The day after the election, the most horrifying part of the outcome was watching Tzipi Livni and Bibi Netanyahu trying to outbid each other for Avigdor Lieberman’s support.
That’s over: Netanyahu won, and is commited to having Lieberman, our aspiring autocrat, in his government. The next chapter in horror is watching Bibi try to enlist Livni and Ehud Barak as packaging for his rightwing coalition. So far, Livni is standing on principle, a prettier sight than her earlier groveling to Lieberman.
My new piece about why Netanyahu is so desperate to seat his opponents at his cabinet table is now up at The American Prospect:
…Bibi Netanyahu is a nervous man, known for sweating heavily. What’s making him sweat now is the prospect that his ruling coalition will consist only of those six parties of the right. That coalition will be fragmented and unstable. Even worse for a politician as America-obsessed as Netanyahu, it will deepen his difficulties in dealing with the Obama administration. Netanyahu would far prefer to share power with his ideological opponents, but as yet they are unwilling to rescue him…
The outrageously optimistic reading is that Netanyahu would like to move toward the political center, following the path taken by erstwhile Likud politicians such as Livni herself. A much more realistic reading is that he’s looking for cover while he avoids peace talks and builds settlements. Livni, serving again as foreign minister, would meet Hillary Clinton. Speaking with Obama, Netanyahu would point to his broad coalition as proof that he has wide public support and cannot be pressured…
Read the full piece here, and come back to South Jerusalem to comment.
I see many Leftists, such as MJ Rosenberg and “MagnesZionist” looking forward with excitement to a right-wing coalition taking power this time. They believe it will be a rerun of the 1996-1999 government which they believe was brought down by a mobilized biased Leftist media, harrassment by the State Prosecutor’s office (6 members of the coalition were charged with various crimes, all of whom were subsequently acquitted in what was obviously nothing more than politically-motivated harrassment), direct interference from the American President . Maybe things will repeat themselves, and that all the Left has to do is sit back, wait for the government to supposedly “self-destruct”, Obama will then give orders to Israeli whom to vote for the next time, or alternatively, Netanyahu will pull a “Sharon” and then carry out a radical withdrawal against the wishes of his party and coalition but with the support of the Left and renegades in the Likud.
However, the situation is not exactly the same.
First, it is an outright myth that “right-wing” coalitions can’t work. The last two coalitions of this type, 1990-1992 and 1996-1999 were times of quiet in the security realm and relative economic progress, and particularly important deregulation of the stifling socialist economic system. Actually most dissention came from within the Likud which self-destructed both times, leading to defeat in the subsequent elections, not from the coalition partners.
Both times, the 1992 and 1999 elections, the winning formula for the Left was NOT “we promise to give more to the Arabs”, but rather “the Likud sold out Israel to the Haredim”. This resonated with enough voters to make the difference. It might work the next time as well, but as I said, it was not the “peace process” and the Likud’s supposed “foot dragging” that made them lose the following elections.
In addition, Netanyahu was dogged by the Rabin assassination. Although he had nothing to do with it, there was a widespread feeling that “incitement” from the “Right” supposedly encouraged it, and this really heated up the emotions of many on the Left to oppose the gov’t. Today, Rabin mostly discredited and forgotten so that will not be a factor this time.
In Netanyahu’s first gov’t, a lot of people on the Left still believed in Oslo and that somehow peace would be achievable if only the Left was in power. This, of course, has been proven to be nonsense. Few Israelis believe that a contractual peace agreement is achievable in the forseeable future. so Bibi’s talk of encouraging economic development in Judea/Samaria makes sense to a lot of people, including far-Leftist Meron Benveniste.
