Current Government: Religious Issues and Some Predictions

Chief Rabbs Yitzhak Yosef and David Lau

Does it look like Iran?  It's not.  It's Israel and here are a couple of Israel's major power brokers (under the current government) - the two chief Rabbis of Israel.

The rabbis and their supporters have had a busy week, filled with lots of newsworthy items.

Last Sunday, they were successful in rolling back a conversion initiative that was intended to make it easier for people to convert to Judaism in Israel.  This was rolled back at the behest of the Shas and Degel HaTorah parties which are major partners in the current governing coalition.  The rollback has widely been viewed as an effort to consolidate power over religious affairs in Israel back to the Ultra-Religious and away from the Zionist religious (i.e. the "modern Orthodox").

On Tuesday, a woman from Colorado, Linda Siegel Richman, was ordered to leave the Kotel (the "Western Wall) in Jerusalem because she was wearing a kippah (a skullcap or yarmulke).  The Western Wall ushers told her that she did not belong and asked her to leave the area.  She had come from the U.S. to study at the Conservative Yeshiva in Israel and was at the Kotel to pray and to place notes in the wall. The notes had been given to her by her students at a Denver school.  The incident attracted enormous public attention.  The next day, Western Wall Rabbi Shmuel Rabinovitch issued a half-hearted apology in which he noted that it was not clear that the incident had actually even occurred.  Rabbi Rabinovitch has, of course, made concerted efforts over the past few years to prevent women from having access to Torah scrolls at the Kotel, from praying out loud and from wearing tallithot.  So it is really no surprise that a woman wearing a kippah encountered such difficulties under his watch.

On Wednesday, the Israeli Minister for Religious Affairs, David Azoulai, (of the Shas party), lashed out at Reform Jews and stated that he did not even consider them to be Jews.  He had other choice comments for Reform and Conservative Jews that were along the same lines.  Prime Minister Netanyahu swiftly issued a condemnation of these remarks and called them "hurtful." Education Minster Naftali Bennett also condemned the remarks in no uncertain terms and stated that all Jews are Jews.  Bennett went on to say the home for all Jews, including Reform and Conservative, is in Israel.

Is all of this related?  Well, the current government includes 7 Shas members and 6 Degel HaTorah members as part of its 61 seat bloc, which gives the government the slimmest possible majority in the Knesset, facing 59 opposition Knesset members.  Prime Minister Netanyahu paid an enormous price to enlist these Ultra-Religious parties into the governing coalition.  Both parties were granted a range of powerful political portfolios as as significant policy and financial concessions. 

This is in marked contrast to the previous government.  After the 2013 Israeli elections, Yesh Atid leader Yair Lapid had won 19 seats.  His party insisted that it would not join a government that would make so many concessions to to the Ultra-Religious parties.  Lapid held out and an Israeli government was formed without the Ultra-Religious parties - for the first time in quite a while.  As a result, the previous government began to make certain changes.  These included mandatory military enlistment for the Ultra-Orthodox, reducing government grants for non-working Yeshiva students, ensuring that secular subjects like math and science are mandatory for everyone and numerous other changes.  Many of these changes as well as other proposed changes that were in the pipeline were quite popular among secular and other non-ultra-Orthodox Israelis.

But when it came time to negotiate a coalition agreement this time around after the 2015 election, Prime Minister Netanyahu simply gave away everything.  He agree to roll back all of the changes that had been made or proposed in the last government and to go beyond that by providing additional monetary incentives for the Ultra-Orthodox to join the government.  The disappointing aspect of all of that is that Moshe Kahlon and his allegedly centrist Kulanu party simply agreed to all of these terms and conditions.  This was in marked contrast to Yair Lapid in 2013 who had retained some principles during the previous round of coalition building negotiations.

As the Ultra-Religious establishment increases its power during the current mandate, many Israelis are becoming more and more disaffected with this turn of events.  This will cause many Israeli voters to turn away from Kahlon and Netanyahu in the next election.  Who will benefit?  Bennett will be the winner among religious and more conservative voters and will take away some seats from Netanyahu and/or Kahlon on the right.  But the big winner is likely to be Lapid.  If he stays the course and continues to fight as an opposition member, Israelis will view him as one of the few principled politicians who is willing to stand up to the Ultra-Orthodox.

It is a fairly common viewpoint that the Labour party, Zionist Camp or other name that it might run under would be as willing as the Likud party to court the support of Shas and/or Degel HaTorah by making similar concessions in order to form a government.  Only Yair Lapid and, perhaps, Tsipi Livni, have shown that they would be willing to hold out against these demands.  It will be clear to Israeli voters that Kahlon will simply agree to anything in order to get a cabinet seat.

While there are many Israelis who simply do not care about many of these secular-religious issues or other issues of religious pluralism, more and more Israelis are starting to pay attention.  Many Israelis are looking for alternatives to Orthodox weddings, which currently have a monopoly in Israel.  Opening the door to civil marriage ceremonies could lead to widespread change and could also open the door to same sex marriages in Israel.  Easing the conversion laws could benefit a large number of Israelis including thousands of immigrants whose religious status as Jews has been called into question. Still other Israelis would like to see public transportation on Shabbat, demonopolization of Kashrut authority, or more liberal laws in other areas affecting personal status.

The more that the current government acts in a fashion that is viewed as extremist, the greater the resentment will be among centrist Israelis.  This may all lead to a large shift of voters from Kahlon and Netanyahu to Lapid and others.

The Shas and Degel HaTorah voters will not change.  Those parties will continue to attract similar numbers in any given election.  Their elected officials are doing a good job in advocating for policies that they support.

But the Israeli political landscape has a large number of undecided centrist voters who are mobile.  These voters have swung around over the past number of years, from the Kadima party, to Tsipi Livni and Yair Lapid and now to Moshe Kahlon and Kulanu.  Lapid and the Yesh Atid party make a strong case that the centrist voters should shift back to him and his party and that they are the only party that will stick to some principled positions on certain issues.

The current coalition is very tenuous.  It is hanging on by a thread and Prime Minister Netanyahu's government even lost its first legislative vote this week, although that vote was not a "non-confidence" vote.  We will probably see another election in Israel sooner rather than later.  And if the current trend continues, Lapid and his Yesh Atid party are likely to be the big winners.
       

 

Big Win for Netanyahu: Some Post Election Thoughts

"Reports of my demise have been greatly exaggerated."

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu led his Likud party to a massive and surprising victory on Tuesday.  While pre-election polls had put the Likud in second place with a forecast of 20-21 seats, the party emerged with 30 seats, the largest number of any party and some 25% of Knesset seats.  Netanyahu will still need to add 31 more Knesset members to get to the magic number of 61to form a government.  However, that looks like it will be relatively easy for him this time around as compared to what he faced just after the 2013 elections.  He will have the support of Habayit Hayehudi ("Jewish Home" - Naftali Bennett's party) which was reduced to 8 seats from 13.  He will also have the support of Yisrael Beitenu ("Israel Our Home" - Avigdor Lieberman's party) which won 6 seats.  That brings him to 44.  He will then turn to the ultra-religious and add in Shas (8) and Degel HaTorah (6). With 58 Knesset members and needing only 3 more, he will most likely count on the Kulanu party, led by Moshe Kahlon with its 10 seats to put Likud at 68.  There is a possibility that Yesh Atid (11 seats) will also consider joining but that seems less likely, especially if the government includes Shas and Degel HaTorah.  Even without one of these two parties, the government may be too far to the right for the tastes of the 11 Yesh Atid (Lapid's party) members.

The Zionist coalition finished with 24 seats, 6 behind Likud.  The United Arab List finished with 14 to become the 3rd largest party in the Knesset.  Meretz hung on with 4 and Eli Yishai's splinter party Yachad, which had left Shas did not make it into the Knesset.

This is all not very good news for Israelis on the left or even those in the centre.  Effectively, Netanyahu will have accomplished his goal.  He will have exchanged the "left" constituents of his previous government - Tsipi Livni and Yair Lapid - for two ultra-religious parties (Shas and Degel HaTorah) and Moshe Kahlon's party.  Kahlon was a former Likud MK himself.  Not that Livni or Lapid were really "leftists" but in the Netanyahu government, they certainly were.


As the election campaign was drawing to a close, Netanyahu sought to shore up his right wing support by renouncing his past statements of support for a Palestinian state. Based on the anticipated constituent members of the government that will most likely be formed, it is hard to see how any negotiations will take place with the Palestinians anytime soon.

