Aharon Nathan, 24th Nov 2013
Sunday 24 November 2013
Isaac Herzog, Labour's new leader
On 24 Dec 2004, nine years ago when the two Labour/Avoda young stars Isaac
Herzog and Ophir Pines-Paz came top of their Party’s primaries I despatched an
immediate fax to them to which they responded politely but of course did
nothing about it. If they followed my realistic assessment then one of them
would have been our prime minister today heading a moderate government at peace
with our neighbour the State of Palestine and ruling a country at peace with
itself.
Aharon Nathan, 24th Nov 2013
Aharon Nathan, 24th Nov 2013
Tuesday 15 October 2013
Rouhani - First respect him and then suspect him.
1)
We need to understand the new direction of the West in confronting their international problems in the wake of the
failures in Afghanistan and Iraq followed by the debacles in Libya and Syria. We, on our part have to face
a different future not keep living in the past when our cards were
more powerful in influencing the policies
of the West in the Middle East. Then our
interests were almost identical with those of the Americans and we sang from the same hymn sheet. Times
have changed and we need to adapt to the new situation.
2)
Nothing can illustrate our lack of understanding better than the behaviour of
our government in the United Nations. We
are undermining our friends and losing
their trust rather than bolstering their stand in the renewed cold war irrupting
in Europe and the Pacific. To leave the UN Assembly
when Rouhani delivered his address, was a mistake of the first degree. Yaeer Lapid's public chiding of Netanyahu was mild. Dany Danon, another Minister, declaring that he would ensure the failure of our negotiations
with the Palestinians was appalling. Our Government looks like it lacks cohesion and clear direction which is harming
our future standing in the region and confusing our supporters. We should stop
self congratulatory rhetoric which is becoming too much of a recurrent theme.
3)
We insulted the Iranian people instead of exploiting Rouhani’s new approach
slanting it to serve our purpose. We denied him the chance to address us publically.
Respect, Dignity and Face are very important in the East. Fight an oriental if it
suits you but don’t insult him showing him disrespect. Diplomacy is a make-belief art
and a game. We can play it to exploit the cracks appearing in our enemies' change of
tone and try to widen it. We should have shown respect towards Rouhani.
Sitting to listen carefully and respectfully to him could have given us a better platform
to appeal and address the Iranian People over his head. Instead we appeared to spoil
the delicate game that Obama believed he was playing as much on our behalf as on the
Americans'.
4)
Rouhani was more crafty than Netanyahu. He appealed to the Jewish people over
the head of Israel's
Government. He was exploiting the very approach that should have been taken by Israel. The Yom Kippur War was
primarily a political failure anchored in a mistaken military assessment of our enemies. Our
military might is again breeding
arrogance and blinding our people. We
need to grasp that things are changing in the West whose governments are under
great pressure from their anti Israel public and that unfortunately includes
even Germany recently despite the
unwavering support by Angela Merkel. Netanyahu should have learned the lesson
when President Hollande complained at the time that his joint visit to Toulouse'
Synagogue was exploited by Netanyahu for
the latter's home election campaign. And let us not forget the off the recorded
whisper between Obama and Sarcosi voicing their exasperation at Netanyahu's
tactics.
6) President Obama might not be the weak president that some commentators in our media in Israel
portray him to be. It is only that he realises that America
is economically too weak to afford itself wars abroad following Afghanistan and Iraq. But he is still the elected President
of the most powerful country in the world today. Netanyahu has to understand
that. The thrust of Obama's stated address to the United
Nations is two prong. Settling the Israeli/Palestinian issue and resolving the
Iranian nuclear impasse. These are the two places where world leaders'
attention were directed to join him in finding solutions. As for the Syrian
crisis Obama realised that he has to
treat it as a side issue rather than tackle it head on and clash with the Russians.
