The
Israeli election set for January 22 and the coverage thereof is very
strange in several respects. It is a contest in which his opponents seek
to beat Prime Minister Benjamin (“Bibi”) Netanyahu, of the Likud
party, in a remarkably inept manner and in which international
understanding of the issues is at the low level we’ve become used to
seeing.
Here's
a simple way to understand the situation. The far right -parties and
the moderate left -parties are each likely to get roughly the same
number of seats that they received in the 1999 election. The difference
is that in 1999 the rightist parties divided their vote among three
parties and today have largely united into one. The moderate left in
1999 gave their votes mainly to one party and now are dividing it among
four.
In
addition, viewing the actual electioneering by the moderate left makes
one appreciate just how fraudulent political consultants are. They claim
that they are going to help the candidate win but have no idea of how
to do so. And in Israel they borrow childishly from the latest fads in
American politics without regard to the differences. Here are the themes
pushed by the moderate left opposition:
--Bibi
is for the rich. This slogan is unlikely to work in a country where
lower income generally corresponds with more conservative voting. The
idea is obviously stolen from Barack Obama’s campaign. But Obama was
going for large African-American, Hispanic, and student blocs plus some
middle class sectors that could be stirred up over hatred of the rich.
This has no relevance for Israel.
--Bibi
will get you killed. This theme is accompanied by a picture
of a mushroom cloud. But is the idea that he will get you nuked by
attacking Iran or by not attacking Iran? It isn’t clear. And since
Netanyahu has the best claim to preserve the country’s security that
approach is likely to be counterproductive.
--Bibi
doesn’t want your vote. This is the newest poster to appear though it
isn’t clear who’s promoting it. That makes no sense at all.
--The
choice of photographs. Former Prime Minister Tsipi Livni, the candidate
of her own party—and one of the quartet seeking moderate/moderate left
voters—has a photograph on her poster that looks as if it were selected
by her worst enemy. In it she appears ugly, angry, and confused.
--Livni’s
ad has several shots of Obama and one of her standing with new
Secretary of State John Kerry. They seem to argue that Palestinian
Authority
leader Mahmoud Abbas really wants peace but Netanyahu blocked it.
Perhaps this ad was designed by left-liberal American Jewish political
consultants. It won’t go over well in Israel.
Shaul
Mofaz, candidate of Kadima, Livni’s former party that is expected to
collapse completely in the election, has a terrible photograph of
himself with former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. That relates to
Kadima’s founder but is unlikely to win any votes. Rather than
projecting leadership, the other left-of-center party leaders seem to be
seeking anonymity.
What’s
astonishing is the obtuseness of the opposition, especially Labor.
Netanyahu is going to win but the way to get the largest vote, becoming
the official opposition and possibly his coalition partner, is to run on
an energetic program of domestic improvements. The obvious opposition
approach should be that it is the time to improve schools, the
infrastructure, and reduce housing and food prices.
People
are waiting to be told that their living standards can be improved
without threatening their security. A winning theme would be to say
Netanyahu has neglected these domestic issues. True, the economy has
done very well but the price of relatively high employment, rapid
growth, and low inflation has been high prices.
For
breakfast just now I paid $3 for a croissant and $3 for a coffee in a
country where income levels average half those in the United States.
Young people can’t afford an
apartment in a country where rentals are relatively rare and there is
not a strong mortgage system or tax deductions for paying one.
That’s
why there were social protests in 2011. While going into big debt and
increasing subsidies—the trap into which most Western economies have
fallen—would be a mistake there are certainly good shifts to be made.
Instead, voters are being treated like idiots who will be won over by
some silly slogan convincing them that either the prime minister is evil
or will get them incinerated. That won’t win an election.
The
splits in the opposition have become ridiculous. Four different parties
are competing with no real differences among them and without a single
charismatic leader. Mofaz may be a highly competent general but has
shown himself a bad politician. Livni has failed repeatedly in office.
Yair Lapid is following his father’s political path in bashing the
Haredim (those inaccurately known generally as “ultra-Orthodox,” while
Labor Party leader Shelly Yachimovich, widely predicted to come in
second, is a radio personality with little political experience. Three
of them—except for Mofaz—just met to discuss unity and broke up in
acrimony.
Livni
has already announced she won’t go into coalition with Netanyahu while
Lapid demands that there won’t be any religious parties involved. In
other words, both of them plus the hapless Mofaz, have boxed themselves
into a corner.
