Israel’s Election: With Netanyahu’s Victory Unlikely, What Happens Next?

The right-wing bloc led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud party had a slight edge but was in a tight race with a grouping of centre, left and right-wing parties.

Jerusalem: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu failed to secure a solid parliamentary majority in Israel’s election, according to TV exit polls early on Wednesday which predicted no clear winner.

The right-wing bloc led by Netanyahu’s Likud party had a slight edge but was in a tight race with a grouping of centre, left and right-wing parties looking to unseat him.

Who are the main players?

Netanyahu is the most dominant Israeli politician of his generation. He campaigned on Israel’s world-beating COVID-19 vaccine rollout but also ran under a cloud of corruption allegations. A polarising figure, he has denied all wrongdoing in his corruption trial, which is set to resume in April.

In the last three elections he faced rivals from the left. But this time he was also up against right-wing contenders. And while his stewardship of the vaccination campaign drew praise, critics accuse him of mismanaging the pandemic during lockdowns that hit Israel’s economy hard.

Also read: Israel PM Benjamin Netanyahu’s Corruption Trial Resumes. Here’s What Can Happen Now

Yair Lapid, 57, a former finance minister and TV host who leads the centre-left party Yesh Atid – “There is a Future”. His party is predicted to come second. Lapid campaigned to “bring sanity” back to Israel with clean government and moderate leadership. He hopes to achieve what seems almost impossible and unite half a dozen disparate parties from across the political spectrum. All want to see Netanyahu removed but are not obvious bedfellows.

Naftali Bennett, 48, a former Netanyahu aide, defence minister and high-tech millionaire who heads the ultra-hawkish Yamina party and is vying to be the next leader of the Israeli right. Though his party is predicted to take only 7 seats, Bennett has positioned himself as a potential king-maker, refusing to commit to Netanyahu or against him. Some analysts believe he is more likely to back his fellow conservative, Netanyahu.

Gideon Saar, 54, a former cabinet minister who quit Likud to set up the New Hope party, vowing to end Netanyahu’s reign. Like Likud, his party opposes Palestinian statehood. Saar’s campaign centred on clean government and jump-starting the economy. New Hope is predicted to win only about 6 seats, but he is seen as a highly skilled politician in the anti-Netanyahu camp who could perhaps help bring together factions from across the left-right spectrum.

Also read: Israel: Snap Election in March as Parliament Fails to Pass Budget

What about the actual results?

The final tally is expected by Friday, but the numbers are updated as vote-counting proceeds, so a clearer picture will emerge as exit polls give way to results. It takes a long time to count because Israel uses paper ballots and 4.5 million Israelis voted.

A party must pass a threshold of 3.25% of the votes to enter parliament. Around 12 parties have a real chance of qualifying.

What happens after the results are published?

Israel’s president will consult with party leaders about their preference for prime minister. By April 7, 2021 he is expected to choose the legislator with the best chance of putting together a coalition. That nominee has up to 42 days to form a government. If he or she fails, the president asks another politician to try.

How long until a government is in place?

No party has ever won an outright majority. Coalition negotiations often drag on for weeks.

(Reuters)

Israel’s Netanyahu, Gantz Come Together to Form Emergency Unity Government

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his political opponent, Benny Gantz of the Blue and White party, agreed on Monday night to establish a unity government.

Jerusalem: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his centrist election rival Benny Gantz have reached an agreement to form a coalition government that would end a year of political deadlock, Israel’s Channel 12 News reported on Monday.

Officials from Netanyahu’s Likud party and Gantz’s Blue and White party were not available for immediate comment but a joint statement said the two men would meet on Monday evening after making progress in coalition talks.

Also read: Israel Is Militarising and Monetising the COVID-19 Pandemic

Israel Is Militarising and Monetising the COVID-19 Pandemic

Coronavirus is ravaging the globe right now. It’s a perfect time for the Israeli state to figure out how to expand its already vast surveillance powers.

Israel held its most recent election in early March, just as the coronavirus outbreak first reached the country in late February. The results of the election at first appeared to give Benjamin Netanyahu and his far-right coalition a major victory.

But within days, the media realised that the fulcrum of power had shifted from Netanyahu’s far-right bloc to the centre-right bloc led by Benny Gantz of Blue and White. As Israel’s president tasked the latter with forming a new government, based on the 61 MKs (Knesset members) who recommended he be offered the opportunity, it appeared there would be a minority government in which Blue and White would be supported from outside by the Palestinian Joint List.

Layered on top of this political crisis was a growing pandemic sweeping the world. As the number of Israeli victims and the first death from coronavirus was announced, Netanyahu saw an opportunity to revive his political relevance. Actually, Netanyahu acted even before the first death, which was on March 20.

Only a few days earlier, on March 16, he asked the Knesset intelligence committee to approve the use of a hitherto secret national database compiled by the Shin Bet and comprising private personal data on every Israeli citizen, both Jewish and Palestinian. In the aftermath of 9/11, Israel’s Knesset secretly assigned its domestic intelligence agency the task of creating the database, which was ostensibly meant as a counterterrorism measure.

The data included puts Edward Snowden’s alarms about the NSA’s mass surveillance to shame. It not only contains the names, addresses, and phone numbers of every citizen; it also records every phone call made, and the recipient of these calls, including name and phone number. It uses geo-location to track where every citizen has traveled within the country, and it maintains records of all online activity, including internet searches.

Also read: Gaza Runs Out of Coronavirus Tests, Palestinian Health Officials Say

The top-secret project was couched by Netanyahu as a powerful tool to monitor victims of the epidemic and all who had social contact with them. Few Israelis, aside from privacy advocates and related NGOs, raised any alarms about the obvious violations of individual privacy and rights entailed in both the database itself, whose codename was “the Tool,” and its use to compel suspected coronavirus victims to self-quarantine. They remained silent — even though health ministry officials urging them to approve use of the database suggested that the epidemic would force the state to “suspend personal freedoms.”