7) After the debacles in Libya
and Egypt Obama began to understand the mosaic of the Middle East. Turkey
and Iran
have been going through social transformations for the last century. As a
result their populations are divided between on the one hand the modernity of Atatuk
in Turkey and Pahlavi in Iran and on the
other hand the rising Islamist reactions of Erdogan and Khamenaei. Recently
these reactions were accentuated by a new open confrontation between Shiaa and Sunni Islam. The undercurrent rivalry
of five centuries between the Ottoman
Sunni Empire with the Shiaa Persian Empire has revived and is now bubbling. But both
countries today have comparatively stable regimes and they realise that they
have to find mutual accommodation of coexistence vis-à-vis the West. They are
non-Arab Muslim countries in our region and we cannot afford to lose both of
them. Our conflict with our Arab neighbours is less significant to them against
their internal problems and is expressed by them in lip service verbal echoing
of the Arab stereotype pronouncements. Lately
the Americans are trying to find a balance between them But on our part we must
take every opportunity to address the moderates amongst them directly rather than concentrate on attacking
their governments.
8) No doubt that Israel
needs to be and be seen to be strong. However what is needed is not just a strong well prepared army. Strength is
relative. Israel's
strength needs to be its ability to protect its borders from outside dangers
and to create peaceful co existence of its fractured society inside. Realities cannot be faced with
semantics. A slogan of a Jewish Democratic State cannot ring true in an Israel
with a substantial Arab presence today
that would swell into a future majority were we to keep the West Bank within
Israel's Borders. Solutions not wishful thinking are called for. On my part, I
tried on the pages of my book “Israel: State
or Ghetto” (and in my Hebrew book:
Hametsiut Machtiva) to encapsulate my analysis of the 3 Major Problems that
have been facing us crying for resolution and offered realistic solutions. 1) A
clear defendable borders, 2) A practical electoral system to ensure the cohesion
of our citizenry and 3) A rehabilitation of our tattered image abroad.
9) And just before the
second Lebanon war of 2006 in my address to the Oxford Union (Chapter 6 ) I analysed factually the struggle of Shia and
Sunna for power in the region to the extent that won me the final vote at that night’s debate,
but more importantly it won me the
admiration of Professor Ali Ansari a close associate of the Rafsanjani faction
in Iran. He went out of his way to tell my wife and later confirmed by email to
me that as he put it, he bowed to the quality of my analysis and the wisdom of
my approach. It is worthwhile to read this address which demonstrates a model of
how to present our case and even our thorny case for keeping our nuclear option
and win without insulting our enemies and
all that while not conceding an inch.
10) Soon after the second Lebanon war I analysed in the same book (ch 7 Debacle
in Lebanon)
the precariousness of our relationships
in the region and beyond, while discerning
the signs of a coming renewed Cold War.
Here we are sandwiched between Arab hostile states neglecting our relationship
with the two non-Arab real powers in the region, the Sunni Turkey and the Shia
Iran. We are a small Jewish enclave in a sea of Arabs.
We need the two non-Arab countries to set them up as our allied dams against
the turbulent Arab sea. The history of the last 500 years would help us to
understand better the background of the Arab relationship with their non Arab
Muslins in the region.
11) The swell of anti Israel sentiments in the streets of Europe fed by a powerfully orchestrated Palestinian public relation
machine is quickly changing into anti Jewish and Anti Semitic. It will soon spill over to the wider public of the United States.
I say wider in order not to compress the
US public as we often do into New York
and Washington.
It is this fear that should inform our
first and most important policy to settle our borders with the Palestinians with
the dual objective of securing the future survival of Israel and changing its image in the world. Once our borders are
agreed and settled Israel then will become as it was meant to be, the de facto last
refuge of the Jewish people rather than a Masada like militarized camp where voluntarily the
entire Jewish population of the world kraal
themselves together into a tiny strip of land surrounded by 400 million Arabs
raring to repossess it. Geography and Demography
should guide our politics and wisdom should guide our negotiations with the
Palestinians. At the heart of our stance during the negotiations should be that in a final settlement Jews can live in Palestine
in the way that Arabs now constitute 20 per cent of Israel living as equal citizens
within its borders.
