat. And it’s the result of what is called ‘rally round the flag’ effect in a moment of crisis. And Netanyahu, mind you—unlike Trump—is a real master-of-manipulation, taking full advantage of this terrible pandemic situation. Another six months or so with him alone in power, alone at the TV podium, and 40 seats in the Knesset might become 50 seats. In short, the chances of Netanyahu escaping justice and solidifying his rule over Israel for many years to come, were much larger without this deal.

Now let’s look briefly at this deal, the other ‘evil.’ It safeguards, enshrined by law, a transition of power. In 18 months, Gantz would become the next prime minister. It gives his party and block (together with two small fractions) hardly 19 Knesset members—Netanyahu has 59!—half the ministers in the new government (no doubt too large of a government). Including in that are the three most important ministers, to my mind, other than the PM: Defense, Foreign and Justice. It safeguards a transition of power, and it ensures that Netanyahu will go to court, once the courts are opened soon (his trial is scheduled now for May 24th). And, should the Israeli High Court prevent Netanyahu from holding office, Gantz automatically will become the interim PM, until new elections.

True, the deal also mandates that in July the decision to enforce annexation of large parts of the West Bank will be put in front of the Knesset. How can Gantz (and I) support that disastrous decision? Here’s how: real politics again. As I pointed many times before here, the settlers movement had won the battle. Hands down. There is no going back. The Two-State solution is dead. Gantz in fact, following his visit to the White House, endorsed the ‘Deal of the Century,’ and so are the majority of Israeli citizens. That’s doesn’t make this wrong right, of course not, but rather inevitable. It is the reality on the ground. (What the Palestinians should do, you ask? What they should’ve done long ago: Throw the keys at Israel and demand to be Israeli citizen in a ‘One-State solution.’)

Again, it’s true also that Netanyahu safeguarded in this deal his ability to remain in power for the next 18 months (at least, since the possibility he might not relinquish it still exists). He has control, and veto—but so is Gantz—over appointments of judges and other important positions in the legal system. But not without obstacles, with the Justice ministry in the hands of an astute Gantz’s appointee, and with time running out on him fast.

There are many who oppose this deal who are saying Gantz had the chance to lead. Had the chance to enact laws that would’ve prevented Netanyahu from subverting the law of the land to his will, and prevent him from staying Prime Minister. Not so. Two members of his party were opposed to these moves, and so is another member of the closely attached Labor Party (that expect to disappear in the next elections). I don’t believe this opposition had a real chance to unitedly do so. It was fragile at best, impossible at worst.

Finally this: Netanyahu threats of ‘masses in the streets’ (blood in the streets is how I see it) in case the High Court or the Knesset would to prevent him from staying as PM were very, very real. Remember the murdered PM Yitzhak Rabin? And all that in the midst of a severe pandemic. The conclusion therefore is: Tough situations demand tough decisions. And in this tough, dangerous days, the ‘evil’ of this unity government—fragile and unpredictable as is—was, still is, a much lesser evil than the alternative.

* The ‘Leave a Comment’ link is the last tag below, in blue.

Friendship in Time of Conflict

goldsborobooks.com

Let me tell you a story. A story about friendship, a story about war and peace, a story about a book. I’ll start with the friendship: When I arrived here in Sacramento almost twenty-four years ago, right away I got involved with a small group of people from different backgrounds (but mostly Jews), who called their group ‘The Middle East Peace Project,’ and who were dedicated on educating the public at large about all aspects of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and more so even, on spreading the word that peace was possible to achieve.

Among the group activists was a Palestinian named Akef Shihabi, who was a mild-mannered, middle-aged man, educated and very pleasant to be around. We struck friendship soon after I joined the group, I visited his house and he mine, and though his family was expelled from East-Jerusalem in 1948; and though my parents arrived to then the British Mandate of Palestine in 1946, refugees and survivals of the Holocaust, we not only fast became friends, but on behalf of our group we began appearing together around the city and county, universities, congregations, Jewish and Christians and Muslims, where we shared our different experiences but common belief in the possibility of peace.

At some point we drifted apart, due to life’s other obligations, necessities, and misfortunes. Also, due to my realization that at some point we were just treading water, and had exhausted all the open venues in this area. Still, on occasions I would think of him. None more so than nowadays, when for the last three weeks I was consumed by a new book—’Apeirogon,’ by Colum McCann—which was published last month to great acclaim and much interest. So much so that one book reviewer I’ve read, in ‘The Guardian’ of London, concluded by saying that if ever a book can bring peace to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, this is the book.

I was immediately intrigued: Can a book bring peace? Not only that: At the center of the book—the author is calling it a novel, yet it’s really a novel in name only since it’s mostly a nonfiction, biographical, historical book using real people, real names, and real incidents—are an Israeli and a Palestinian, from Jerusalem and Jericho, who both lost young daughters to the conflict. They form an everlasting friendship, first through an organization called ‘The Parents Circle,’ and then through an organization called ’Combatants for Peace.’ Both organizations are also real and active presently.

At the core of the book is the story of these two men. How their daughters were killed—the Palestinian man, Bassam, ten-year old daughter, Abir, was shot in the back of her head by a rubber bullet from an Israeli soldier riding in a Jeep, just as she came out of a small shop on a break from school, a candy in her hand; the Israeli man, Rami, his daughter Smadar, only fourteen, was walking with her two best friends on Ben Yehuda Street in Jerusalem when three suicide bombers exploded themselves one afternoon. The book tells their stories, their families’ and daughters’ stories, how they deal with the constant grief and loss, how they became friends and active in peace and reconciliation efforts, appearing and lecturing together not only in Israel-Palestine, but in Europe and America.

This ancient conflict, they believe, won’t end until we talk. (A side bumper-sticker on Rami’s motorbike says just that in Hebrew : (זה לא ייגמר עד שנדבר. And the book indeed talk. And talk for long about them and about other things. It’s all those other things, unrelated to their friendship, peace activities and personal stories that obscure and dull the effect of the book somewhat. They hold our attention, the two men; their stories original and painful enough for the book to sustain interest and emotional resonance throughout. The author though, it seems, wanted to write the “ultimate” book about the Middle East at large, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in particular. Which takes away from the impact at the core of his book.

Nonetheless, it’s an admirable effort. But can it bring peace? No, it cannot. Still, it’s an important book. And it’s important not only because it shows the historical depth, and current magnitude of the conflict—as other books had done already (not to mention the Bible)—but also because it gives voice to the possibility of friendship in time of conflict. The possibility of shared experiences and shared humanity and efforts working, united, for the common good. And it makes clear that peace is possible to attain.

Therefore, in conclusion, I suggest that anyone who’s connected to this conflict in any way, to the ‘land of milk and honey’ and to its people, whether closely or remotely, would surely find this book of great interest. As Rami thinks to himself when he first joins ‘The Parents Circle’—an organization of bereaved parents from both sides—“It is not a decree of faith that we should live forever with a sword in our hands.” And equally so Bassam (who experienced seven years of humiliation and torture in an Israeli prison) thinks that “The only revenge is making peace.” So ultimately, and persuasively, their story renews the hope that someday in the future, sooner rather than later, driven by the people more than by their leaders, a peaceful resolution to this endless war would be found.

* The ‘Leave a Comment’ link is the last tag below, in blue.

%d bloggers like this: