The collapse of the short-lived supermajority who presided over Israel’s ruling coalition since May has given critics of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu the best couple of days they’ve had in years. But anyone who expects this setback to change the political equation in which Netanyahu is not only an overwhelming favorite to win re-election but to stay in power for years to come doesn’t understand what has happened.
The end of the coalition is a disappointment for those friends of Israel who hoped the supermajority could help create some much-needed fundamental changes. But though the failure is not something that will burnish Netanyahu’s reputation, it will do far more damage to his junior partner Kadima and its leader Shaul Mofaz than it will to the prime minister or his Likud. At the end of the day, Netanyahu can be said to have his reputation dented a bit, but he remains on top of Israeli politics with no credible rival for the post of prime minister in sight.
Netanyahu was hailed as the “king” of Israeli politics for the adroit maneuver by which he enticed the Kadima party into his tent and for giving very little in return for padding his majority to more than 90 members of the 120-seat Knesset. The coalition could have achieved great things, including a reform of Israel’s draft laws that could have required the ultra-Orthodox and even Arabs to do national service along with the rest of the country. Even more importantly, it could have worked on election reform proposals that might have ended the tyranny of small parties and taken the nation to a more rational and stable model. But perhaps it was too much to expect Israeli politicians, especially those in Kadima, a feckless assembly of the worst opportunists in Israel, to behave rationally, let alone courageously and the experiment has ended.
But it should be remembered that Netanyahu already had a stable and strong governing majority even before the Kadima deal. Some of his critics (a group that included President Obama) hoped that he would not last long in office after his February 2009 election victory. But in contrast to his first unsuccessful term as prime minister in the 1990s, Netanyahu would not make the same mistakes this time. He not only kept his coalition together but gained rather than lost popularity by standing up to U.S. pressure. The end of the peace process destroyed Israel’s left-wing parties and the Likud’s smart stewardship of Israel’s growing economy has also retained the confidence of the country despite the attention given to protesters.
Mofaz has criticized Netanyahu for proposing a gradual move towards drafting the ultra-Orthodox rather than a plan that would have done so more quickly. But, as Haaretz’s Yossi Verter reports, Mofaz’s decision to bolt the government probably had more to do with his worry that former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert (who was acquitted on corruption charges last week) was thinking about getting back into politics. Netanyahu is widely accused of making an astute political calculation that he was better off retaining an alliance with the ultra-Orthodox parties rather than Kadima. This may be true because, like everyone else in Israel, Netanyahu knows that after the dust has settled after the next election (which may take place early next year), Kadima will be history, but the Orthodox will still be standing.
But even those who sympathize and agree with the majority of Israelis who bitterly resent Haredi draft-dodging must concede this is not a problem that can be solved overnight. As soon became apparent once the possibility of draft reform came in sight this year, the Israel Defense Forces are unprepared for a huge influx of reluctant ultra-Orthodox recruits. It is far more important that the Haredim who are currently allowed to be unemployed and undrafted Torah scholars (or at least pretending to be scholars) are pressured or guided to enter Israel’s economy than its army. Netanyahu’s proposal that Mofaz has rejected might have fallen short of expectations but it was a reasonable start that the prime minister will have no trouble defending when he faces the voters.
The end of the coalition will likely hasten the exit of Kadima from the Knesset at the next election where it will be replaced by a revived though still weak Labor Party as the principal opposition to Netanyahu. Mofaz and Olmert will join Tzippi Livni, another former Kadima leader, may continue to try to maneuver, but they are destined to wind up on the dustheap of Israeli politics. Other, smaller parties will fill the place that Kadima thought to occupy in Israel’s center. But the one thing that will not change is Netanyahu’s ascendancy. For all of his problems and occasional missteps, his position on the peace process and security issues represents the consensus of the Israeli people. Though American liberals and the Obama administration may long for him to be replaced, Netanyahu is likely to remain prime minister throughout the term of the next American president.
Does LIkud increase its majority?
I hope you're just asking a simple question and I haven't misunderstood… But there have been no new elections, which is the only way for a party to get larger. Just Likud's coalition got smaller — more beholden to the other parties in the coalition (although honestly, with a partner like Kadima which could leave at any minute, I don't know how much this really changes anything). As for next tme around, peole are sure Kadima will get smaller — not sure about projections for Likud. And this article oddly didn't say. But I'm sure you can find that somewhere on the Internet.
Bibi welched on replacement of the Tal law by hobbling it with an incrementalism that was asymptotic in ever approaching a meaningful absorption of the ultra-Orthodox Hershele Ostropoliers into the wider Israeli society. Choosing Shas over Kadima may seem like a no-brainer but down the road Leiberman and Yisrael Beitenu might start playing their own bank shots against boss Bibi. This thing is still in progress.
Besht2003, your comment seems to reinforce the opinion of those who suspect that the objections to the Tal law had NOTHING to do with personnel needs of the IDF, or sharing the burden of military service, or any of the other justifications given, and EVERYTHING to do with resentment of the mere fact that Haredim exist and a determination to assimilate them into the secular, immoral and sexually promiscuous lifestyle that Israel's Histradut founders envisioned. As witness also the hostility to the National religious despite their disproportionate contributions to the IDF.
The address for your objections is Leiberman not this old pooch at this point, as he will be the tip of the spear for secular nationalist resentment. That said there are four immediate questions suggested: n nOne is whether the IDF can use the socially and vocationally hobbled religious separatists given their deep commitment to (state supported) parochialism and the intense difficulty of assimilating them (against their will) in universal military training and the unproven benefits of compulsory civilian national service. n nSecond, whether any segment of any society can claim social benefits of a vigorous technological society through social welfare payments while refusing to actively participate in its maintenance because its members eat pork, play paddle ball and enjoy a western consumer (promiscuous) lifestyle the Histadrut founders didn't forsee. The Israel of today has come a long way from the Israel of 1967-1973 let alone the Yishuv-1948. n n(There is a tendency to conflate general secularist radicalism of, say, Ha Shomer Hatziir cira 1930 and anti-traditionalist mores with the actual Western style hedonism of a later epoch–moreover we underestimate the trickiness of assessing the depth, consistency, and dysfunctionalities of promiscuity across secular behaviors latitudinally and through the life course of individuals longitudinally–and there is also the issue of sub-rosa "deviancy" or "acting out" in ultra-orthodox communities ). n nThird, whether any Jew serves any religious model by being ignorant of, say mathematics, or science, drifting ad hoc into modernity by application of top-down rabbinic dicta to the day-by-day challenges of acquiring the technological fruits of the enlightenment. n nFour, whether, given rising non-participation rates in the IDF of secular men and the consistent differential n participation of women, the crucial requirement of the IDF for a rapid-mobilization reserve (of those who have served) can be squared with the unsuitability of a given percentage of those subject to the draft year by year for useful service. n nThat said, I haven't read the Tal decision so don't myself know how the Supreme Cout came up with a "constitutional" objection to the original Knesset law to begin with. And I don't know that Lieberman and Yisrael Bietenu themselves in challenging the exemptions have ANY objections AT ALL to the participation of the nationalist camp post-Gush Emuniim officer cohort in the IDF. I don't myself know their take on the most recent development: the internal spiritual purification of the national religious participants directly confronting the ethos of a military chain of command with rabbinic decisions carving out exemptions to military discipline as set by the civilian political class: the refusal to listen to women singers, the refusal to participate in evacuation of outposts etc.
I don't know enough to counter besht's asymptotc comment (good use of asymptotic), but what needs to change among the kharedim is psychological. They need to get more comfortable with the idea incrementally (and it's happening a little without khiloni pushing). It's now been at least three generations of people raised on welfare. And they need to be weaned off, physcally and psychologically. So this wold be a stepping stone for a later government to change things so they're not asymptotic. Too fast and you'll have civil (I hope!) disobedience, peole proudly being arrested in numbers Israel can't sustain, and perhaps violence. None of this is to agree with the kharedim, but it's the reality created by a socialist state that allows people to live off of welfare.
It's a conundrum. Because the welfare model is not ultimately sustainable and yet it becomes more prevalent throughout western societies as a whole–witness the explosion of welfare benefits in the United States to those definitely not wearing side locks. But there is something off-putting to the assertion that the state wishes to snatch the souls of the kharadiim and destroy them even as the state's checks are cashed.
I'm a traditional American Jew (they call them Orthodox here) with kharedi uncle and cousins sprinkled throughout Israel. Some things I love about them some things I hate (not them personally) and everything in between. But you have the same thing here with people who hate America and White people who still take welfare checks, food stamps, etc. The thing to fix it is to get the government out of the charity game. It will encourage a return to the normal society that all us traditional Jews engaged in before the move to Israel. There are many historical reasons for how the community in Israel got shaped the way it is today, that I could go into at length, but what's important is the future as the kharedi way of life becomes more and mre untenable both for internal and eternal reasons. If you hate them you would almost wish they would continue this way, but I love them as Jews and know they can do better and live better Jewish lives.
As to the article, if Bibi is firmly entrenched on top, isn't it time to call him the middle and Kadima to the left and Yisrael Beiteinu to the right?
“Asymptotic” or not, Netanyahu had the guts to tackle this issue. Apparently for many, there was no visible light at the end of the tunnel, for others, the light if present was gray. Regardless, Netanyahu was willing to go a long way to address the concerns of Mofaz and his constituency because this issue crossed party lines. The difference between Labor and Likud is not whether reform was necessary, but whether it was of such an overriding priority as to throw unwilling communities into the pool, SINK OR SWIM”. Of course that is ludicrous and Mofaz should lose support amongst fair minded Israelis who fairly view Mofaz as a ruthless politician who was simply trying to game the Prime Minister in order to raise his own profile and stature. Even more so, pulling off this stunt when Israel could face attack with chemical or biological weapons any moment, show a remarkable lack of insight which for a military man, Mofaz, is tatamount to treason.That lame quality of mentality, is precisely what we expect from Livni or Olmert, so Mofaz, I agree should be finished.