If the ultra-religious parties are back in the government, as expected, we can anticipate a rollback of some of the changes that Lapid sought to bring in.  A restoration of funding for Yeshivot and other ultra-religious interests.  A pullback on the effort to put the ultra-religious in the army.  Increased power over religious affairs in the state handed back to the ultra-orthodox.  

It seems to me that we can also anticipate a further deterioration in current U.S.-Israeli relations and EU-Israeli relations.  I'm reluctant to go on with predictions of other developments that we are likely to anticipate but they are daunting.

In looking at these results, we can size up the Israeli electorate as follows.  57 out of the 120 Knesset seats are right wing or religious parties.  21 more are centrists or right-centrists.  14 seats are in the Arab bloc.  That leaves 28 seats for the left.  The results clearly show that the Israeli electorate leans, at this point in time, heavily to the right.

There had been a sense of optimism in central Israel that the left and the centre would fare better.  Even the exit polls that were released at 10 p.m. in Israel suggested that the Likud would be tied with the Zionist Union at 28 for the lead.  But when the votes were actually counted and the results announced, Israelis had shown a clear preference to continue on with Prime Minister Netanyahu ("Bibi") as the Prime Minister.

Winners and Losers

Prime Minister Netanyahu was the big winner of the evening with 30 seats, rallying from a polling deficit, a barrage of attacks from the press and a big push by the left to try and remove him from office.  He scored a convincing victory.  If he serves out a full term, he will become Israel's longest serving Prime Minister.

Looking down the list, it is also reasonable to put Moshe Kahlon in the winners group, with his 11 seats.  His party will most likely join the government and will have significant power.  Other winners include Shas, which is also likely to join the government.  The Joint Arab List won a convincing 14 seats.  However, they will sit in opposition and have little impact on the government. Avigdor Lieberman held on to 6 seats and will likely hold a cabinet post. So, on balance, he can also be put in the winners category.

Almost all of the other parties can be put into the "losers" camp.  For Yesh Atid under Lapid, this election meant a reduction in seats from 19 to 11.  Lapid's party is likely to be sitting in the opposition this time around after holding a number of important cabinet posts in the most recent government.  It is hard to paint this as any kind of victory for Lapid.

The Zionist Camp won 24 seats.  While that is a respectable number, the party's goal was to form the government.  That will not happen.  This can only be described as a defeat for that party as well, despite the sugar coating by some of its leaders.

Meretz held on to its status with 4 seats but its leader promptly resigned, early this morning, taking the blame for the party's decline in numbers.  Eli Yishai's splinter party Yachad failed to make the cut off and will not sit in the Knesset.  The election can even be viewed as a defeat for Bennett's (Habayit Hayehudi) party which only won 8 seats.  However, Bennett will play a key role in the new government so it is more of a mixed result for his party.

The 2013 election brought a sense of optimism in some Israeli circles as a government was formed that included Tsipi Livni and Yair Lapid and left out the ultra religious parties. That government made some moves on economic and social issues but approached Palestinian issues through the Naftali Bennett lens.  Now, it is anticipated that the party's "left" will be Moshe Kahlon's party and the party will continue to approach Palestinian issues through a Naftali Bennett lens.  As well, the government will approach many other issues through an Ultra-Orthodox lens.

In the losers category, I suppose I will also have to include my personal election predictions.  I accurately predicted that Yishai would be out and that Meretz would make it in (barely).  My predictions for Yisrael Beitenu, the Arab list, Shas and Degel HaTorah, were all within one.  I was wildly off with the Likud predicting 21- which is 9 less than the 30 that they won.  I overestimated the Zionist Camp (27-24), Yesh Atid (16-11) and Bayit Yehudi (13-8).  Conversely, I underestimated Kahlon (7-10).  On the whole, it looks like a chunk of centrist votes went to Kahlon instead of Lapid - and a chunk of right wing votes went to Likud instead of Bayit Yehudi. 

Conclusion 

What can be concluded? The left and the centre are far from close to forming a government in Israel at the present time.  The electorate prefers a right wing government and has voted heavily in favour of putting one in place.

Israel is surrounded by hostile, unstable regimes.  The threat of war with Hezbollah on Israel's northern border looms large as does the possibility that the Syrian civil war will spill into a conflict that engages Israel.  Egypt is a powder keg and Israel is constantly on high alert at its southern border.  All three of these realities would be unlikely to change irrespective of the type of leadership that Israel had in place.

With respect to the Palestinians, many Israelis fear that the danger of a Hamas takeover in the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) would make a two state solution suicidal for Israel at the present time.  Together with all of this, pre-election opinion polls showed that Netanyahu was perceived as the best leader for Israel.  Zionist Camp leader Herzog did not project strength or confidence.  On the other hand, Netanyahu was perceived as a strong, forceful, qualified political and military leader.  For many Israelis, that is the type of leader Israel needs to face the unique range of existential threats that it must constantly address.

One can only up that the day will come when Israelis feel less threatened existentially and confident enough to try a different approach.  These elections clearly demonstrate that this is not yet the case.

I guess for now we will have to go with this line from our daily prayers:

עושה שלום במרומיו, הוא יעשה שלום עלינו ועל כל ישראל, ואמרו אמן

Israel Elections 2015 - Latest Trends

Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu

What to make of the upcoming elections in Israel which are scheduled for March 17, 2015?  According to the most recent polls, Israel's 20th Knesset may well look quite a bit like the current Knesset.  It is likely however that the religious parties will join the government, replacing Yesh Atid, in what would be a more right wing government than the current one.

However, there is a fair bit of time until the election, about 40 days.  Much can change as it often does in the swirling Mideastern winds of an Israeli election campaign.

Over the past week or two, there have been numerous stories in the press about the excesses of the Netanyahu family in the Prime Ministerial home.  One story involved allegations that Prime Minister Netanyahu's wife was pocketing a huge amount of money from refunded deposits on the return of water bottles.  Another story focused on excessive wine consumption in the Netanyahu quarters and a third story questioned a patio furniture purchase that the Netanyahus had recently made.  Listening to the Israeli news broadcasts, one might have thought that the reaction to this accumulation of allegations would be overwhelmingly negative.  But surprisingly, in polls that have come after this media barrage, Netanyahu has emerged, according to the polls with an even higher number of predicted seats than he had before the scandals broke.  The latest polls have put him at anywhere between 24 and 27 seats in the 120 seat Israeli Knesset, which would likely give him enough to have a plurality and have first dibs at forming a government.

Where there was some apparent momentum in the media for Isaac Herzog, leader of the Labour Party and Tsipi Livni (who together have joined forces to campaign as the "Zionist Camp"), the poll numbers do not seem to be reflecting the media enthusiasm.  The latest polls put the Zionist Camp at a similar range - 23 to 26 but the additional questions that pollsters have been asking suggest that the confidence in Herzog as a potential Prime Minister is lacking in the Israel public and that the Zionist Camp numbers may not wind up as high as the numbers that are currently being reported.

At election time, Israel usually winds up with a few new parties.  In this case there is a new centrist party, led by Moshe Kahlon.  The party is a centrist party, focusing on economic issues.  Does this sound familiar?  A look at the pools suggests that they are currently at a predicted eight seats, most of which were probably taken from Yesh Atid, Yair Lapid's party.

Of course many of these numbers could change quite a bit between now and election time.

So far, however, there seem to be few scenarios under which Herzog could become the Prime Minister.  Assuming he obtained 26-28 seats, how could he get to 61?  He could add in 13 seats from Yesh Atid (on a good day), 6 from Meretz and 9 from Kahlon.  So that would get him to 56.  And those are some very flattering and highly optimistic assumptions all around.  He would then need to find 5 or 6 more seats.  One option would be Lieberman's "Yisrael Beitenu" which would bring this coalition somewhat to the right.  Hard to imagine making a successful shiduch out of that arrangement.  Another option would be to add in the religious parties - Shas, United Torah Judaism and "Yachad" - a new Shas splinter group.  That could amount to 10 or even 15 seats but the cost would be the reversal of most of the gains that Israel achieved in the two years of governing without these parties in the Knesset.  It would be very unpalatable for Lapid - unless the Haredi parties greatly toned down their historic demands.  Of course another option is that the "Zionist Camp" could be supported by the three Arab parties - that have now united under one banner.  But how ironic would it be for the "Zionist Camp" to form a government that is held together by 12 Arab Israeli legislators?