Mixing politics and pandemic

Few politicians, even in the opposition, questioned the prime minister’s exposure of a decades-long secret database touted as one of the Shin Bet’s most powerful counterterrorism tools. They should have, because Netanyahu was clearly exploiting the existence of the Tool to highlight for the public his indispensability. He wanted Israelis to view him as the strong, steady leader who could carry them through the threat posed by the epidemic.

He was pulling out all the stops to save his career, as the opposition plotted to form a government that would exclude him from power and leave him vulnerable to a criminal trial on three corruption counts. The planned governing coalition also proposed several new laws that would prohibit Israel’s longest serving premier from ever returning to power.

So Netanyahu pulled out all the stops. He directed the Likud speaker of the Knesset to use the excuse of coronavirus contagion to adjourn the Knesset. For that reason, the intelligence committee never approved use of the Tool during the epidemic. Instead, Netanyahu bypassed legislative oversight and employed emergency executive regulations to approve the plan.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gestures as he delivers a statement during his visit at the Health Ministry national hotline, in Kiryat Malachi, March 1, 2020. Photo: Reuters/Amir Cohen/File Photo

The opposition Blue and White appealed to the Supreme Court, which asked the speaker to reconvene the Knesset. When he refused, the justices told him he must do so within five days or Netanyahu’s order would be null and void. In response, the speaker himself resigned, which left the country with no legislative body, since only the speaker can call it into session.

Add the growing anxiety over the COVID-19 epidemic, which began to hit Israel in earnest, to the near panic over the country’s political crisis, and you have a perfect recipe for Netanyahu’s miraculous political comeback. Polling began to concern Gantz, showing that the public wanted stability and saw this in a unity government between his Blue and White and the Likud.

As a result, late last month, the opposition leader pulled the plug on the centre-right bloc he’d led through three previous elections and threw in his lot with Netanyahu’s Likud.  The bloc split in two, with fifteen MKs following Gantz into the new government and the remaining eighteen MKs, led by former IDF general Moshe Ya’alon and Yair Lapid, going into opposition. The split shocked Gantz’s former allies and was received as a betrayal of a campaign commitment he’d made never to sit in a government with an indicted prime minister.

As part of the deal to form the new unity government, Gantz demanded the speaker’s position for himself. This allows him to control the body’s agenda. Negotiations continue to be underway regarding the ministerial portfolios and legislative priorities.

Netanyahu exposed major intelligence asset for political self-preservation

Returning to the Tool, spy agencies are loath to divulge their secrets, and no doubt the Shin Bet was stunned when it discovered this potent weapon had been exposed. It was also concerned about the long-term criticism it might face on civil liberties grounds and, according to a security source, decided to leak an account of the Tool to foreign media.

That’s how Israeli intelligence reporter Ronen Bergman published his story in the New York Times in mid-March. Bergman followed up with a much more detailed account in Yedioth Ahronoth near the month’s end. While his story raised some ethical concerns, including noting that no time limit had been placed on retention of the data collected, it generally played down concerns that the project might violate individual rights.

Bergman did so by quoting former agency officials who claimed they had engaged in exhaustive deliberations about these issues, minimising any possibility of serious security breaches, or of the Tool being used for the purpose of a political vendetta or to harm innocent citizen victims.

But clearly, the aim of the leak was to portray the Tool and the agency in the most flattering possible light and head off any groundswell of criticism of it or its mission. It’s no accident that four days after the publication of Bergman’s article, the Knesset intelligence committee approved using the Tool in the COVID-19 fight.

Missing were any serious discussions about how it would impact those targeted by its use. The geo-location function would track every known coronavirus victim, and not only while they had the illness. It would go back in time two weeks to track every movement of the victim: where they went, who they met. It would even identify anyone who stood within six feet of the individual for longer than twenty minutes. Those bystanders, too, would be identified and placed under quarantine, whether they had the virus or not; whether they were tested or not.

Also read: Coronavirus: Gaza Faces Worst-Case Scenario

Any health policy expert will tell you that the history of pandemics, including HIV and Ebola, indicates that victims must not be criminalised or ostracised. They must be encouraged to cooperate with authorities in order to protect themselves, their family, and the public.

Given that Israeli police are now empowered to arrest anyone violating regulations and fine them $1,500, along with a six-month prison term, using the Tool as a law enforcement rather than a public health measure carries the nation very far in a direction no society should go.

The Israeli government also tasked the Mossad with purchasing hundreds of thousands of ventilators and respirators for its citizens to prepare for the full onslaught of the contagion. Media reports deliberately omitted the source of the equipment, saying only that it might be a country with which Israel has no formal relations. Other reports indicated that it was purchased in the United Arab Emirates.

In fact, Mossad officials interviewed for the TV programme Uvda boasted to Ilana Dayan, the host, that the agency had “stolen” the 100,000 face masks and respirators on the first shipment it brought to Israel.

The New York Times just published a bit of journalistic hagiography by Ronen Bergman, celebrating the heroics of the Mossad in saving Israeli lives by beating the bushes around the world for medical equipment and test kits to protect Israelis from COVID-19. But no one seems to have asked why the nation’s intelligence agency would be assigned the job of preparing for a national epidemic. Indeed, Bergman quotes an Israeli health official bursting with pride:

“It is only in Israel that the Sheba hospital could have enlisted the help of the Mossad,” he said in an interview. “Can you imagine Mount Sinai Hospital going to the C.I.A. for help?”