There still is the danger that Obama will push for Israel to destroy settlements in Judea/Samaria to supposedly show Israel’s “good will” to the Palestinians who will be give a denuded territory in the future once they “get their act together”. Prior to that the IDF would still control security, or a NATO or other multi-national force would supposedly come in and take control of the Palesitinian territories. Well, most people I talk to on the Right do not believe that Bibi can repeat what Sharon did with Gush Katif. Tragically, Sharon was viewed by many on the Right as a big hero and they would, like lemmings, go along with anything he propopsed, no matter how suicidal. If Bibi tries to carry out a unilateral withdrawal, the Right will be much better mobilized in order to oppose it, instead of simply rolling over and capitulation without any struggle as they did with Gush Katif.
Thus, it is premature to view a “right-wing” gov’t as the salvation of the Left. Time will tell, assuming that Kadima and Labor do go to the opposition.
“There still is the danger that Obama will push for Israel to destroy settlements in Judea/Samaria …” (YBD)
“Even worse for a politician as America-obsessed as Netanyahu, it will deepen his difficulties in dealing with the Obama administration.” (GG)
I read comments like these and it makes American presidents sound very important in Israeli politics. If only it were more true. Bibi can always take a page from the Republican minority in the Senate and simply ignore the new President and his popularity. I can’t imagine a U.S. president forcing or coercing any Israeli government to adopt policies against its will. Unlike Shas or other parties that might withhold votes for their point of view, American foreign aid keeps coming, whether settlements are expanded or not, whether two state negotiations occur or not. We have very little leverage or, to put it another way, choose not to use our leverage to influence Israeli policies.
It is precisely because his own coalition will cause more problems than the American administration that Netanyahu is reaching out to Kadima. That, and perhaps the fear that Likud is shifting “right” out from under him.
John,
while it is true that Israelis don’t vote the way the WH tells them, the US president is the one of the most important men in Israeli politics, especially today. Lets take the Iran issue: If Israel wants to mobilize the international community, it must have the US support. If Israel wants to attack, it must have US approval (now that it controls the Iraqi air space), and even if Israel is to accept an Iranian bomb, it needs the US for some sort of a defense treaty. And that’s only one geo-political issue. So I believe the administration has plenty of leverage.
By the way, Y Ben David mentioned in his comment the 1990-1992 Shamir government. Many people agree today that what made the Likud lose the 1992 elections is the economical crisis, caused by the immigration from Russia. Back in1991, Israel has asked the US for 10 billion $ aid, but the Bush administration demanded that the government stop settling the West Bank. Shamir tried to play some tricks on (secretary of state) James Baker, and ended up not getting the money until it was too late.
So as I said, the US always has plenty of leverage.
It’s difficult to imagine Likud ‘shifting “right” out from under him’ as much as I love that phrase.
Bibi Netanyahu is scarier than Lieberman to me. First of all, he is entirely ‘respectable.’ As much flak as we do throw at him, the mainstream population does not wander around calling Bibi a ‘racist’ or a ‘fascist’, yet his economic reforms during his first ministry were just that: fascist. Israelis work in welfare slavery far below market value instead of getting real jobs because of Benjamin Netanyahu. His welfare reform has had long lasting effects on Israel’s economy: because it is cheaper to contract with the state for welfare recipients than to hire skilled workers, companies no longer hire skilled workers. More people end up on welfare as a result, which further depresses the wage market as they are shoved into their old jobs for less money.
As revolting as Lieberman’s Arab policies are to me, he specifically supports a two-state peace plan, going so far as to advocate giving up Arab land in Israel to a Palestinian state. Netanayhu specifically opposes two-state peace, flatly and without reasonable alternative.
Benjamin Netanyahu as Prime Minister is simply bad for Israel, bad for the Palestinians, bad for the region, and bad for the world.
The ‘respectable’ fascist scares me a lot more than the obvious fascist.
Eclectic Radical-
You, like many uninformed people blame Netanayhu for various economic policies that you don’t like. I would like to point out that he didn’t have plenipotentiary powers to carry out these policies alone. They were passed by the government and were even supported by the Labor Party and the rest of the Economic Establishment which has been affialited with the Israeli Left since the creation of the State. Saintly Sharon was Prime Minister, why don’t you attribute these economic policies to him? But you like him because you liked his destroying Gush Katif, so you shift the blame to someone else.