On the other hand, if Prime Minister Netanyahu emerges with 25 to 27 seats, his path to a majority seems somewhat less difficult (at least ideologically).  He could add in Yisrael Biteinu with 6, the "Jewish Home" under Bennett with 12. That would put him at 45.  He would now have the possible options of a mixture of Shas/Yachad/UTJ (10-15), Kahlon (8/9), Yesh Atid (9-12), which could get him close to 70.  Even if Lapid chose not to join this unholy coalition, there would likely still be enough for Netanyahu to exceed 62 and form a government.  However, it would be a significantly more right wing government than the one that is currently in place.

A third option would be some sort of Labour-Likud coalition - which Israel has seen in the past.  Hard to imagine as things sit right now.  However, Prime Minister Netanyahu has certainly had his differences with most of his current coalition partners - ranging from Bennett to Lapid.  Perhaps a government with fewer partners would be more manageable?  Not that this would be a "Zionist Camp" fantasy - but it might be preferable, even for Herzog, to the alternative of a few years of a hard right Israeli government or a government that is dependent on the demands of the ultra religious parties.

It is somewhat unclear what Netanyahu's inclinations really would be with these different alternatives.  The easier route for him might be a government with 13-17 ultra-religious seats bolstering his core group.  But the cost would be quite high for Israeli secular society.  I'm really not sure that it is a cost that even Netanyahu is willing to pay, after having been able to see what can be accomplished in a government without the ultra religious parties.  He may have already made some type of deal with Shas (and certainly there have been rumours to that effect).  But until the election results are in and the deal is consummated, nothing is certain.

In my view, a right wing coalition with the various ultra-religious parties and Bennett's "Bayit Yehudi" will create many challenges for Israel, both domestically and internationally.  It would be a coalition that would continue to increase the gap between the rich and the poor in Israel and one that would reverse many of the changes that had been made to secular-religious issues in Israel.  In particular, it is a coalition that would spend much more money funding Yeshivas and new settlements and would halt the very modest trend towards increased religious pluralism in Israel.  And it is a coalition that could lead to the further isolation of Israel in many international circles by taking an even harder line in matters involving the Palestinians.  I find it hard to imagine that a majority of Israelis would view this as the best type of government but I guess that is for Israelis to decide at the polls. 

It should be a very interesting period in Israel as we watch the changing poll results come in and wait to see if any of the parties are able to create some momentum in an unforeseen direction over the course of this campaign.  I'm not betting on it.

Je Suis Yoav

Je ne suis pas Charlie.  Je suis Yoav.

Who is Yoav?  Yoav Hattab is one of the four French Jews murdered by terrorists at at the Hyper Cache market in Paris on Friday January 9, 2015.  Mr. Hattab Z"L was not the first French Jewish victim of terrorism in France.  Unfortunately, there have been a number of incidents including a 2012 attack on a Jewish school in Toulouse in which 4 people were killed, including three children.  If the only terrorist incident on Friday had been the attack on the Kosher supermarket, the item would probably not have garnered anywhere near the press coverage that this series of attacks has attracted.

With the murderous attack on Charlie Hebdo, the condemnations of Jihadist terrorism were near universal.  I have heard very few suggestions that we should investigate "root causes" or "deal with the underlying problem."  Of course, there will be some who will say that the press should not publish images of the prophet Mohammad or that the press should always take care to ensure that nothing printed offends Muslim sensibilities in any way. There are those who were not too concerned about the fatwa against Salman Rushdie.  But, fortunately, these voices are in the small minority.  Far more commentators and political leaders have spoken in favour of free speech and freedom of expression.

But with respect to the murderous attack on Hyper Cache, some of the responses tell a very different story.  For example, as reported by YNet News, BBC Reporter Tim Wilcox compared the hostage taking at the supermarket to Israel's treatment of the Palestinians.  Really Tim?  Seriously?  He later issued a mild apology.  CNN minimized its initial reports of the fact that a Jewish establishment was targeted.  Even so, it became apparent that the terrorist had clearly stated that his intention was to kill Jews.

When terrorist attacks on Jewish civilians occur, many quickly try to take a "balanced" approach and "condemn all forms of terrorism" in their response or speak about root causes.  But what are the root causes of the murder of a group of Jews?  How is it any less outrageous than Charlie Hebdo to see an attack in which Jewish worshipers are murdered while at prayer in a synagogue, because they are Jews?  Just because it takes place in Israel?  Or an attack on Jewish shoppers in a Kosher supermarket?  Atlantic magazine correspondent sent out this spot-on tweet on Friday:  "Selling kosher food is a provocative and vulgar act, sure to arouse the hostility of aggrieved extremists."

There is no way to link Israel's issues with the Palestinians to the murder of Jewish civilians, other than for the sickest of minds.  And by the way, Turkish Recep Erdogan does qualify in this category.  He apparently attacked Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for attending the French protests on Saturday and tried to draw a parallel between the Paris attacks and the Israeli war with Hamas terrorists in Gaza.  Even Hamas apparently issued a mild condemnation of the attack on Charlie Hebdo but was eerily silent, if not supportive of the murder of some Jewish Parisians.

When news of the attack at Hyper Cache emerged, French leader Francois Hollande initially called the attack "an appalling anti-Semitic attack."  Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper called these French attacks "barbaric."  But when Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu indicated his attention to attend the French rally, Hollande told him not to show up.  Defiantly, Prime Minister Netanyahu eventually decided to come anyways, leading Hollande to invite Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas to provide some "balance."  God forbid Hollande should politicize this situation.  After all, even though he can bring himself to say that this was an appalling anti-Semitic attack, he would not want to be seen suggesting that there is any comparison between this attack and the murder of Jewish worshipers in a Jerusalem Synagogue.  Or the countless other terrorist attacks that Israel faces on its civilians.  Or attacks on Jews in other parts of the world.

It is about time that France and other countries, worldwide, show the same type of indignation and determination with respect to attacks on Jews that they have shown with respect to Charlie Hebdo.  Terrorism must be universally condemned, whether it is an attack on the Twin Towers, an attack on Charlie Hebdo or an attack on a group of Jews, wherever in the world they might be.  They should recognize what the leaders of Israel have, unfortunately, understood for far too long.  That terrorist attacks carried out by ISIS, ISIL, Al Qaeda, Hamas the PLO and other terrorist organizations  are all in the some category.  All of it should be condemned vociferously.

There is nothing wrong with a button that says "Je Suis Charlie."  But an equal number of people ought to be wearing buttons that say "Je suis Yoav."  An attack on Jews because they are Jews is as egregious as an attack on free speech.  Or as an attack on any other fundamental aspect of a civil society.

Memorable Events in Israel 2013

New Year's Day is not a national holiday in Israel.  Although there are certainly many Israelis who celebrate New Year's Eve (known in Israel as the "Sylvester" holiday - after Pope Sylvester - the origin of New Year's commemorations), it is a normal work day for most Israelis.

Nevertheless, with the calendar changeover from 2013 to 2014, I thought I would review some of the major Israeli events of 2013.  I wound up writing about most of these events in one way or another during the year, but not everyone has the chance to read all of my blog posts.  (Some intentionally disregard them...).  So I thought you might enjoy this collection of key events, in no particular order.

1.  Israeli National Elections:

This has to be considered the biggest event of 2013.  Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was re-elected, though he formed a very different coalition.  A new government was created without the ultra-Orthodox parties, and with a huge number of voters turning to the centrist party, Yesh Atid.  For a detailed discussion of the Israeli elections, you can have a look at my election summary post here or some of my other blogs about the Israeli elections which are listed in the contents by topic page.  The coalition is still a work in progress with some very different views being represented within the same government.  Nevertheless, the election was a sea change in some ways for Israeli politics.

2.  Visitors to Israel: 

President Obama visited Israel for the first time as President in March 2013.  It was a short visit and nothing particularly substantial was accomplished.  Nevertheless, any time the President of the United States visits Israel, it is a newsworthy event.  There was a great TV ad put together by McDonald's in honour of the occasion.  Other visitors to Israel in 2013 included performing artists Rihanna, Jose Feliciano, the Pet Shop Boys and Alicia Keys.  Pink Floyd member Roger Waters certainly did not visit.  Instead, he spent his time trying to vilify Israel and dissuade other artists from visiting or performing here.  Fortunately, many artists of goodwill and other celebrities ignored his wrong headed and quite possibly anti-Semitic attacks.