No one notes that in every other democratic country, the health authorities do such a job. But Israel, in a bit of political chicanery, appointed an ultra-Orthodox (“Haredi” in Hebrew) Jew who does not believe in science or medicine to take charge of the health ministry. The minister violated his own ministry’s quarantine orders and joined in prayer services, where he promptly contracted COVID-19. Were Israel a normal state instead of a mash-up of a theocracy and a garrison state, it would not need (or want) the Mossad to perform such duties.

Militarising the pandemic

Netanyahu has also directed hundreds of IDF soldiers to patrol inside Israel and enforce restrictions against movement. Armed soldiers have never walked the streets targeting Israeli Jews for violating the law. A Haaretz report claims it is the only democracy using its security services and military to track coronavirus victims.

In addition, the prime minister announced that the ultra-Orthodox (Haredi) city of Bnei Brak has been placed under full closure. In another first, the Border Police, whose mission is to enforce occupation on West Bank Palestinians and prevent them from entering Israel as illegal workers, will enforce the blockade on an entire Israeli Jewish community.

This reinforces the impression that Israel’s far-right government has militarised the contagion. Just as a hammer never met a nail it didn’t want to pound, it is only natural for a national security state like Israel to see COVID-19 as a security threat just as much or more than a health threat.

Special Patrol Unit police forces in Jerusalem, March 22, 2020. Photo: Ohad Zwigenberg/Reuters

Israel announced before any other country that its chemical and biological weapons lab at Nes Tziona had developed a vaccine (though the claim was later disputed). While it’s certainly commendable for Israeli scientists to make such efforts to save lives, Nes Tziona has the expertise to develop such a vaccine because its research involves testing and developing lethal agents used against the country’s enemies. The lab also develops agents to counteract such pathogens as COVID-19 in order to protect Israel’s soldiers and civilians.

But the preponderance of Nes Tziona’s work, at least what is known publicly, is used to develop deadly agents to kill Israel’s enemies. The poison injected by two Mossad assassins into Khaled Mashal in Jordan in 1997 was developed by Nes Tziona, as was the antidote that King Hussein demanded in order to save Mashal’s life. The poison used by the twenty-seven-strong Mossad hit team to assassinate Hamas weapons dealer Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai in 2010 was similarly developed by Nes Tziona.

Any evaluation of the good that could come from such a COVID-19 vaccine must be weighed against the damage such a facility does in all its other work.

Democracy dies during disasters

Netanyahu is attempting to cast himself as the Indispensable Man during the health crisis. He knows that when an entire nation is living in uncertainty and mass anxiety, they are willing to sacrifice even more of their rights in return for a leader with a firm hand. This is how Adolf Hitler came to power in 1933 in the midst of a deep economic crisis. Similarly, Hungary’s Viktor Orbán arrogated to himself absolute power using the excuse of the epidemic to name himself dictator.

Fortunately, Netanyahu’s political status is unstable. He does not have the sort of ironclad control Orbán enjoys. There are limits to what he can accomplish. But over the past twenty-five years, during most of which he led the country, he has gradually consolidated massive power in himself and his office. There is a huge temptation to exploit that power as he faces legal and political challenges.

Israel’s right-wing defense minister, Naftali Bennett, offered his own proposals for fighting the pandemic. The technology he’s promoting would develop a scorecard for every citizen and rate their likelihood of having or transmitting coronavirus. Because the surge in the number of victims and hospitalizations has rendered it impossible to do proper investigation of the chain of transmission, in order to detect who was in proximity to the victim and isolate them as well, he urges adoption of a cyber tool created by the ID, which would pour all relevant data compiled by the ministry of health and Shin Bet into a database.

The computer model would then assign a score of one to ten to each individual profiled. The score would indicate in real time, moment by moment, the likelihood that they were infected. Those on the highest end of the spectrum would be “invited” for testing.

In a deft bit of dog-whistle racism, Bennett also noted that COVID-19 was spreading like wildfire through two different Israeli communities: the ultra-Orthodox and the Palestinian. He told a TV interviewer that there were “three Israels”. Two were riddled with disease. The third, presumably, was his own modern, well-educated, affluent, and relatively disease-free Ashkenazi sector.

He advocated treating the other two Israels as if beset by plague: sealing them off and letting them fend for themselves. In fact, Israeli authorities have refused to provide any testing for Israeli Palestinian communities, which are already best by inferior medical care. That is one of the reasons Israeli Palestinians in Jaffa rioted recently, throwing stones at police and firefighters.

Israel media reported that Palestinians protested the arrest of a resident who defied “stay-at-home” regulations. If that is the case, the blame lies as much with the state for not educating its minority citizens about the peril they face in ignoring public health protocols. But it’s equally likely these protesters were objecting to the not-so-benign neglect they face from the Israeli public health system.

The ultra-Orthodox face other obstacles to following public health regulations. Since they reject secular Israeli society, they are naturally segregated from outsiders. Their communities tend to be insular. Since they have rejected secular education, they tend to be poorer and live in apartments in densely populated neighbourhoods. And the only authorities they trust are rabbis, who naturally have no scientific or medical expertise. Many of the rabbis told their flock earlier that they should carry on daily life as usual, including mass prayer services and other public religious rites — all of which led to further spread of the contagion.

Bennett’s statement about both communities revealed the innate racism, and even a form of antisemitism, at the heart of Israel — toward Palestinians and the ultra-Orthodox, respectively. It also highlights the failure of the state to integrate either group into larger society. Israeli politicians benefit from the segregation of the ultra-Orthodox, who tend to vote as a bloc. Their political parties then join governing coalitions as they have the current far-right Likud-led government.

