peacefare.net

Netanyahu redux

The Wilson Center held a panel discussion April 11 analyzing the Israeli elections, with David Horovitz, Founding Editor of The Times of Israel, Natan Sachs, Director of the Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution, Dana Weiss Chief Political Analyst, and David Halbfinger, Jerusalem Bureau Chief at The New York Times.

Horovitz opines that it might seem the elections were to a large extent a referendum on Netanyahu and that the public wants more of him. But it is more complex than that. The election was a referendum on Netanyahu’s leadership. Voters were looking at Netanyahu as the world leader who kept Israel safe in a toxic and unpredictable region for the past decade. Israelis are not convinced they need to change their leadership in the current hostile environment. Netanyahu is viewed as successful in confronting Iran as it seeks nuclear weapons. He also succeeded in painting the Blue and White alliance, including three chiefs of staff (among them his own former defense minister) as weak leftists who won’t be able to keep the country safe.

Horovitz suggests the interesting thing to focus on after the elections is what Netanyahu will do vis-vis the Palestinians and the corruption allegations against him. He has said will annex all the settlements in the West Bank, where he will apply Israeli laws. Even more important is how Netanyahu will fight off his indictment, using the Knesset to change the process and evade prosecution.

Sachs points out that since 1977, the first time the Likud party came to power in Israel, there have been fourteen elections, ten of which Likud has won. There is a structural advantage to the right wing. The majority of Israelis are right wing, with a small number (around 16%) calling themselves left wing. The left lost credibility among the Israeli voters after 2000 when Israel withdrew from Gaza and the second Intifada broke out. Israelis are pessimistic and skeptical of the possibility of reaching peace any time soon with the Palestinians.

Weiss stated Netanyahu did whatever it takes to win the election. He orchestrated the campaign by himself and a few young media experts. Elections were supposed to take place last November, but Netanyahu held them in April so that he would be strengthened in efforts to evade being indicted and to get immunity. Today, left and right are not about the conflict, it is about the nature of Israel. It is unclear if it will stay democratic and bound to the rule of law. The Blue and White wants to feel more Israeli than Jewish, seeking to keep Israel a democracy and the rule of law consistent. Netanyahu wants the opposite.

Halbfinger suggested that Netanyahu sold the electorate stability as well as economic and military leadership. He demonized his opponents. The fight over the Supreme Court and the judiciary is not personal to Netanyahu. There is a belief on the right that the Supreme Court in Israel, which is very liberal, has been overreaching. The right believes it needs to be brought back under control. For Halbfinger this is brewing into a constitutional crisis in a country that has no constitution.