This
brings us into the popular international theme about the alleged
meaning of the election: Israel is moving to the right and rejecting a
two-state solution. A lot of this is motivated by the agenda of making
Israel look as if it is against peace, despite the fact that it is the
Palestinian side that makes such a solution impossible.
Yet
Netanyahu’s impending victory has nothing to do with any shift on that
issue. Rather, it is due to the fact that the prime minister has done a
reasonably good job, the economy is okay, terrorism is low, he’s kept
out of trouble, and has shown he can
be trusted to preserve security. Moreover, there is no very attractive
figure, unity, or single impressive party on the other side. Given this
situation, Netanyahu’s victory--meaning his party will come in first and
he will form the next government--is a no-brainer.
Please be subscriber 31,123 (among more than 50,000 total readers). Put email address in upper right-hand box: http://www.rubinreports.blogspot.com
We’d
love to have your support. Why not make a tax-deductible donation
(instead of giving your money to pay for Senator Harry Reid's Cowboy
Poetry Festival and U.S. aid for the Egyptian and Syrian Muslim
Brotherhoods) to the GLORIA Center by PayPal: click here.
By credit card: click
here.
Checks: "American Friends of IDC.” “For GLORIA Center” on memo line and
send to: American Friends of IDC, 116 East 16th St., 11th Fl., NY, NY
10003.
--------------------
There
are four pieces of evidence supposed to indicate that the next
government will be further to the right or more “hardline,” three of
which are clearly bogus. First, several supposedly moderate candidates
in the Likud primary were defeated. In fact, this group—one of whom,
Benny Begin, is an honorable man but hard right—consists of nice guys
who were terrible campaigners. Nothing is less surprising
than that they lost.
Second,
the hardline faction of Likud, led by Moshe Feiglin, a dangerous
extremist, is supposedly stronger. In fact, though, Netanyahu held it at
bay and it would have no influence in the next government as it has not
had in this one.
Third,
Netanyahu made a distasteful alliance with the party of the demagogic
Avigdor Lieberman. While Lieberman is corrupt and a poseur, his
right-wing militancy was for show and he never actually did anything
materially. At any rate, with Lieberman under indictment for corruption,
the political careers of his faction’s parliamentarians now depend on
keeping Netanyahu happy. Moreover, they represent more of a Soviet
immigrant pressure group than right-wing militants.
This
leaves the real fear regarding the rising star of Naftali Bennett, head
of the genuinely far right Habayit Hayehudi
party. But the problem with the thesis, popular among Western
journalists, that there will be a right-wing Netanyahu-Bennett coalition
is that Netanyahu loathes Bennett and knows he would be a constant
headache. Bennett’s party would attack every pragmatic step Netanyahu
took—including those needed to get along with an Obama-led America--and
ache for opportunities to threaten to walk out of the coalition or
actually do so.
If
such a coalition does happen it will be because Netanyahu could find no
way out. It is more likely that he will do everything possible to avoid
this outcome and work with
some combination of other parties, including if possible Labor. Of
course, such an outcome isn’t certain but is more likely than an
all-rightist coalition.
The
results will depend on the political math following the January 22
voting, with the key issue being how Netanyahu could assemble a
parliamentary majority of 61 out of 120. Most likely would be an outcome
in which the policies of the next government will be the same as the
one ruling Israel for the last four years.
Right
now, as Israelis realize, we live in an era when Israeli policy is
necessarily more reactive and defensive. There is no diplomatic option
for peace and Israel has no influence over the Islamist direction of
Egypt, Syria, the Gaza Strip, and Lebanon.
The
big question, of course, is whether Netanyahu would ever attack Iran’s
nuclear installations. I think the answer to that question is “no” for
many reasons, only one of them being that this would lead to a
confrontation with the Obama Administration.
After
decades of hearing American writers and alleged experts misunderstand
Israeli politics and thinking I can say that nothing has changed in this
regard.
Barry
Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs
(GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International
Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His latest book, Israel: An Introduction, has just been published by Yale University Press. Other recent books include The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley), and The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). The website of the GLORIA Center and of his blog, Rubin Reports. His original articles are published at PJMedia.
Professor Barry Rubin, Director, Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center http://www.gloria-center.org
The Rubin Report blog http://rubinreports.blogspot.com/
He is a featured columnist at PJM http://pajamasmedia.com/barryrubin/.
Editor, Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal http://www.gloria-center.org
Editor Turkish Studies,http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~db=all~content=t713636933%22
--
No comments:
Post a Comment