Israeli officials have banned people going more than 100 metres from their homes, unless for essential journeys such as food shopping. Photo: Reuters/Ronen Zvulun

The Haredi ministers tend to dole out funding and benefits to their community from the public purse. That’s how one of their rabbinic authorities became health minister without any experience in either health, medicine, or secular knowledge. In fact, when an interviewer asked him how long before the worst of the epidemic would be over, he replied that the Messiah would come before Passover and relieve all the suffering. He also developed COVID-19 himself after twice defying his own ministry’s quarantine orders ordering the end of public prayer services.

The development of Haredi political muscle that then joins secular Israeli governing coalitions has made for a convenient arrangement for both sides as long as the state has existed. But the downside is that they have been offered little reason to join the broader Israeli society. The COVID-19 tragedy, in which one public health expert has estimated that 40 percent of B’nai Brak’s residents are infected, is the result of that misguided social policy.

Monetising the pandemic

The second half of the defense minister’s plan to combat COVID-19 urged the nation to adapt the Tool as a “civilian” product developed by Israel’s cybersecurity industry and marketed to foreign countries. In fact, he suggested one particular company that was already doing so: NSO Group. As I’ve written here before, it is the world’s most successful cyber-hacking firm, recently sold to a private venture capital firm in the UK for a $1 billion “unicorn” valuation.

NSO’s primary product is Pegasus, the most sophisticated malware on the market. It has been used by police agencies in scores of countries to spy on terrorist groups and drug dealers. At least, that’s what the PR firms representing NSO will tell you. But there is a dark underbelly that NSO refuses to acknowledge. It also sells Pegasus to some of the most repressive countries in the world, whose secret police use it to target political dissidents, rights activists, independent journalists, and public interest lawyers.

NSO’s products have been used as evidence in cases brought against human rights activists fighting for democracy in their own societies. Ahmed Mansoor in the UAE was sentenced to ten years in prison for his activism. His cell phone was hacked, and all his emails and text messages were used as evidence in court against him.

Even more troubling is the case of Jamal Khashoggi, who was murdered by Saudi intelligence agents. They, too, used Pegasus to monitor Khashoggi’s contacts and even his physical location. The malware enabled them to determine where he was, where he went, and where he intended to go, including to the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, where the murderers laid in wait for him.

Groups like Amnesty International and Citizen Lab are fighting back against these violations of basic human rights. The former is suing in Israeli courts to force the defense ministry to revoke NSO’s export license to sell Pegasus abroad.

NSO may see the handwriting on the wall in terms of the pushback against its malware. It may contemplate so much controversy that either the state will cease to permit its sale or the world will prohibit it. That’s why NSO is getting ahead of the curve. It knows about the Tool and is already offering to sell countries a “civilian” (meaning less problematic) version. Presumably, health ministries and government population registries would compile databases covering all citizens. Then, algorithms developed by the Shin Bet and/or NSO would manipulate the data to detect patterns among the population.

If you know who is already infected with COVID-19, you can trace their movements, who they’ve been in proximity to, and then spread a wider net to stop the circulation of the virus in the wider population. But, of course, such a tool can be used for much more nefarious purposes.

If you’re a Saudi intelligence agent, you can target a specific state enemy — where they go, who they meet, who they email or text, what they say to each other. You can go backward in time as long as you wish to follow such trails. It offers endless dragnet opportunities to ensnare targeted individuals and anyone who has any contact, whether benign or suspicious. This saves such security agents the tedious process of hauling suspects in for interrogation and attempting to elicit from them, by persuasion or force, incriminating information.

Also read: COVID-19 Could Result in a Geopolitical Face-Off

Bennett is promoting this new NSO product as a way to monetise the COVID-19 epidemic. Israel is one of the top ten weapons exporters in the world. But now, it’s also become a powerhouse in the field of black-hat cyber-security: selling tools used by the world’s most repressive regimes to exert social control.

It seems like human nature that grifters and con artists will exploit tragedy in order to cheat unwitting individuals. Even major corporations advertise during such disasters in order to promote their brands. But in this case, Bennett is using the power of his state office to promote not just an individual product, but the entire mass surveillance state it represents.

When a country buys Pegasus or the civilian version of the Tool, they are not just buying a discrete product. They are, in fact, buying all of the social, political, and intelligence premises built into it. Even if, for example, you have a national constitution or a set of regulations that govern surveillance and individual privacy, these tools are so powerful, so sweeping that they vacuum up massive amounts of data. The data cries out to be used and manipulated, which is what intelligence agencies like the NSA and the IDF’s Unit 8200 do.

In the process, they far outstrip any protections that may be in place to prevent misuse of personal data or violations of privacy. In that sense, Israel is exporting its own national security state alongside these cyber-tools: a state that sacrifices individual rights on the altar of security. A state in which citizens defer to state authorities who act in their name. So, when another country implements Israeli cyber-ware, they too will absorb some of these assumptions and values embedded in their development.

In effect, these cyber-spying tools are outrunning the development of laws to regulate them. There is no international code under which cyber-surveillance technology may be regulated. It is a Wild West out there. These are conditions Israel finds ideal for pursuing both its geo-political and commercial interests, interests that thrive on confusion, division, and uncertainty — precisely the conditions we now face.

Richard Silverstein blogs at Tikun Olam, where he covers the the Israeli national security state. He has contributed to the essay collections, A Time to Speak Out: Independent Jewish Voices on Israel, Zionism and Jewish Identity and Israel and Palestine: Alternate Perspectives on Statehood.

This article was published on Jacobin. Read the original here.

Netanyahu Set to Survive Another Knife-Edge Israeli Election

It could be days, or even weeks, before a new Israeli government emerges, after the horse-trading that has become standard after decades of close-run elections.

Benjamin Netanyahu may well have survived to fight another day as Israel’s prime minister after a third knife-edge election in less than a year.

However, it could be days, or even weeks, before a new Israeli government emerges, after the horse-trading that has become standard after decades of close-run elections.