Bibi was smart. He can now go to The Haredim and try to find a compromise which would both benefit the state and benefit the communities. For instance, weaning Haredim off of welfare and into professions and skills which will be compatible with their lifestyles, over time.
I think one needs to clearly acknowledge and differentiate amongst the Haredim those who are enemies of the state, like Neturei Karta. Obviously, we do neither need nor want them to serve in The IDF. They should be given no benefit, on the contrary, since they are the local representatives of Israel’s sworn enemies, they should be sued for murder. Let them be The P.L.O.: Permanant Latrine Orderlies.
If PM Netayahu wishes to keep a supermajority at this time, maybe he should consider bringing in some of the parties to Likud’s right. That would be poetic justice for one proven jackass, named moofaz.
"I think one needs to clearly acknowledge and differentiate amongst the Haredim those who are enemies of the state, like Neturei Karta. Obviously, we do neither need nor want them to serve in The IDF. They should be given no benefit, on the contrary, since they are the local representatives of Israel's sworn enemies, they should be sued for murder." nAgreed. But I am also told that for all the noise they make, it is only a small part of the Neturei Karta who are involved working with Israel's enemies, demonstrating against the state for existing, etc. The rest just consider the state irrelevavent, and go about trying to live their lives, even though the noisy minority get a lot of publicity by committing their chillul Hashem. n nAll this came as a revelation to me, but comes from an apolitical young Kollel mon in Yerushlayim whom I consider highly reliable.
It wasn't about gradual vs. sudden change, but about the age of draft and over draft deferment. Changing the law to require drafting at age 26 is meaningless in a sector where the majority will marry and have children by their early twenties (and dodge the draft through the married-with-children exemption). Not to mention the fact that the law needs to apply equally to all sectors (which is why the Supreme Court shot it down in the first place). n nYou calling Mofaz an opportunist clashes with the fact that he left the coalition. Isn't there more opportunity to be found by staying in the coalition? Mofaz left because he thinks that standing on principle is what will help him in the election.
So, Ari, what is being proposed to allow Charedim to serve without forcing them into chillul Shabbos (I am not including, of course, situtations of genuine, as opposed to manufactured, military necessity of other cases of danger to life), eating non-kosher food or food of questionable kashrut, and forcing them into situations of sexual immorality? Is it about equal service, or is it about showing the Charedim who's boss, or better yet, getting them to come out of what some consider the 17th century? I have read that the Chazon Ish was willing to declare military service a religious obligation back in 1948, provided that religious men would not be serving in co-ed units, but Ben Gurion turned him down.
In practical terms absorbing charadiim per se is a headache the IDF is probably not eager to implement–but. again, those definitions of what constitutes true kashrut or sexual impropriety start getting elastic and Israel cannot ab initio exclude from service what might end up to be an unsustainable class of objectors. If objections to sexual immorality follow Chazon Ish prohibitions to being in the same room with an uncovered woman and a significant portion of religious youth generally claim this as their standard of modesty conflict in resolving manpower and equity needs becomes unavoidable. Enforcing separation of the sexes in practical terms will not be accepted in a modern IDF–de facto it becomes a policy of relegating women "to the back of the bus"–but otoh there is fundamental issue of hashkafot–and objecting to a non-contact standard of social interaction doesn't end the discussion on social relations within the IDF. n nBut this is all complicatedby the state monetary welfare subventions to the ultra-orthodox.
"but. again, those definitions of what constitutes true kashrut or sexual impropriety start getting elastic " – particularly when placed in the hands of those who do not believe in kashrut, shabbat, or tzniut to begin with.
but this then refers back to the fundamental contradiction of hashkafot–and the fact that the IDF is founded as a sole monopoly of state force in what is a secular state and yet Israel is not just a secular state and so, for example, Shas politicking on behalf of religious exemption is not exceptional. And yet, for all that, Zahal has to be able to function. These issues did not seem to come up in Zahal when I was there in 1978-1980; the guy from the religious units I served with was integrated with us in the field. I didn't sense a sense dissatisfaction with accommodations for prayer or the norms of kashrut and I for one didn't see wanton immorality and the guy, a married man, didn't object to the presence of women. n nBut we were in the field and a small unit and generally women were visitors. I didn't see wanton immorality or lack of modesty. And my stay in Israel was decades ago. Maybe times have changed on both sides but a policy of forcing women to, say, always wear long sleeves and pants is going to face objection. Again, are gals in the IDF wearing bikinis in the presence of men? Are there make-out parties with booze? This old pooch has no idea what the soldiers in the central rear bases are doing, except for the periodic news reports of officers engaged in sexual coercion. Oh, hello Mr. President.