 |
| Gadi Eisenkot and Benjamin Netanyahu |
I think it’s pretty clear what the last election was about.
A referendum on Netanyahu. The country was pretty evenly divided about him,
with passions on both side running high. You either reviled him or thought he
was the greatest leader in Israel’s history. Listening to media pundits here in
the US who tended to be in the former category, you would get the impression
that most Israeli voters hate him. But that is clearly not the case.
Sadly, however, at 53 seats Netanyahu’s governing bloc did
not get nearly enough votes to govern. That is due, in part, to the large
number of seats (19) won by the Arab parties. Based on all the pre-election
rhetoric and promises, there is no way a governing coalition can be formed
unless there are defections from one bloc to another or the Arab parties are
invited to join a governing coalition.
That just ain’t happening.
There have been suggestions of a unity government. Looking
at the issues most people care about in this country, there really isn’t all
that much daylight between the two parties. They have essentially the same
attitude toward the war with Iran and the war with Iran’s proxies. Eisenkot
will probably pursue the same military course Netanyahu did. That will not
change.
This will surely disappoint those who think Netanyahu’s
tactics in these wars were draconian, and that he was too casual about the n
umber of civilians he killed in pursuit of Hamas terrorists. A policy based
entirely on his political survival. But Eisenkot would not have done things any
differently. In fact, he was chief of staff under Netanyahu until relatively
recently. Had he had the kinds of objections Netanyahu’s critics have raised
about his conduct of the war, he surely would have resigned well before now.
So what’s keeping them from forming a unity government? It’s
the animus the voting public has toward Charedim for insisting on being exempt
from military service. That resentment is compounded by their vile
pronouncements directed at the government and judiciary for trying to undermine
that status.
Netanyahu was seen as coddling the Charedim to retain power.
Eisenkot tapped into that anger and swore he would end the exemption once and
for all, imposing serious sanctions on draft dodgers.
Another difference is the extremist settlers who have been
using violence against Palestinians in the West Bank in an effort to drive them
out. Most Israelis do not tolerate these extremists. Netanyahu has looked the
other way while paying lip service to condemning them. Eisenkot tapped into
that anger, too. But it didn’t do him much good.
There has been a lot of mudslinging against Netanyahu,
blaming him for October 7 and calling him corrupt, a traitor, and a liar. He
has been accused of undermining Israel’s democracy, prolonging the war,
delaying the release of hostages, coddling Charedim, and protecting his
extremist right-wing allies who support violent extremist settlers. His wife
and children have been attacked, and he has been blamed for ruining the
bipartisan support Israel once enjoyed.
It would seem that Netanyahu has generated more anger and
incitement against himself than any other prime minister in Israel’s history!
But it turns out that most Israelis did not fully buy into
that narrative. In fact, a plurality of voters supported him enough to vote for
his party or the other parties in his governing bloc.
None of this surprised me all that much.
The biggest disappointment for me was the poor showing of
the Hatzibur Hacharedi party…
To continue reading - and/or to comment on this post -
click on this link: substack.
You must subscribe to receive new posts. It's easy and it's free.