12) And as if we have not enough what with our internal divisions and external dangers a new
problem as worrying is now beginning to
surface. A fault line is developing between
the messianic convictions of the militant ultra nationalistic ideologies in Israel
and the progressive pragmatic views of a
growing segments of the Diaspora. This is a gratuitous future threat to our very existence as a united Jewish
People. Letting this gap between Israel and the
Diaspora widen will weaken and may lead to destroying a unity which we have
maintained for a century. Herzl's Altneuland needs to meet midway the Golden
Medinah.
Aharon Nathan, 15 Oct 2013
Monday 16 September 2013
A New Year Message to my Friends in Israel
First let us be less arrogant and stop thinking that anybody who thinks differently from us is stupid. Let us assume that Obama and some of the entourage from the ultra Right Tea Party and from the ultra Left Liberal Democrats have something brewing but undefined as yet towards isolationism that eventually will affect American policies in the Middle East. I remember in the fifties a book on the ME (by Spicer ?) saying that we did not know what the United States’ interests in the Middle East were, but that that they were growing! The reverse appears to be happening today. Policies are not defined first and applied later. They get slowly applied by force of circumstances and are defined at a later stage
.
With this in mind let us proceed:-
America and Soviet
Russia fought each other in an ebb and flow fashion from the two sides of the
Iron Curtain. Roosevelt and Stalin met in Teheran during World War 2 to define their spheres of influence in that
region by dividing Iran
itself, between the Russian North and the American South. The background for
all that is well known and over documented, culminating in the recent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
All that was guided in the main
by America
and the West’s need for oil and therefore the fortunes of Aramco and IPC.
However, the latest development of fracking and other measures are forecast to make
America
self-sufficient in energy by 2020.
America and Russia supported the creation of Israel, the
first out of religious and humanitarian motives moved by the Holocaust and the Russians
by long term calculations of sheer self-interest. The Americans continued their support in a
merely humanitarian way, helped by NY Jewish community. The Suez War alienated
the American establishment but Israel's
triumph in the Six Day War proved to be a great land mark signalling change of
direction. By that time Soviet Russia had penetrated Syria,
Egypt, and Ethiopia,
threatening Saudi oil supplies and challenging American interests. It is then
that America realised that victorious
Israel
could provide a counter balance to neutralise this acute threat. Slowly the 6th
Fleet took residence in the Mediterranean, and Israel became for the Americans a
sort of an American aircraft carrier on land.
The same Anwar Sadat (a super
conspirator!) who together with General Masri met Rommel during the second
world war, woke up to see that Russia could supply arms but not bread. Wily crafty
Kissinger recognised all that and exploited it to the full, and the Israel Egyptian
peace treaty ensued following the Yom Kippur War.
With Soviet Russia economically
disintegrating, American hegemony became supreme both in Europe and the Middle East. The wars in Afghanistan
and Iraq were superfluous
and only served Russia
indirectly by weakening America
economically at the time when Russia's
fortunes were reviving. This rendered the United States impotent in a
startling way. Even more so recently with its hesitant moves both in Libya and recently in Syria. The international wheel
turned complete circle round.
Russia was
emboldened and the new Tsar Putin saw that his growing interest in pushing America was
bearing fruit. The new situation has
created a new mood in Teheran. The two world powers have to accept sharing their
spheres of influence again. Conveniently America backing the Sunnis and the
Russians, the Shiaa. And where is Israel in all this?
This drama is being enacted before
our eyes, but we are so obsessed with the latest 24 hour news headlines that
our evaluation and understanding of the finality of these events is still based
on the past. We need to wake up to the new realities that will dictate the
future impact on the American public and therefore policy towards Israel. We have
to think now and take the long view well before facing new realities.
Israel needs
to speed up the setting up of the Palestine
State out of sheer self
interest. The solutions are well known and documented At best is to revive the
Bush/Sharon agreement. If not then to agree to a new situation where Jews live
in Palestine the way that Arabs live in Israel. That
will be beneficial to both sides and the world will acclaim such a move by Israel. Time is
against us. The public in the West (may be not the Governments) resent Israel and will
not be sorry if it is hurt.