3.  Mishpacha:  Celebrations and Losses:

Israeli President Shimon Peres celebrated his 90th birthday in style.  Celebrants in attendance included former President Bill Clinton, Barbara Streisand, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and many others.

Israel lost one of its great musicians, Arik Einstein.  Two well known Rabbis passed away: former Sephardi Chief Rabbi Ovadia Yosef died as did Rabbi David Hartman, founder of the Shalom Hartman Institute in Jerusalem.  The American founder of the modern day Kabbalah movement (followed by Madonna and many other celebrities) Philip (Shraga) Berg passed away and was buried in Israel.  In December 2013, noted philanthropist Edgar Bronfman died.  He was a great friend of Israel and a noted advocate of Jewish causes worldwide.

4.  Charged, Released and Convicted:

There were many stories relating to criminal activity or accusations of criminal activity that made the news in 2013.  Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman was acquitted of all charges after facing a state led investigation and prosecution that spanned many years.  Israeli singer Eyal Golan was released without any charges after stories circulated about a sex scandal involving minors.  Former Israeli Chief Rabbi Yona Metzger was arrested on a slew of charges relating to fraud and bribery.  That process could take years until the outcome is determined.  Danny Dankner, the former CEO of one of Israel's largest banks, Bank HaPoalim was convicted on fraud and breach of trust allegations as part of a plea bargain.

5.  Another Large Scale Hi-Tech Sale:

Israeli security company Trusteer was sold to IBM for almost a billion dollars.  Trusteer manufactures software that is used for, among other things, securing bank account information.  This was yet another in a series of transactions where international business interests have been willing to pay top dollar for leading Israeli technology companies.

6.  Israeli Municipal Elections:

Israeli municipal elections were held on October 22, 2013.  While it is true that it was mostly a story of incumbents returning to office, there were some other stories of interest.  The election results in Bet Shemesh have been mired in scandal, with an Israeli Court recently ordering a new election due to evidence of widespread voter fraud.  In Ra'anana, a former Mayor returned to power with a landslide victory over the incumbent.  For a more detailed look at Israel's municipal elections, you can have a look at my article of October 24, 2013.

7.  The Kotel and Egalitarianism:

A Jerusalem District Court released a landmark decision in April 2013 (State of Israel v. Lesley Sachs).  According to this decision, there is no prohibition on women being able to pray in the women's section of the Kotel, wearing Tallitoth and Tefillin if they wish to do so.  This marked a huge change over the way in which Israeli laws were being enforced up until that point.  Within months, Israeli Cabinet Minister Naftali Bennett expanded and opened up the Davidson Center (the Southern Wall) in an effort to diffuse the effect of this ruling.  Women are still prohibited from bringing a Torah Scroll to the women's side of the Kotel.  However, this Court decision was a huge victory for Israeli organization Women of the Wall.  For a discussion of the issue as it was in 2012, see this blog.  For a discussion of the changes in 2013, see this entry. 

8.  The Weather:

Israel faced a huge rain storm in January 2013 that flooded many areas.  In December 2013, Israel encountered one of its largest snow storms in many years.  More than 30 centimetres of snow fell on Jerusalem by some estimates.  The city was paralyzed for days, with the loss of electricity and roads that became completely blocked.   Just my luck that after being in Israel for this storm, I happened to be in Toronto during a snowstorm that caused 300,000 families to lose power, in some cases for more than four days during the bitterly cold winter.  So everything must be considered in proportion.  But this was a huge storm by Israeli standards. 

9.  Ice Hockey:  

How could a Canadian summarize Israeli events of 2013 without mentioning Ice Hockey?  The Israeli national ice hockey team won a gold medal in its division - Division II, Group B at the World Ice Hockey Championships in April 2013 in Izmit, Turkey.  The team will now move up to Division II, Group A for the 2014 tournament.  Israel will play teams ranked 29-34 in the world, with a chance to move up to Division I if the Israeli team can finish first in this difficult group.  The tournament will take place in Belgrade, Serbia from April 9 to 15, 2014.  Israel will face Australia, Belgium, Estonia, Iceland and Serbia, with Estonia and Serbia listed as the favourites to win the division.  It is also worth mentioning that Twin Peaks Ice Rink in Holon, Israel became fully operational in 2013, providing Israelis who live in central Israel with a much more convenient place to get some ice time.  Until recently, the only place to play was Metullah, which is more than 180 kilometres north of Ra'anana.

10.  Wine News:

In November 2013, Israeli archaeologists found a 3,700 year old wine cellar near Nahariyah, Israel, containing 40 ceramic jars, each large enough to hold 60 litres of wine.  It is believed that this cellar was part of a Canaanite palace.  Many historians have noted Israel's ancient history of high quality wine production, which was dormant for many years during periods of Muslim rule.  While Israeli wine making was reintroduced in the late 1800s, as early immigrants arrived as part of the first two waves of immigration, the industry only truly took off in the early 1980s.  Israel is now blessed with more than 280 wineries, including Kosher and non-Kosher, large and small, producers.   

 The 2nd Annual Kosher Wine Festival was held in Jerusalem in January 2013 (I managed to attend the 2012 event with a visiting friend) and the Golan Heights Winery celebrated its 30th Anniversary in June 2013 with a big festival at the Tel-Aviv Port. 

Conclusion:

This summary is by no means comprehensive, though, hopefully, it is reasonably accurate.  As usual, I welcome any comments, suggestions or additions.  I apologize in advance if I have overlooked some key events.  This is, after all, just a hobby for now.  Wishing everyone a happy, healthy and peaceful 2014.

Israel: Coalition Talks Continue

Yair Lapid (left) and Naftali Bennett

The Israeli election was held on January 22, 2013.  My analysis of the expected coaltion talks, writing at the time, can be found here.  Meanwhile, more than a month has passed and it is still unclear what type of government Israel will have, other than the fact that it will almost certainly be led by the Likud party.  Prime Minister Netanyahu has failed to reach a coalition deal within the initial alotted time period.  He will now have until March 14, 2013.  If he still cannot conclude a deal by that time, there will either be new elections - or President Shimon Peres will ask another party to try to form the government.  In all probability, Netanyahu will reach a deal with some of the other parties by the deadline, even if the deal is reached just as time is expiring.

The only party to have joined the Likud so far is "The Movement" led by Tsipi Livni.  This was quite surprising to many Israelis since the centrist Livni joined a government without knowing which other parties would be involved.  She was granted a few cabinet posts and put in charge of overseeing Israeli-Palestinian negotiations.  As leader of the Kadima party after the previous election, Livni had opted to stay out of the government, despite having a large and powerful party.  This time around, she brings a much smaller number of seats.  To date, no other parties have been willing to join this coalition, which now numbers 37.  A majority of 61 is required to control the Knesset.

Prime Minister Netanyahu has been speaking to all of the possible suitors - Labour, Yesh Atid, Habayit Hayehudi and the ultra-Religious parties.  These talks are mainly held behind closed doors and it is really difficult to know exactly what is being demanded, promised or rejected and what genuine information or misinformation is being leaked.

However, it is fairly clear that two of the largest parties, Yesh Atid and Habayit Hayehudi have reached some sort of deal under which they will only enter the government together.  Apparently, the main piece of the deal centres around the idea that almost all ultra-religious Israelis will be required to serve in the army or the national service, by age 21, with only a small number exempted.  Both parties seem to be holding very firm to this demand, even as the ultra-religious Shas party has been attacking the parties for their lack of flexiblity and alleging that they are "anti-Haredi."  Tonight, Likud-Beitenu suggested that Yesh Atid was refusing to sit in a government with the ultra-religious parties.  However, it is not clear that Yesh Atid has actually taken this position.  It may be that they are holding merely steadfast to certain demands - the content of which are entirely unacceptable to the ultra-religious.  However, there is a big difference between insisting on some significant policy changes that will affect Haredim (as well as many other Israelis) - versus being "anti-Haredi."