With more than 90% of the vote in the March 2 election counted, Netanyahu’s nationalist Likud party and its allies can probably muster 59 seats in the 120-member Knesset, two short of a majority.

The main opposition Blue and White party of ex-general Benny Gantz will have trouble cobbling together a Knesset majority of the centre and left, given Gantz has ruled out a coalition with the Arab List.

Gantz’s party slipped at the election from its showing in the previous encounters over the past year, in April and September. This will weaken his hold on his leadership and diminish his bargaining power in a coalition-building process.

Also read: Explainer: Israel Voted Three Times in a Year. What Happens Now?

The Arab List represents Israel’s Arab population. This accounts for 20% of the country’s people, or 17% of eligible voters.

The Arab List is set to improve its position in the Knesset from 13 to possibly 14 or 15 quotas. This is a significant advance.

The wild card in all of this is the position of the staunchly secularist Yisrael Beiteinu party of Russian émigré Avigdor Lieberman, whose list appears to have secured up to seven quotas.

This places Lieberman, a former Netanyahu ally turned antagonist, in a potentially powerful king-making position. Lieberman has declared he will not serve in a government populated by the more extreme Orthodox Jewish parties. These political alignments shun military service.

But if there is a lesson in Israel’s politics in this latest fractious stage it is that no constellation of political forces can be taken for granted. Election fatigue after three polls in 12 months may well drive various players towards some sort of accommodation.

Israeli support for the status quo in the person of Netanyahu, who is under indictment on criminal charges, has signalled exasperation with continuing political paralysis. Gantz and his centrist party did not made a compelling case for change.

Lieberman’s support for any coalition that might eventually emerge could be described as fluid, depending on the allocation of the spoils of victory and his own resolute opposition to partnership with parties on the extremities of the religious right.

All this raises the possibility of a national unity coalition that would involve Natanyahu in partnership with Gantz. The two might rotate the premiership. This sort of arrangement has been tried before with varying degrees of success.

It was significant that on election night, after it became clear Netanyahu was likely to survive and Gantz had slipped, the two leaders refrained from making negative references to each other.

On security issues, they are not far apart, in any case.

The point of all this is that Israel has entered a period during which the playing cards will be shuffled in an attempt to come up with the sort of hand that enables relatively stable government.

Complicating calculations about the next stage is the fact that Netanyahu is due in court on March 17 to face serious charges of bribery, fraud and breach of trust.

His allies in the Knesset have said they will seek to pass a law that would preclude, or freeze, the prosecution of any sitting prime minister.

That manoeuvre is given little prospect of success.

What may evolve is that judges agree to delay hearings for a short period, pending attempts to form a government. In any case, court proceedings may well drag on for a year or more.

In the meantime, Netanyahu would continue in his role. Remarkably, criminal charges do not preclude such a continuation in office.

Also read: In Israel, Yet Another Election on Benjamin Netanyahu’s Future

On the other hand, the uncertainties a criminal trial engenders would be potentially destabilising politically.

In the end, the willingness of enough Israelis to look the other way when it comes to charges of criminality appears to have enabled Netanyahu to survive as prime minister.

This observation comes with the caveat that, in political terms, not much can be taken for granted in Israel.

Typical, perhaps, of attitudes towards the case against Israel’s leader were these remarks in The Guardian by a small businesswoman in Jerusalem:

I don’t mind if he eats takeaway food in boxes covered with diamonds. Look what is happening around us.

One of the charges against Netanyahu is that he improperly used public funds to feed himself and his family.

From an international perspective, the Israeli election result is likely to pose a significant dilemma. That is if Netanyahu presses on with his threats to annex settlement blocs in the West Bank and the Jordan Valley.

Most countries regard these settlements on land occupied after the 1967 Six-Day War as illegal under international law.

This is where a potential Netanyahu victory aligns itself with a possible Trump re-election.

No American president has been as accommodating to Israel’s nationalist impulses. No US administration has been as antagonistic to Palestinian aspirations.

Also Read: In 10 Points, What the ‘Israel Model’ Is and Why It’s Bad for India

Washington yielded to long-standing Israeli pressure to move its embassy to Jerusalem and at the same time reverse US policy that regarded settlements as a breach of international law.

If Netanyahu is confirmed as Israel’s prime minister for another term and Trump is re-elected, prospects for an accommodation between Israelis and Palestinians will likely become more distant.

Elections have consequences.

Tony Walker, Adjunct Professor, School of Communications, La Trobe University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Trump Plan for Palestinian State Gives Israel Control of Illegal Settlements, ‘Undivided Jerusalem’

Under Trump’s proposed Middle East peace plan the United States will recognise Israeli settlements on the occupied West Bank.

Washington: US President Donald Trump on Tuesday proposed creation of a Palestinian state with a capital in East Jerusalem, dependent on Palestinians taking steps to become self-governing, in an attempt to achieve a peace breakthrough in their decades of conflict with Israel.

Senior administration officials, briefing Reuters on the details of a plan the president was due to announce at the White House at mid-day, said that under Trump’s proposed Middle East peace plan the United States will recognise Israeli settlements on the occupied West Bank.

In exchange, Israel would agree to accept a four-year freeze on new settlement activity while Palestinian statehood is negotiated, the officials said.

Israeli-Palestinian talks broke down in 2014, and it was far from clear that the Trump plan will resuscitate them.

US officials said they were braced for initial Palestinian skepticism but hoped that over time they will agree to negotiate. The plan places high hurdles for the Palestinians to overcome to reach their long-sought goal of a state.


It remains to be seen also how Israel responds, given the pressures the right-wing Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, faces going into his third attempt at re-election in less than a year.