I know and accept that Israel's military power today can prevail and
defeat the combined armies of all the Arab countries and Turkey together.
That is not the issue. The existential danger for us comes from the sheer
number of the Arab millions surrounding us. Leaving our borders undefined stalks
vulnerability. The danger does not need to come from attacks or intifadas. What
will we do if one million of them decide one morning to walk unarmed, children
first followed by women and then by their men folk. Just literally walk towards
and through the check points claiming what they believe is the repossession of their
lands? How many of them are we prepared to kill? A devilish nightmare plan but not
unthinkable.
In all this one thing remains a
mystery. The most potent weapon in our hands vis a vis the world and the Arabs
is the fact that as many Jewish refugees from Arab countries found refuge in Israel as the number of Arab refugees who left Israel. Arab
lands are now Judenrein. Why are our leaders shy and intimidated from shouting
these facts from the rooftops. Irrespective who pushed and who pulled before or
after 1948 the facts of the present are staring us and the world in the eye.
The realities on the ground today confirms the validity of our position and
constitutes a powerful argument that the public of hostile or friendly
countries would understand and accept far better than invoking King David
Temple or King Solomon Palace or for that matter whether Abraham paid or did
not pay for Sarah's Tomb in Hebron 3500 years ago! Let us cast aside messianic
dreams and face re-al politics.
Aharon Nathan
16
Sept 2013
Saturday 16 March 2013
Analysis and Comments on 19th Knesset Coalition
Analysis of the Parties in the Knesset
|
||||
17th Knesset
(2006)
|
18th Knesset
(2009)
|
19th Knesset (2013)
|
||
Party Orientation
|
Party / List
|
Actual
|
Actual
|
Actual
|
Fluid Parties
Sub-totals
|
Shinui
Yesh Atid
Pensioners
Be’Aliya
Beitenu
Meretz / Greens
Am Ehad
Brit Leumi
|
-
-
7
-
11
5
-
-
---
23
|
-
-
-
-
15
3
-
-
---
18
|
-
19
-
-
-
6
-
-
---
25
|
Solid central parties
Sub-totals
|
Labour
Likud
Kadima
Hatnuah
|
19
12
29
-
---
60
|
13
27
28
-
---
68
|
15
31
2
6
---
54
|
Solid right
parties
Sub-totals
|
Shas
Torah Judaism
Mafdal
Jewish Home
Echud Leumi.
|
12
6
9
-
-
---
27
|
11
5
4
3
-
---
23
|
11
7
-
12
-
---
30
|
Solid Arab
parties
Sub-totals
|
Hadash
United Arab
Balad
|
3
4
3
---
10
|
4
4
3
---
11
|
4
4
3
---
11
|
Total
|
120
|
120
|
120
|
In
order to point out some future trends and draw some conclusions from the above
table the parties are grouped into four categories. The results for 18th
Knesset were analysed after the inauguration of Netanyahu's
Coalition in March 2009 and published at the time in:
Chapter 13 of Total
Representation by Aharon Nathan and Prof Ivo Skrabalo ERS Publications, London
2009. (Paper Back in AMAZON at £11.99). It was prepared with full participation
of the late Professor Gideon Doron.
Here
the analysis is carried forward to review the formation of Netanyahu's new
coalition. Being in or out of the Coalition can impact on the future of the
Parties.
The
assumption by the Parties and the public
that Netanyahu would lead the new Government distorted the results and confused
everyone, the electorate and the various Party leaders. It also blinded Likud
senior members during the campaign for
the 2013 Elections who behaved with
arrogance as if success is in the pocket. Despite this we have to keep a sense
of proportion. Yesh Atid 19 + Hatnuah 6
+ Kadima 2 = 27 i.e. one less than Kadima in 2009 with 28 seats. However Lapid
managed to get out with his 19 more than Tsipi Livni could manage with her 28. Our electoral System and
our politics are failing everybody. A change is very long
overdue before we get into
another debacle of 2 Ballots directly or worse through the back door destroy
our parliamentary democracy by raising the threshold (Achuz Chasima) and
granting presidential power to the prime minister.