Habayit Hayehudi leader Naftali Bennett and Yesh Atid leader Yair Lapid seem to have been able to agree on policies in a number of areas, primarily related to domestic issues.  Their stated aims are to improve education in Israel, improve life for the middle class, change the relationship of the State and the Ultra-Religious and other issues.  Both Bennett and Lapid served in the Israeli Defence Forces and both believe that the burden of mandatory military service should be distributed universally across Israeli society including ultra-religious Jews and Arab Israelis.  Overall, in the realm of domestic policy, Bennett does not appear to have staked out any particularly extreme positions, though his party would certainly have a much more right leaning social and domestic agenda than the platform on which Lapid campaigned.

The big question mark is what this means for the future of Israeli-Arab and Israeli-Palestinian relations.  Bennett is adamantly opposed to any territorial concessions and has indicated that his party will not support a government that makes any such compromises.  Lapid is much more flexible and favours an immediate return to the bargaining table  with the Palestinians.  Even though both parties oppose any concessions with respect to Jerusalem, it is hard to see how any kind of peace deal could be reached with the Palestinians without significant territorial concessions in other areas.  So, ultimately, if both Bennett and Lapid join the Netanyahu-led government together, the government will likely be preoccupied with domestic issues and negotiations with the Palestinians will move down on the priority list, even below where they have been currently.

The big winner so far in the Israeli public forum has been Yair Lapid.  Israelis have apparently been very supportive of his determination and resolve in not making concessions to the ultra-orthodox on the issue of universal conscription.  Some polls have suggested that Lapid's party would win more than 30 seats if a new election were held now.  It may well be that Lapid plans to deal with domestic issues first and then use his momentum and popularity to force a change in the governing coaltion or to force the government to turn its attention to addressing the Palestinian-Israeli dispute in more flexible fashion.

In any event, it seems to me that there are still reasons for Israelis to be cautiously optimistic.  Although the Yesh Atid Party may not be able to fulfill all of its promises, the determination that Yair Lapid is showing with respect to domestic issues is a promising sign that some significant, positive changes are on the way.
 

Israeli Election 2013 - Official Results

Here are the final results of yesterday's Israeli election - according to the Israeli press.  These results could still change slightly - though they are apparently based on more than 99% of the actual polling station results.  If there are any changes from these numbers, they would be very minor.

Likud 31                     Right/Right-Centre            Same as exit polls
Yesh Atid 19             Left/Left-Centre                 Same
Labour 15                   Left                                     Down 2 seats from exit polls
Shas 11                       Ultra-Religious                  Down 1
Bayit Yehudi - 11      Religious/Right                  Down 1
Meretz 6                     Left                                      Down 1
Hatenuah 6                 Left-Centre                         Down 1
Yehadut HaTorah 7   Ultra-Religious                  Up 1
Hadash 4                    Arab/Left                             Up 1
Raam-Taal 5              Arab/Left                             Up 1  
Balad 3                       Arab/Left                             Up 1
Kadima (Mofaz) 2     Centre                                  Up 2

With these new numbers, the "right wing bloc" as it is referred to by the Israeli press - which includes Likud, Bayit Yehudi and the two religious parties, Shas and Yehadut HaTorah sits at a total of 60 seats, which would not provide them with a sufficient number of Knesset members to form a government (61 would be required).  To form a government, Prime Minister Netanyahu will have to make compromises with at least some of the centre or left-centre parties to get them into a coalition government.  In doing so, Netanyahu will have some very interesting challenges.  He may choose to start by negotiating a deal with the number two party, Yesh Atid.  Assuming he could come to a deal with this party, the deal would probably be attractive to Tsipi Livni and HaTenuah as well.  That would put the three parties at 56.  They would then either need to add religious parties (who have 18 seats - between Shas and Yehadut HaTorah) or they would have to add the right wing Bayit Hayehudi (with 11).  Much of Lapid's campaign has focused on reducing the influence of the ultra-religious parties in Israel - ensuring that the ultra-religious are conscripted to the army, reducing the amount of money paid to Yeshivas.  So it is hard to see how Netanyahu will be able to build a government with both Yesh Atid and the religious parties.

If Netanyahu chooses to add Bennett's party (Habayit Hayehudi), there will also be significant hurdles.  While Habayit Hayehudi might go along with some form of universal conscription (they are a religious party but a party of "modern Orthodox" who serve in the army), Bennett is strongly opposed to some of Lapid's ideas with respect to the peace process.  If this type of coalition is arranged, it might lead to significant domestic policy changes but it is hard to see how a government that includes Bennett would make any meaningful changes to the policies of the current Israeli government with repect to the Palestinians.

So in either case, it will be tricky for Netanyahu, who will likely be required to include Yesh Atid plus either the ultra-religious parties or the more nationalist party, both of which have interests that conflict with those of Yesh Atid.

Netanyahu could aim for a broader coaltion with Lapid, Labour and even Meretz.  However, this seems quite unlikely.  Labour's leader Sheli Yacomovitch has attacked Netanyahu at every opportunity and has railed against the possibility of another Likud led government.  She has stated very clearly she would not join.  While this might be a wonderful bargaining tactic, it is hard to see how Labour would wind up in a goverment with Likud this time around.  Meretz is even further to the left.

One other option is that the left and left-centre bloc could try to form a coalition with the religious parties and take over the government.  T|his is what Labour leader Yacomovitch was suggesting last night that she would try to do.  However, she is sitting at only 15 seats.  Even if she added 18 ultra-religious seats, that would get her to 33.  Add Meretz and she has 39.  She could add Tsipi Livni and get up to 45.  She could get the support of the Arab parties and that would get her to 57.  Would Lapid want to join this type of government, which would rely heavily on including 18 ultra-religious Knesset members and 12 Arab members of the Knesset?  This seems extremely unlikely.  I would have to conclude that Labour is going to be part of the opposition unless it dramatically changes its rhetoric very soon.

So overall, it looks like a government led by Prime Minister Netanyahu, and moderated, perhaps significantly, by Yair Lapid.  We should see some signficant changes in direction.  If the government includes Shas and Yehadut HaTorah but not Habayit Hayehudi, we may see movement towards reopening peace negotiations with the Palestinians but not nearly as much domestic change as Lapid might have liked.  If the government includes Habayit Hayehudi but not the ultra-religious parties, we could see signficant domestic change but not necessarily any movement on Israeli-Palestinian issues.  Of course, coalition negotiations in Israel never cease to amaze, so we could see some very interesting surprises.  Prime Minister Netanyahu is very experienced in handling these negotiations and has managed to put together some very stable Israeli governments.  As he said in his speech last night, it is time for him to get to work and start negotiating.

The next few weeks - or even months of coalition building and horse trading will be fascinating.  We will only understand that real results and meaning of this election once we see the make up of the new coalition government.  In either case, it is almost certain that there will be some movement to the left on either domestic issues, foreign policy issues or perhaps even both.  

Postscript:  See my subsequent posts - but the "final results" have Bayit Hayehudi at 12 and Ra'am-Tal down to 4.  I have discussed the implications of this in my Jan 24 post - Election is Over: Coalition Talks Begin.

Israeli Elections 2013: Preview

With Israeli national elections approaching on January 22, 2013, I thought it was about time that I provided a bit of information and perspective on the coming elections.  It will be my first opportunity to vote in Israel, though I'm not writing this article as a partisan piece.  I thought I would look at trends and anticipated outcomes.

As many of you know, Israel is a parliamentary democracy with a 120 seat legislative assembly, the "Knesset."  Like in other similar systems (Canada, Britain, to name a couple), a party is required to cobble together a majority in order to govern.  A governing coalition requires more than 61 seats to hold the confidence of the Knesset.

The Knesset

The challenge in Israel, of course, is that each Israeli believes that he or she can and should run the country.  New political parties are constantly being formed, old ones disbanded and new coalitions arranged.  Things are very volatile, to put it mildly.

Following the last election in 2009, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu put together a very stable coalition (by Israeli historical standards).  The numbers ranged from 66 to 74 over the course of this term in office but the coalition was never really threatened.  The government was made up of a multi-party coalition which included the Likud party, led by Prime Minister Netanyahu, the Yisrael Beitenu party lead by Avigdor Lieberman (who has now been indicted), some religious and ultra-religious parties and the leftist Labour Party.  It is interesting to note that some of the most vociferous condemnation of the current government has come from the leader of the Labor Party, even though Labor was an integral part of the governing coaliton.

Prime Minister Netanyahu

For the current election, there have been some very interesting changes for some of the parties. While at this point, there seems to be little doubt that Prime Minister Netanyahu will be reelected, the big issue is what type of coalition he will put together and what policies that government will embrace.