The plan encompasses about 80 pages, 50 of them the political plan announced on Tuesday and 30 from an economic plan announced last July setting up a $50 billion economic revival plan for Palestinians, Jordan and Egypt.

The US plan represented the most dramatic and detailed attempt to break the historic deadlock between Israel and the Palestinians in several years, the result of a three-year effort by Trump senior advisers Jared Kushner and Avi Berkowitz and former adviser Jason Greenblatt.

Trump has endorsed a proposed map outlining the two states, the officials said. The Palestinian state would be double the size of land that Palestinians currently control and would be connected by roads, bridges and tunnels, the official said.

Trump briefed Netanyahu and his rival in Israel’s March 2 elections, Blue and White Party chief Benny Gantz, in talks on Monday. Netanyahu was to appear alongside Trump for his announcement on Tuesday.

Asked what Washington was prepared to do to advance negotiations, the officials said it was up to the Palestinians to come forward and to say they are prepared to negotiate.

Also read: Why Trump’s Recognition of the Golan Heights as Israeli Territory Matters

They said both Netanyahu and Gantz had said they were willing to support the effort.

Israeli leaders have agreed to negotiate on the basis of the Trump plan and agreed to the map, the officials said. Israel’s agreement on statehood for Palestinians is dependent on a security arrangement to protect Israelis, they said.

Israel will also take steps to ensure Muslim access to al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem and respect Jordan’s role regarding holy sites, the officials said.

Palestinian statehood would be dependent on Palestinians taking steps for self-government, such as respect for human rights, freedom of the press and having transparent and credible institutions, the officials said.

“In doing the map it’s incredibly difficult to try to create contiguity for a Palestinian state based on what’s happened over the past 25 years so if we don’t do this freeze now I think that their chance to ever have a state basically goes away,” said one official in reference to the growth of Jewish settlements.

“So what we’ve done is basically we’ve bought four more years for them to get their act together and try to negotiate a deal for them to become a state, and I think this is a huge opportunity for them,” the official said.

The official said the question for Palestinians is will they “come to the table and negotiate?”

If they agree to negotiate, there are some areas that can be compromised in the future, the official said without offering details.

Trump’s plan calls for Palestinians to be able to return to a future state of Palestine and creates a “generous compensation fund,” the official said.

About Israel retaining the settlements, a US official said: “The plan is based on a principle that people should not have to move to accomplish peace … But it does stop future settlement expansion which we consider to be the most realistic approach.

“The notion that hundreds of thousands of people, or tens of thousands of people, are going to be removed either forcibly or not from their homes is just not worth entertaining,” the official said.

Before the Trump announcement, thousands of Palestinians demonstrated in Gaza City and Israeli troops reinforced positions near a flashpoint site between the Palestinian city of Ramallah and the Jewish settlement of Beit El in the West Bank.

While Israeli leaders have welcomed Trump’s long-delayed plan, Palestinian leaders had rejected it even before its official release, saying his administration was biased towards Israel.

A Netanyahu spokesman said the Israeli leader would fly to Moscow on Wednesday to brief Russian President Vladimir Putin on the proposals.

Palestinian leaders had said they were not invited to Washington, and that no plan could work without them.

On Monday Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas said he would not agree to any deal that did not secure a two-state solution. That formula, the basis for many years of frustrated international peace efforts, envisages Israel co-existing with a Palestinian state.

Palestinians have refused to deal with the Trump administration in protest at such pro-Israeli policies as its moving the US Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, whose eastern half the Palestinians seek for a future capital.

The Trump administration in November reversed decades of US policy when Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said Washington no longer regarded the settlements on West Bank land as a breach of international law. Palestinians and most countries view the settlements as illegal, which Israel disputes.

Both Trump and Netanyahu face political challenges at home. Trump was impeached in the House of Representatives last month and is on trial in the Senate on abuse of power charges.

On Tuesday Netanyahu was formally indicted in court on corruption charges, after he withdrew his bid for parliamentary immunity from prosecution.

Both men deny any wrongdoing.

(Reuters)

Note: The headline of this article has been changed to correct initial impressions based on Donald Trump’s remarks that East Jerusalem would be the capital of Palestine under the ‘peace plan’. In fact, the plan assigns ‘Undivided Jerusalem’ to Israel but envisages the Palestinian state establishing its capital in an area of ‘East Jerusalem’ that lies outside the illegal wall — or “security barrier” — that Israel has built on occupied Palestinian territory.

Watch | India and Israel: Strategic Partnership & Beyond

The interview also addresses India’s evolving stance on the Israel-Palestine conflict.

Happymon Jacob speaks to Professor P.R. Kumaraswamy of the School of International Studies at Jawaharlal Nehru University and honorary director of the Middle East Institute, New Delhi,  about the evolution of India-Israel relations.

He discusses the various aspects of India’s relationship with Israel in the context of India’s larger West Asia policy. He also describes the various phases that mark India’s relationship with Israel from having no formal diplomatic relations to forging an increasingly significant strategic partnership. Professor

Kumaraswamy also addresses India’s evolving stance on the Israel-Palestine conflict, human rights issues, and the so-called convergence of Hindutva and Zionism.

Embed Code:

Setback for Netanyahu as Exit Polls Say Israel Election Too Close to Call

Exit polls show Netanyahu’s Likud and the centrist Blue and White in a tie. Neither party appears to have enough seats with their allies to form a majority.


Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appeared to suffer a setback in national elections Tuesday, with his religious and nationalist allies failing to secure a parliamentary majority, early exit polls showed.

Exit polls from Israel’s three major television stations showed the centrist Blue and White party of ex-military chief Benny Gantz is projected to win 32 to 34 seats, while Netanyahu’s right-wing Likud party is on pace for between 30 and 33 seats. Another projection estimated both parties would receive 32 seats each.