Netanyahu: The moment the
results were announced Netanyahu made a simple calculation and moved quickly.
With Shas and Yahadut Ha-Torah he had 49.
Lapid on the other hand with Benet, Tsipi, Shelli, Zhava and Mofaz
theoretically could secure 60 and the
Arab Parties would be only too ready to
be neutral. 49 versus 60 could have left Netanyahu and Likud out in the cold.
He could not have met Benet without losing his only cartd/weapon of Shas/Yahdut
left in his hand to threaten with. The
key was Lapid not Benet. And with the former playing hard to get and with Shelly even
harder, Netanyahu had no choice but to act swiftly in secret away from the
press cameras. By treating Tsipi generously
(a forced marriage of convenience) he theoretically secured 55 thus closing the
door in the face of Lapid. Netanyahu
from his point of view used wisely the
few cards left to him. He actually managed to save his premiership and his Likud Party. And
with the same brilliant stroke in appointing Tsipi he signalled to Obama and
Abu Mazen that he was now ready for real
dialogues especially as the Feiglin/Settlers faction within Likud proved an
obstacle in the past and a liability in the elections. Moreover Netanyahu through facilitating a ministerial appointment for Amir Peretz rendered both Labour and Hatnuah
split down the middle and weakened both. All very clever moves! However this weakening may now open the door for Lapid to become the
Centre-Left alternative to Likud in the next elections may be sooner than
envisaged. Lieberman, the most likely successor to the Likud
Leadership if he survives his Court Case must take notice.
Shelly Yechimovitch made all the
mistakes in the book from the moment she was elected Labour leader. She played the self-righteous in a
field of sinners. She did not learn from Tsipi Livni's bitter experience when in the last Knesset she allowed Netanyahu to manoeuvre her into the
Opposition. No credible aspiring Party leader should declare during the
election that he/she is campaigning to be in the Opposition. By sidelining Amir
Peretz and Mitzna she showed political immaturity and her defeatist stance helped Lapid to project
himself as the sole alternative to
Netanyahu's dominance without presuming to be next prime minister. Shelly did
and compounded her defeat by refusing to join the New Government as the senior
partner and secure the Finance Ministry. She led herself and Labour to a
precarious and uncertain future existence as a leading party. Ben Gurion must
be turning in his grave!
Tsipi Livni : By accepting Netanyahu's
olive branch with alacrity she kept her
hope of leading, may be with
Olmert, the Centre-Left against Lapid in
time to come.
Mofaz before, during and after the elections managed to snatch
defeat time and time again from the jaws
of victory despite the fact that he had all the right policies, on Palestine,
electoral reform and on the inclusion of the religious in the army. Mofaz by
retiring from politics and the Knesset could help what is left of Kadima in
a future possible survival if Olmert
decides eventually to return to his old Party.
Fluid Parties
Over the years Fluid parties seem to come and
go. Each starts with a flourish and a fanfare, only to disappear soon
afterwards. They are mainly secular in outlook and centred in and around Tel
Aviv. The future fluid parties and their chances will depend which direction
they go left or right. Apart from Beitenu, their voters have supported Kadima in
the 2009 elections. Beitenu is the exception. Its voters, backed by Russian
immigrants, have more in common with Likud. As predicted in my review way back in 2009 its members gravitated towards Likud
and merged with Likud just before
the elections in 2013. In view of the
election results it is unlikely that
this merger will revert back to its two
constituents. Lieberman, the sworn enemy of Shas, is now inseparable
from Netanyahu and Likud constituting together the Centre Right in Israeli
politics.
Meretz
which
lost seats to Kadima in 2009 has regained its strength to 6 seats thanks to a
clear and sincere leadership of Zahava Gal-On. However without the big guns of
Sarid, Beilin and Ran Cohen it cannot continue its orphan situation. It will have to go back to its original home and unite with Labour to their mutual
benefit and may even save Labour from extinction if the Histadrut supports this
union.