The "Right Wing" Parties

The two major right wing or right centre parties are Likud and Yisrael Beitenu ("Israel, Our Home").  Founded by former Prime Minister Menachem Begin in 1973, Likud has been one of the two dominant Israeli political parties for more than 30 years.  Its membership includes members with a range of view points from those who support a negotiated two-state peace solution with the Palestinians to those who favour annexation of much, if not all, of the disputed territories (Judea and Semaria or the West Bank).  On its own in the last election, Likud won 27 seats.

Avigdor Lieberman

Yisrael Beitenu is a party led by Avigdor Lieberman, who was serving as Israel's Foreign Minister and Deputy Prime Minister until December 2012 at which time he was charged with fraud and breach of trust.  Yisrael Beitenu won 15 seats in the last election.  While characterized as a right wing nationalist party, Yisrael Beitenu favours a two-state solution including territory swaps with the Palestinians.  Lieberman has called for the Israeli government to demand "loyalty" from its Arab citizens and has also called for a reduction in the power of Israel's religious authorities.

Likud and Yisrael Beitenu have now merged and are running as one party for the current elections.  Most recent polls estimate that they will win anywhere from 32 to 37 seats.  The combined total will almost certainly be lower than the 42 that these two parties won in the 2009 election.

One of the big surprises of the campaign to date has been the newly named party Habayit Hayehudi (the Jewish Home).  Its leader Naftali Bennett, a youthful and successful entrepreneur oversaw a merger of the Jewish Home and National Union parties and won more than 60% of the combined leadership race.  The party has an avowedly right wing platform, favouring annexation of the disputed territories, even though Bennett himself lives in the wonderful city of...Ra'anana.  Bennett has used a mixture of facebook advertising, carefully produced videos and his own energetic appeal to build growing support.  While many might characterize Bennett's views as extremist, current polls have estimated that Bennett may win between 13 and 18 seats in the Knesset.

Naftali Bennett

 One other "right wing" party, Otzma L'Yisrael ("Strength for Israel) could also win anywhere from 0 to 4 seats.  This was a group that splintered off from the newly merged Bennett party.

Overall, the "right wing" parties, which are not characterized as "religious" are projected to win anywhere from 45 to 59 seats.  This is quite a variance and will have a tremendous impact on the type of government that is formed.  If the combined numbers are closer to 45, the group will almost certainly be forced to combine with some of the centrist parties to form a fairly broad coalition.  If the group is close to, or even over 60, it could combine with some of the religious parties and produce a very stable, very right wing government, politically and even economically.

The Religious Parties

Shas is an ultra-religious party dedicated to furthering the interests of observant Sephardic and Mizrachi Jews.  It has formed governments with the right and the left over the past 20 years - and has been willing to bend on some of its principles, as long as there is lots of money available for its constituents.  Several Shas Knesset Members have been convicted of offences including fraud, forgery and bribery.   One of those convicted, well known member, Aryeh Deri is now the number two candidate on the Shas list and will almost certainly be elected in the coming elections.  Polling numbers for Shas have been quite consistent.  Estimates range from 9 to 12 seats, with most polls at 10 or 11.

Aryeh Deri

United Torah Judaism, another ultra-religious party, is estimated to win between 5 and 6 seats.

So the ultra-religious block is expected to have somewhere between 14 and 18 seats, which would position it well to join a government in exchange for all kinds of concessions.

Throughout Israel's history, left wing and right wing governments have been prepared to make major concessions to this religious block to bolster their governments.  Some of the resulting policies have included exemptions from the army for Yeshiva students, exclusive legal jurisdiction for the religious over personal status matters including weddings and funerals and control of many other aspects of Israeli life, ranging from limitations on public transportation on Shabbat to laws prohibiting the sale of Hametz (leavened bread) on Pesach.   Of course the flip side is that at least some of these laws enjoy fairly widespread public support, even among non-Orthodox Jews.


The Centrist Parties

There are currently three centrist parties that are expected to win seats in the coming election - Kadima, Yesh Atid and Hatnuah.

Formed in 2005 by moderate Likud members, Kadima reached a high point of 29 seats in the 2006 elections, with a policy platform emphasizing efforts to reach a peace deal with the Palestinians.   In the 2009 election, the party won 28 seats under the leadership of Tsipi Livni.  Rather than join a coalition with Prime Minister Netanyahu, Livni opted to remain in opposition.  In 2012, Livni lost a leadership race to Shaul Mofaz.  Following Israel's history of politicians founding new parties, Livni left Kadima and set up her own party, arrogantly named "Hatnuah" - "the Movement."  The party's campaign has featured some fairly bizarre advertising slogans.  Tsipi Livni herself has been viewed as ineffective as an opposition leader.  Nevertheless, it looks like many of the Kadima supporters have deserted Mofaz and flocked to Livni.  The party's platform has emphasized peace, social justice, environmental protection and religious pluralism.  Current estimates suggest that Livni's party may win between 7 and 10 seats.

Tzipi Livni

The other centrist party expected to do well is the party led by well known Israeli media personality Yair Lapid named Yesh Atid ("There is a future").  Lapid's party's platform has included an emphasis on education, religious pluralism, an end to exemptions from military service for the ultra-religious, and efforts to change the Israeli political system.  Lapid's party seems to be running at 9 to 11 seats.

If these two parties, which should be natural allies, combine for between 16 and 21 seats, they could be part of a government and have substantial power.  Lapid has already suggested that he would like to be part of a Likud led government if Likud wins the election while Livni has been more circumspect.

Yair Lapid

The number of seats won by the centre may be the most significant factor in determining what type of government Israel has.  If the centre attracts some Likud supporters and helps limit the cumulative right wing block to less than 50 seats, it will be very important for Likud to include the centre in the government.  If the centrist parties are less successful, Likud may be able to form a government without them, relying only on the religious parties.




The Left

Though the Labor Party was one of Israel's two strongest parties and has been the governing party throughout much of Israel's history, it seems fairly clear that this has been a party on the decline over the past several years.  Perhaps Israel's new economic realities, with a shift over time to more of a capitalist economy have been instrumental in creating this result.  Or perhaps there has been disenchantment over Labor's role in participating in a staunchly right wing Likud coalition.  In any event, under its current leader, Shelly Yacimovich, the party has emphasized social justice issues rather than national security and has tried to position itself as the party most willing to tackle issues of widespread Israeli middle class decline and increasingly high levels of poverty.  Predictions have varied for the Labor Party, but most seem to estimate 16 to 21 seats.     

Over to the left of the Labor Party is Meretz, a party that touts itself as "Israel's Left."  Emphasizing human rights (especially in the area of sexual orientation), social justice, separation of religion and state, dismantling of most Israeli settlements, and humanism, the party is expected to win 3 to 5 seats.

If Labor and Meretz do well in the coming elections, they could have as many as 25 or 26 seats.  This would either be a considerable opposition block - or it could elect to try to form a national unity government though that seems unlikely.    Even if the political left and centre were to combine, the ceiling would probably be in the range of 40 to 45 seats.  Given current Israeli political realities, it seems quite unlikely that the left wing parties will play a significant role in the next government.

The Arab Parties

Israel currently has three Arab or Arab-Socialist parties in the Knesset.  UAL-Ta'al, Balad and Hadash.  They currently have 10 seats between the three of them.  The expectation is that they will be in a similar range following the coming election.  It is unlikely that they will form part of the next government, though it is theoretically possible that these parties could bolster a left-centre coalition.  Given the expected number of seats, it appears that even if the left and the centre combined with the Arab parties, they would still have less than 61 seats.

Israeli MK Ahmed Tibi

Finally, this type of survey article would not be complete without mentioning at least some of the "novelty parties" that are not expected to win seats.

There is the "Green Leaf Party" - I will leave it to you to figure out what they stand for...

How could I not mention the "Kulanu Haverim" ("We are all friends") party, whose members include follows of Rabbi Nachman of Breslev?



And finally - the "Pirate Party" whose members advocate the "freedom to copy" and promote the lifestyle of the piracy sector.

This list is not complete - there are many other parties running, including, for the first time, an Arab Zionist party (El Amal Lat'gir), led by Bedouin politician Aatef Karinaoui.  But time limitations keep me from making this blog article more comprehensive.