Israeli exit polls are often imprecise and initial results expected on Wednesday could shift the seat count.

Either way, the results indicate that Netanyahu or Gantz will face tough and protracted negotiations to cobble together a government.

The initial results showed that neither Blue and White nor Likud would be able to form a 61-seat majority in the 120 member Knesset with the support of their allies.

Likud and its religious and nationalist allies with which it hoped to form a majority only have 55 seats, less than in April’s election, according to the average of the three exit polls. Blue and White could enlist the support of 59 for a centre-left government.

Lieberman as kingmaker

The results put ex-Defence Minister Avigdor Lieberman in a kingmaker role. His secular, hardline Yisrael Beitenu that receives most of its support from Russian-speakers was on pace to win 9 seats, nearly double its performance in April’s election.

Lieberman, a former Netanyahu protege, refused to join a Likud-led government following April’s election because of what he described as excessive influence from ultra-Orthodox religious parties. His move forced Netanyahu to call new elections to avoid giving other parties a chance to form a government.

Also read: Will Election-Weary Israelis End Benjamin Netanyahu’s Rule?

Late Tuesday, the Moldovan-born Lieberman reiterated that he sought a broad unity government with Likud and Blue and White.

“There is only one option for us,” he said, adding the unity government should exclude the country’s ultra-Orthodox religious parties. 

Netanyahu’s future in doubt

A potential complication is that Gantz has ruled out forming a government with a Netanyahu-led Likud at a time when the prime minister is expected to be indicted on corruption charges in the coming weeks. Lawmakers in Gantz’s party have said they are open to a unity government with Likud, but not under Netanyahu’s leadership.

“We will act to form a broad unity government that will express the will of the people,” Gantz said at a post-election rally, though he cautioned supporters to wait for final results.

Lieberman is unlikely to want to sit in a government with left-wing Arab parties or the ultra-Orthodox religious parties. Blue and White is also unlikely to ask Arab parties to join a coalition.

Netanyahu in a late-night address to party supporters said that he wanted to assemble a “strong Zionist government and to prevent a dangerous anti-Zionist government” with any Arab parties.

Continuing a campaign theme against Israel’s 20% Arab minority that critics have called racist, he claimed that Arab parties “negate the existence of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state” and “glorify bloodthirsty murderers.”

Arab parties come in third place

The Joint List, an alliance of Arab parties, came in third with 14 seats, according to exit polls. They have suggested they could potentially block Netanyahu from becoming prime minister by recommending Gantz.

In other results, the ultra-Orthodox Shas and United Torah Judaism were expected to win nine and eight seats, respectively; the right-wing Yamina party seven; the Labor Party six; and Democratic Union five seats. The ultranationalist Jewish Power faction, widely viewed as a supremacist group, failed to overcome the threshold to enter parliament.

Over the next days, the focus will shift to President Reuven Rivlin, who is responsible for choosing the candidate he believes has the best chance to form a government. That is usually, but not always, the leader of the largest party.

This article was originally published on DW.

Israeli Lawmakers Approve Netanyahu’s Jordan Valley Annexation Plan

The Israeli prime minister said Sunday that the Jordan Valley was Israel’s “defensive wall to the east.”


Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government legalised a new settlement in the West Bank on Sunday, following the final meeting of his Cabinet ahead of Israel’s general elections on Tuesday.

“The final approval will, of course, be given with the formation of the new government,” Israeli daily Haaretz quoted Netanyahu as saying at the meeting, which took place in the remote settlement called Mevo’ot Yeriho.

Mevo’ot Yeriho was founded as an agricultural settlement in 1999 on the outskirts of the Palestinian city of Jericho in the West Bank’s Jordan Valley. Around 30 families live there.

The international community and the Palestinians consider Israeli settlements in the West Bank to be illegal, but Israel makes a distinction between “official” and “unofficial” settlements.

Politics and territory

During the Cabinet meeting Sunday, Netanyahu said he was proud to establish what he expects to be Israel’s eastern border in the future, and to officially incorporate Jordan Valley settlements into Israel.

Also read: Netanyahu Announces Post-Poll Plan to Annex Jordan Valley

Netanyahu said Sunday that the Jordan Valley was Israel’s “defensive wall to the east.”

“The Jordan Valley, together with the territories that will be part of Israel, guarantees that the military will be here forever,” he said. “Instead of having a country that is only a few kilometers wide, it is a country with strategic depth and strategic height.”

Sunday’s move comes after Netanyahu promised last week to annex the Jordan Valley to Israel if he wins Tuesday’s elections. The announcement drew an international backlash, with the Palestinians, the EU and the UN condemning the annexation plans.

The Jordan Valley takes up almost one-third of the West Bank’s territory. Extending Israeli sovereignty over the valley and annexing Jewish settlements there has been at the center of Netanyahu’s second election campaign in 2019.

Critics have said the annexation is a political ploy from Netanyahu to boost turnout among his right-wing base. The premier took a big political hit following his failure to form a ruling coalition after April’s elections.

If he wins Tuesday, Netanyahu said he would annex settlements in coordination with US President Donald Trump, who is expected to release the US peace plan for the region after the election.

An estimated 400,000 Israeli settlers now live in the West Bank among 2.6 million Palestinians. The settlements are seen as a barrier to the peace process, as they are built on land claimed by the Palestinians as part of a potential state.

This article has been republished from DW.

Israel: Why the Campaign of The Generals Who Challenged Netanyahu Failed

The three former IDF chiefs – Benny Gantz, Moshe Ya’alon and Gabi Ashkenazifailed – failed in their efforts to create a new centrist, non-ideological bloc that would replace Netanyahu’s ruling right-wing bloc.

The close results of the April 9 Israeli elections, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as the apparent winner, represent a missed opportunity for his centrist rivals.