Yesh
Atid, despite its protestations, is like Shinui a secular party centred in and around Tel-Aviv.
It rode on a temporary tide of the social protests of the Rothschild Bld.,
and the disintegration of Kadima and
drew voters from the same sector. To stay as a leading party it has to replace
one of the two centre parties, left of centre Labour or right of centre Likud.
With Beitenu within Likud and having shed the liabilities of Shas/Torah, Likud
has established itself as the Right-Centre Party in Israel. For Yesh Atid to replace
the traditional Labour it has to move to the left. It is then that the two main
Parties will model themselves on the Two Party Pattern in the West in UK, France
or USA. The adoption of YESH Yitsug Shalem Electoral System(TR Total
Representation) will ensure the election of two big parties as simulations have
shown. This in turn will bring stability
to the government and to the body politics of Israel.
Solid Centre Parties
The Solid parties are the old Zionist parties
with ideologies and outlooks inherited from the two main streams of Zionism,
led in Israel
by the two flag-bearers Ben Gurion and Menachem Begin. Labour and Likud were
well defined. In 2009 it was Kadima that was left undecided after the elections for the
18th Knesset. Which turn was it going to take?
Prime Minister
Sharon set up Kadima to replace Likud. He then added a sprinkling of Labour
leaders to facilitate his then-impending evacuation of Gaza, and in order to pave the road for peace
with the Palestinians. He looked upon Tsipi Livni as a potential successor in
the distant future. So the Kadima -- call it New Likud under Sharon – that he created was a
right-of-centre party. Sharon untimely
withdrawal from politics was followed by
an internal strife between Tsipi Livni and Ehud Olmert,
and later on at the party primaries between her and Shaul Mofaz – a perceived
hawk who was brought into Likud by Sharon. This had created a new situation that forced Kadima to fight to replace Labour as a
new left-of-centre party. It had no
chance of replacing Likud after 2009 as
the latter had already consolidated its position in the Knesset, in the
government and in the country at large as the right–of-centre party. The big
question was which party will lead the
left-of-centre in the country. The fight for this position was going to be life
or death for one or the other of Kadima or Labour. Unexpectedly it was Kadima
not Labour that disintegrated at the end
leaving Labour in command of the Centre-Left backed by the Histadrut.
Towards the 2013
elections the utter failure of Labour,
Kadima and Hatuah to unite and the untimely defection of Amir Peretz to Hatnuah
resulted in Netanyahu's Likud-Beitenu staying ahead to produce the biggest faction
in the new Knesset with markedly reduced majority. None of the leaders of the
former three parties could project a
credible Prime Minister's image. Moreover their collective failure to unite
left their voters demoralized and
disorientated leaving a gaping space for Yesh-Atid to forge ahead. This result
created a tug of war between the two sides of the Centre-Left. Labour unwisely, declared that it would
lead the Opposition to Netanyahu. But with
Yesh Atid joining the government
together with Hatnuah (with Tsipi and Amir Peretz) Labour is left vulnerable. In the new situation it is most likely that
Lapid's Yesh Atid will replace Labour as
the future Centre-Left Party.
Jewish
Religious Parties
The Jewish
religious parties, with the exception of Torah Judaism, were weakening as their supporters were slowly
moving to the main stream parties.
Habayit Hayehudi (Jewish
Home) halted this trend amongst the Jewish ultra-nationalist religious factions
by recruiting
seculars and appealing to the traditionalists. Its
leader Naphtali Benet was the biggest winner of the elections by unexpectedly
allying himself to Lapid. Will his success strengthen his party and revive the glorious
days of Hapoel Hamizrachi of the 50s!?