Green Leaf...

I will see if I have time to add some additional information between now and the election date.  I will want to be sure to research all of the issues thoroughly to make an informed decision.

For now, a couple of things seem fairly clear to me.  Prime Minister Netanyahu will almost certainly be the next Prime Minister.  Labor and Meretz will almost certainly be in the opposition along with the Arab parties.  The real issue is whether Netanyahu will lead a broad right-centre or right-centre-religious coalition or whether it will be a much narrower right-religious government.  Stay tuned and if you are in Israel and you are eligible - make sure to vote!!

Canada and Israel Issues: Conservative Support and the National Post

Canada's National Post printed two interesting articles about Israel on Saturday.  I had the chance to review them on Sunday on my flight back.  Both have certainly generated some online controversy.  At the same time, both illustrate a certain pro-Israel viewpoint that is increasingly rare in much of the rest of the world.

One article by Kathryn Blaze Carlson, "No Better Friend" describes the close nature of the relationship between Canada's current Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.  The article looks at Prime Minister Harper's motivation for standing by Israel in difficult situations, even in the face of withering criticism from many other countries.  It is certainly true, especially here in Israel, that all of the policies of Prime Minister Netanyahu are not synonomous with Israel and Israel's interests.  In other words, there is plenty of room for Israel to have good friends who do not necessarily agree with all of the policies of any particular Israeli administration.

However, the article discusses the ideas, suggested by some critics of the Conservatives, that Canada used to be viewed as an "honest broker" by much of the Arab world.  But these days, as the world is watching many Arab countries shift towards Islamicization, peace loving western democracies cannot be "honest brokers."  The  article suggests that Prime Minister Harper is one of the few western leaders to truly recognize the importance of the struggle that Israel faces, as a democratic country situated in sea of repressive, anti-democratic regimes.  The conclusion is that Prime Minister Harper and the current Conservative government support Israel as a matter of principle not as part of quest to win a handful of Canadian electoral ridings that happen to have large Jewish populations.  Given the tireless efforts of Conservative Minister Jason Kenney in supporting Israel but also in fighting anti-Semitism worldwide, it is clear that the current Conservative government has been a tremendous ally for Canadian Jews and for Jews everywhere around the world.  This has been the case even in the face of an overwhelmingly hostile world.  Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird has also demonstrated recently that Canada will continue to support Israel even when it is unpopular to do so.


The National Post also printed an article by Conrad Black, "A Better Two State Solution" proposing what would effectively be an unilateral Israeli withdrawal from certain territories, a unilateral demarcation of acceptable borders and an extremely aggressive military response to the types of rocket attacks that Israel recently faced and which it would likely face from other areas if it were to cede certain territories.  Yet the policy is probably close to one which was favoured by former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and may not be that far removed from current Prime Minesterial candidate Avigdor Lieberman.   There is little doubt that many Israelis would prefer a negotiated long term settlement with a neighbour that would be interested in a truly peaceful resolution. But the indications over the recent weeks from a range of Palestinian leaders, whether Khaled Meshal of Hamas or Mahmood Abbas of the Palestinian Authority are that the only real long term policy on the part of the Palestinians is a long term commitment to the destruction of Israel.  This concern is buttressed by the unsettling events over that past few years that have been occurring in Syria, Egypt, Iran and Turkey, among others, all of which suggest that Israel is facing an increasingly hostile existential threat.  Conrad Black's proposal may not lead to short or even long term peace.  But Israel may be pushed towards unilateral disengagement as a means of countering unilateral Palestinian initiatives.  Israel could recognize a Palestinian State within borders that Israel deems acceptable, and under conditions that Israel deems acceptable if these matters cannot be properly addressed through negotiation.

It is unclear which Israeli Prime Ministerial candidate, if any, would be best suited to address these matters though it seems clear to a majority of the Israeli electorate, according to recent Israeli news reports, that Prime Minister Netanyahu will win the coming election quite handily.  We can only hope that the winds will change and there will be movement from all sides toward a much peaceful future.  Unfortunately, recent events do not suggest that there is currently a basis for optimism.

The U.S. Election, Obama, Netanyahu and Israel

So after four years of run-up, the U.S. election came and went yesterday.  Although the electoral college system is quirky and flawed, the U.S. still ranks among a fairly small number of truly democratic nations that hold properly democratic elections and transfer power peacefully.  Election night is a great evening (or morning) of television drama and can be quite suspenseful some years.  While things were uncertain at some points last night, there was definitely an early sense that it was going to be President Obama's night, even while Ohio and Florida remained unpredictable.  By the end of the night, Governor Romney gracefully accepted that the American people had spoken and lauded the American democratic system. 

Israel shares that great democratic tradition with the U.S. and other distinguished company and will go to the polls in January 22, 2013, although as of the writing of this blog entry it appears that the political landscape in Israel is not likely to change any more dramatically than the U.S. changed as a result of its 2012 election.

The whole topic of Israel and the Middle East attracted quite a bit of interest during this U.S. campaign., probably more so than many previous campaigns.  Like in the case with many other issues in this U.S. election, particularly social issues, people's views were very polarized.  There were those, like vice Presidential candidate Ryan and Governor Romney himself, trying to portray President Obama as someone who had "thrown Israel under the bus."  On the other side, there were those like former World Jewish Congress Chair Edgar Bronfman, who staunchly defended President Obama as a great friend of Israel.  Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu seemed to have gotten himself involved in the campaign in a very partisan and unprecedented fashion and this may not have been such a great tactic for ongoing Israeli-U.S. relations even though it might assist Prime Minister Netanyahu in his dealings with his domestic constituency.

In looking at President Obama's record in his first term, it does seem odd and uncomfortable, to say the least, that the President would fly to the Middle East and visit Egypt - in a very apologetic way - and not find the time to visit Israel. While I appreciate that President Obama visited Israel before the 2008 election (and it is fair to say that his trip was better planned and more graceful than Romney's visit this year), he should have found the time to visit Israel at some point during his first term.  Hopefully, he will visit soon.

It was also unhelpful, to say the least, to lay all of the blame for the failed peace negotiations on Israel by insisting that the first step that must be taken, as a precondition for any negotiation is a building freeze.  President Obama realized this and backtracked somewhat.  But his call for a return to 1967 borders also seemed to be handled in a deliberately provocative way even though he added "with mutually agreeable land swaps" to the phrasing.  At the time time, Prime Minister Netanyahu's response was predictably excessive and seemed intended to further the rift with the U.S. President.  Despite all of this, most analysts who are genuinely interested in a peaceful solution recognize that the eventual result will have to be a two state solution with mutually agreeable land swaps.  This is even a solution that the present Israeli government has endorsed - and certainly the kind of solution that former President Bill Clinton pushed so hard to achieve, while remaining extremely popular in Israel.

Another source of tension between Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Obama has been the issue of Iran.  President Obama has overseen a series of very significant sanctions imposed on Iran in an effort to cease the Iranian nuclear program.  Yet despite these sanctions, it is far from clear that the sanctions will actually result in Iran dismantling its program.  So it does seem reasonable for Prime Minister Netanyahu, as he proposed at the U.N. to ask that the world draw a "red line" beyond which other means may become necessary if Iran continues to develop a nuclear program.  Neither President Obama nor Governor Romney were willing to stake out a "red-line" position and in the third U.S. debate, their positions on this issue sounded very similar if not identical.  It may well be naive, given Iran's history, to assume that Iran will concede its position as a result of the sanctions or that this plan of action will actually stop Iran from producing nuclear weapons.  But it is unclear whether any U.S. president would support Israel in conducting a pre-emptive attack at this time.

It may well be the the source of tension is also related to a personality clash between Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Obama or a perception of policy direction rather than actual policies that have been implemented.  In fact, the level of strategic, military and economic cooperation between Israel and the United States is it one of its highest points ever and the two countries remain very close allies and friends.

In Israel, the perception of antipathy towards Israel by President Obama apparently translated into a voting trend by absentee American voters living in Israel choosing to vote for Governor Romney by a margin as high as 85% to 15%.  Of course, the explanation that has been suggested by some is that a significantly high percentage of American expatriates living in Israel are observant Orthodox Jews who might also share some of the social policy preferences of the Republican party and are likely to vote for "right wing" parties in Israel.  I am fairly confident that if one were to poll Conservative (Masorti) and Reform American Jews living in Israel, the results would be quite different.