As a foreign policy scholar who researches Israeli politics, I believe that perhaps the greatest irony of the election was the failure of Netanyahu’s challengers, the newly formed “generals’ party,” to contest his approach to security.

Security has long been the central issue in Israeli politics. It’s the one area in which this unique party would presumably have had the most to say. Former Israeli generals and retired intelligence chiefs have traditionally been the nation’s most outspoken critics of Netanyahu’s security policies.

Yet, the generals did not capitalise on their security credentials by offering a real alternative to the government’s policies, especially the government’s hard-line policies toward the Palestinians. Instead, their “Blue and White” ticket chose to turn this election into one more referendum on Netanyahu’s character.

In doing so, they failed in their effort to create a new centrist, nonideological bloc that would replace Netanyahu’s ruling right-wing bloc.

Control of Israel’s government, the Knesset, seen here, is at stake in the election. Credit: Reuters/Ronen Zvulun

Military at home in politics

The participation of retired generals in Israeli politics is nothing new. The Israel Defense Forces, or IDF, has always been the country’s most revered institution, and it has been common practice for generals to enter the political arena upon retirement.

Three of Israel’s 12 prime ministers – Yitzhak Rabin, Ehud Barak and Ariel Sharon – were retired generals, and numerous other military veterans have entered the political fray over the years, some more successfully than others.

But the unified list of three former IDF chiefs – Benny Gantz, Moshe Ya’alon and Gabi Ashkenazi – who teamed up in February to unseat the prime minister was without precedent.

The generals’ Blue and White ticket was co-led by the popular centrist politician Yair Lapid, whose enigmatic views on security issues mirrored the vague centrism of the three generals. The party tried to attract both right-of-center and left-of-center voters by running a campaign that was largely devoid of substance.

It studiously avoided engaging in key issues, such as the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Blue and White offered only banal policy pronouncements and a Trump-like “Israel First” slogan.

Netanyahu’s agenda lives

Netanyahu received bad news in the midst of his election campaign. In February, Israel’s attorney general announced his intention to indict him on three separate corruption cases.Pa

By focusing on Netanyahu’s flawed character and homing in on his corruption scandals, the Blue and White candidates convinced centre-left voters to abandon the traditionally left-leaning Labor and Meretz parties.

But they did not convince right-of-centre voters to abandon Netanyahu.

I believe that by failing to offer a coherent alternative to the right’s hard-line national security approach, the leadership of Blue and White failed to sway voters from Netanyahu’s camp over to their centrist slate.

Instead, they took votes from the left-bloc parties. Indeed, Tuesday’s results show that both Labor and Meretz suffered stinging defeats, with Labor falling to historic lows – their voters shifted over to Blue and White.

Also read: Israel: Benjamin Netanyahu Secures Fifth Term as Prime Minister

Likud in the lead

To be sure, replacing Netanyahu’s dominant Likud party was no small ambition – not even for generals who once led their country into the battlefield.

The right-wing bloc has dominated the Israeli political scene for years. That’s due to several factors, including Israelis’ reaction to the violence that accompanied the second Palestinian intifada in the early 2000s, more violence – still ongoing – that followed Israel’s decision to unilaterally leave the Gaza Strip and years of on-again, off-again failed peace talks.

Indeed, a preelection survey found that a plurality of Jewish Israelis, 40%, wanted to see the formation of a right-wing government. Just 25% preferred a right-centre government; 16%, a centrist government of national unity; and a centre-left or left-wing government was the least preferred option at 15%.

Even so, this election was a missed opportunity to do what the opposition in Israel has long failed to do: to present a distinct alternative security agenda.

Netanyahu’s hardline approach on the Palestinian issue is the only approach with which young Israelis, who have grown up with Netanyahu, are familiar. His narrative of Israel’s failure to reach peace with the Palestinians – it’s the Palestinians’ fault – is their only version of that story.

Not surprisingly, a preelection poll by the Israel Democracy Institute found that 18-24-year-old voters overwhelmingly preferred Netanyahu to the more moderate Gantz – the opposite of the trend among Israelis 65 and older.

Letting Netanyahu off the hook on security issues allowed him to maintain his self-cultivated image as “Mr. Security.” It also enabled him to put the generals on the defensive, warning that they would establish a Palestinian state that “will endanger our existence.”

Who defines Israel’s national interest?

The security community, composed of veterans of the IDF and Israel’s intelligence agencies, has for years argued the opposite.

Several organisations of senior security establishment veterans have argued that the two-state solution is the only way to preserve Israel as both a Jewish and democratic state. They include the Peace and Security Association and the more recently formed Commanders for Israel’s Security, and are supported by hundreds of former generals and intelligence chiefs.

The silence of Gantz’s team on the two-state solution also enabled Netanyahu to move the security discussion from a status quo policy, which critics call “creeping annexation,” to a full embrace of the hard-right’s agenda to annex the occupied territories.

Just three days before the election, Netanyahu vowed to annex West Bank settlements, a step he had always resisted but apparently felt he needed to take to shore up his right flank.

It was also a step he could take in the absence of countervailing pressure from his centrist rivals, who could have emphasised – but didn’t – the dangers of annexation to Israeli national interests.

Netanyahu was therefore able to get away with a dramatic policy shift that, if carried out, would bury the prospects for a two-state solution. He endorsed that position in June 2009, but has since abandoned his pledge.

The last two IDF chiefs who beat a Likud prime minister – Rabin in 1992 and Barak in 1999 – offered clear alternatives to the incumbent’s policies. By calling for a reordering of national priorities, they were able to form left-of-centre governments, a scenario that is impossible today due to the decimation of the left.

Guy Ziv, Assistant Professor, American University School of International Service.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.