Shas
made a fatal mistake. While Benet allied himself with Lapid it allied
itself with Yahadut Ha-Torah. Even if Lapid could have tolerated Shas at least as a Sephardic and socialist partner he
could not swallow its sandwich with Charedic Yahadut HaTorah. Shas has two sides to it. On the one hand it is
religious, the way Arab Jews generally were in their diasporas. Unlike in the
West a Jew could not be both an Arab and a Jew at the same time the way
English, French or German could. But in Israel things are moving on. Without the
spiritual leadership of Rabbi
Ovadiah Yossef it is difficult to predict the fortunes of Shas as a Sephardic
Party. It has another side to it, the
welfare and socialist. It is seen by many poor in the Sephardic
communities as protector of their
welfare But for how long? Unless it
emphasises its social side and accept traditional but not strictly religious
Jews along the lines of Benet, it will continue to weaken. The emergence of
Jewish Home in this context and the efforts of
Derii inside and Amsalem outside Shas in the same direction will hasten
the disintegration of Shas especially now that it was left out of the
Coalition. Sooner or later membership of both these Parties will merge
officially or through movements of members' allegiances. This applies especially to Shas voters as the label of
Sephardi does not appeal anymore to the second and third generations of its
oriental immigrant populations themselves.
That leaves Torah Judaism as the only true religious party drawing more and
more support from the young generation of
true Ashkenazi Charedim helped by increasing birth rate in those communities and near 100% voters' participation. It will
continue to draw financial and moral support from its diasporas in America and
elsewhere.
Arab Parties
The power of the Arab vote has to be taken
together with the Druze vote. The Druze
have secured four seats out of 120 in the 18th Knesset, far beyond the
proportion of their numbers in Israel’s
total population which is only 1.6 per cent. The reason for this is that they
serve in the army and have no problem swearing allegiance to the state. Their
communities are used to this in Syria
and Lebanon.
Moreover, while the Muslim and Christian Arabs in Israel distance themselves from
the Jewish parties, the Druze don’t have
any problem with that. They claim Jethro, Moses' father-in-law to be their exclusive Prophet! Being a minority everywhere they learnt
to run with the rabbits and hunt with
the hounds. Things may change now with the increasing anti-Israel belligerence
of the Muslim MKs and the encouraging spirit of the Arab Spring. The chasm between Arab MKs and their Jewish counterparts is widening.
This chasm will draw the young Druze towards the Arab Muslims. It is a worrying
trend.
The Arab, mainly
Muslim parties, are becoming stronger as
independent groupings. That is fine and is what democracy is all about. The
problems will arise when Islamist elements infiltrate and take over one of
them, which would sharpen the conflict with the main Jewish Zionist parties and
could lead to conflict and even violence. Political leaders in Israel need to
wake up in time to bring about internal reconciliation and pave the way to
integrate all their Arab citizens into the social and political fabric of the
country. The introduction of YESH/TR can help in that direction.
Meantime the three Arab parties stood still
in 2013. The elections brought no change in their fortunes. However few
undercurrent trends could be detected during their campaigns. On the one hand
Daam an urban Arab/Jewish voice that called for Arab-Jewish integration in Jaffa was completely ignored by all sides. Hadash
faired no better. That left the field wide open for the militant extremists
headed by Balad and Hanin Zuabi. Unfortunately that will be the voice which
will unfairly project the allegiance of
the Arabs of Israel in the present Knesset and impact on the image of Israel
abroad. A reform of the electoral system
based on 60/60 will strengthen and these Parties. A threshold of more than the
present 2% will unify the Arab Parties and merge them into one big party that
can theoretically secure more than 20 seats in future Knessets.
TR YESH 90/30
can avoid this danger and bring real transformation by integrating the Arab citizens and their
representatives within the main stream parties.
YESH avoids
the necessity of corrupt primaries and
simplifies the elections of Party
Leaders. It bestows representation for
all voters in the peripheries and ensures the accountability of MKs and
Parties. It is simple to introduce and cheap to operate. It creates two big
parties and avoids the need to leave the country without effective government 6
months before and 45 days after each elections. Moreover it can save at least
one billion Shekel out of the 1.5 Israel Treasury has to dish out. It
will be irresponsible for all the Parties in Israel not to study its details
seriously.
Aharon
Nathan,
London, 16th March 2013
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)