On the other hand, President Obama apparently carried close to 70% of the Jewish vote in the United States itself.  While some suggest that this is because many American Jews are apathetic about Israel, I don't think this is the real explanation.  American Jews tend to share many policy preferences on a whole range of social issues with the Democrats rather than the Republicans (ranging from abortion and gun control to who might be the most suitable candidate for appointment to the Supreme Court).  Further, while many of these American Jews are staunchly supportive of Israel, that is not necessarily synonymous with being staunchly supportive of all of Prime Minister Netanyahu's policies.  In fact, many very committed Israelis have views about the peace process and other matters that are diametrically opposed to those of Israel's current Prime Minister.  Overall, most American Jews probably prefer Edgar Bronfman's viewpoint that President Obama is, and will continue to be a strong friend of Israel rather than the rhetoric that was coming from the likes of Sheldon Adelson.

Even though President Obama has vowed to continue the strong relationship between Israel and the United States, there are certainly areas of concern.  The tension over Iran's nuclear program will heat up as Iran draws closer to its goals.  The continuing absence of a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians is also a sore spot and one that is potentially explosive.  And the personal tension between President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu has probably been exacerbated after Netanyahu's failed efforts to bolster Governor Romney's campaign.
 
The tension even increase further if President Obama chooses to become as involved in the Israeli election as Prime Minister Netanyahu was in the American election.

Yet, it seems to me that with all of this said, the best thing that President Obama could do in the area of Mideast policy, would be to plan a visit to Israel, Jordan and the area governed by the Palestinian Authority at a fairly early stage in his second term.  With a short but meaningful visit, President Obama could send a confidence boosting message to the Israeli public and to the Palestinians that would probably help him regain some of the trust he would need to oversee a peace deal successfully. 








 

Israel, the U.S. and Iran - Rosh Hashanah 5773

As Jews around the world prepare to celebrate Rosh Hashanah  - the Jewish New Year of 5773, it is probably fair to say that many of us have significant concerns about the coming year and in particular the situation that Israel is currently facing.

Events throughout the region over the past year have demonstrated yet again that Israel resides in a very unstable and dangerous neighbourhood.  The emergence of an Islamic government in Egypt, with its volatile and often hostile rhetoric has led to a heightened level of security on Israel’s southern border and accompanying sense of deep concern.

Events  unfolding in Libya, Syria, Afghanistan and other parts of the Middle East have all reinforced the idea that Israel really is an island of democracy and western values in a sea of dark, hostile regimes.  As Caroline Glick recently suggested in the Jerusalem Post, many liberals held the optimistic view that these regimes would be “liberated” and would choose freedom in their new transformed governing structures.  But this hope has not turned to reality.  In fact, even Turkey, a country that once was the example of a true Muslim democracy, seems headed in the other direction.  For all the talk of an “Arab Spring” in Egypt, there is no sign that Egypt will be emerging from winter weather any time soon even though summer and early fall temperatures may regularly pass 40 C.

Of course, above all else, the Israeli government, the Israeli press and much of the world media have been consumed with the ongoing threat posed by Iran and the best way for Israel to address it.

There is no easy solution here.  Prime Minister Netanyahu has been pushing for a “red line” threat to be presented by the world to Iran, beyond which the world community would take military action to prevent Iran from realizing its nuclear ambitions. 

On the one hand, Israel has every reason to be concerned.  Iranian leader Ahmadinejad has vowed to destroy Israel and has repeatedly called for its elimination.  He has called Israel “a cancer” on the body of the world that needs to be removed.  Iran has certainly shown in the past that it is not averse to suicidal missions that could result in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of its citizens if this is viewed as justifiable.  Should Israel simply dismiss his rhetoric as that of a madman?  This could be a very dangerous miscalculation, as history has shown.  This is a very real, existential issue for Israel.

On the other hand, it is not clear that Israel would be able to carry out a successful attack on all of Iran’s nuclear facilities at this time, even with U.S. help, if such help was forthcoming.  This does not appear to be the same type of situation that Israel faced in dealing with Iraq’s nuclear reactor in Osirak, Iraq in 1981 or the alleged attack by Israel on the Syrian nuclear project in September 2007.  Iran supposedly has many different sites, spread out throughout the country and hidden deep below the ground.  These sites have purportedly been designed to repel traditional air attacks.

Moreover, if Israel were successful, it is far from clear that such success would translate into a significant delay in Iran’s nuclear capabilities.  Perhaps Israel would gain a year or two or more, but Iran might also redouble its efforts with increased aid from sympathetic countries.  As well, Israel could face massive reprisal attacks from a range of sources.  Israel had a very difficult time defending itself from rocket attacks in the 2006 war with Lebanon.  This time around, the attacks could be far more severe.   

Radio talk shows have filled the airwaves in Israel with discussions of possible consequences.  One radio show I was listening to was hosting former Israeli generals to discuss competing estimates of potential Israeli casualties in the event of an attack on Iran.  The estimates ranged from 300-400 Israelis killed in a “highly successful attack and defence strategy” to tens of thousands in a less successful operation.

Another radio show appealed to the black humour of the Israeli public which is often necessary for those of us living here.  Callers were asked to come up with an appropriate code name for the eventual military operation to be undertaken.  This show was a few months ago, just after the holiday of Purim (which is said to have taken place in ancient Persia (i.e. Iran).  Callers were suggesting names like “Operation Avenge Esther,” “Operation Crush the Hamentaschen” or “Operation Ra’ashan” (a noise maker used on Purim to blot out the name of the evil villain of the story, Haman).  Even though the callers were trying to be humourous, one could still sense the readily apparent level of unease.

More recently, much has been made of the apparent rift between Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and U.S. President Obama, particularly over the very issue of whether to proceed with an attack on Iran.  Many have suggested that Netanyahu is openly interfering with the current U.S. election campaign by attempting to call attention to President Obama’s failure to give Israel a green light (at least publicly) to proceed with an operation against Iran.  Indeed, Netanyahu often seems to be echoing the sentiments of Republican candidate Mitt Romney who claimed that President Obama has “thrown Israel under the bus.”

But President Obama’s record  vis a vis Israel is not nearly as negative as one might believe from listening to the words of Prime Minister Netanyahu or Presidential candidate Mitt Romney.  In many respects, U.S.-Israeli cooperation in military, economic and technological spheres is the strongest it has ever been.   While it is somewhat disconcerting that President Obama has not visited Israel during his first term in office (even while visiting Egypt), it is far from clear that the U.S. President must be seen as supporting every policy of the current Israeli Prime Minister to be viewed as a close friend and ally.  In fact, quite a number of Israelis do not agree with many of Prime Minister Netanyahu’s policies.  Many Israelis feel that Prime Minister Netanyahu has gone out of his way to try embarrass President Obama and to push for the election of Romney.

While some Israelis might accept Prime Minister Netanyahu’s assessment of President Obama’s views of Israel, it appears that American Jews are remaining supportive of President Obama.  According to a Gallup poll released this week, some 70% of American Jews are expected to vote for President Obama in the upcoming elections.  While this may signify the fact that American Jews overwhelmingly support more liberal positions on a range of social issues – and these are the issues that dominate an American presidential election campaign, it may also indicate that American Jews still believe that Obama will be fine for Israel in the long run.  Many Israelis (and American Jews) would count Democratic President Bill Clinton as one of the best friends that Israel ever had in the White House.  On the other hand, Republican President Ronald Reagan was a tremendous friend of the Saudi Arabian regime, perhaps more so than with Israel.  It is far from clear that President Bush’s policies (either one of the two presidents) left Israel in a safer, more secure or more stable situation in the Middle East. 

Hopefully, despite all of the posturing by Prime Minister Netanyahu, the Israeli-U.S. relationship will continue to be a close, strategic relationship between friends, irrespective of who wins the White House in November.  And hopefully, these friends will continue to work together on an urgent basis to come up with the best way of preventing Iran from fulfilling its nuclear ambitions.  It may well be that military leaders have a detailed plan for a pending attack that will meet all of its objectives successfully.  Or perhaps, there will be other ways to achieve this result.

That’s a lot to hope for at Rosh Hashanah, along with our hopes for peace throughout the Middle East and the rest of the world.  But I do believe that we have to be optimistic, even while being realistic and being prepared for a whole range of possible scenarios. 

A happy and healthy New Year to all.  Shana Tova.