Yair Lapid: No Grasp of History, No Plan for the Future

Liberal Jews and other moderate types who wish Israel well are positively tripping over each other in trying to cast Yair Lapid as the savior of all that is good and decent in Israel, and as the person who will somehow bring Israel to its senses regarding its "Palestinian Question." My advise to them: "Don't hold your breathe."

Here are a few quotes from Lapid that should clarify some of his positions and his general seriousness re policy (as opposed to electoral politics.)

"I do not think that the Arabs want peace."

Here we have him channeling both Netanyahu and Ehud Barak, the leaders of the outgoing coalition. (And, as a matter of fact, ignoring the Saudi - Arab League peace plan, Abbas's own claims, and the opinion of Ehud Olmert and Tzipi Lini who conducted the last serious round of negotiations with Abbas.)

"I do not care what the Arabs want. What I want is not a new Middle East, but to be rid of them and put a tall fence between us and them."

Here we have him channeling Ariel Sharon, the father of the  "unilateral separation" that brought us the current mess in Gaza and Israel's security barrier (aka "Apartheid Wall") built well into the occupied West Bank. He is also echoing Avigdor Lieberman here. And while this may have helped him win votes with Lieberman's base - after Lieberman merged his party into the Likud -  this attitude is only going exacerbate Israels problems with its own Palestinian citizens.

"The important thing is to maintain a Jewish majority in the Land of Israel."

Here he echoing the pat consensus of Israeli (and perhaps Diaspora) Jews. But in Lapid's case, this is the only thing motivating him to give up some of the occupied territories. This is not a basis for peace, but rather a basis for Palestinians bantustans - or if you prefer Indian reservations.

"The Palestinians must be brought to an understanding that Jerusalem will always remain under Israeli sovereignty and that there is no point for them in opening negotiations about Jerusalem. We have no existence without Jerusalem. The Tower of David is important for Israel's heritage and existence, because it is more than a tower, it is a symbol. It is more important than the Azrieli Towers [a large luxury condominium] in Tel Aviv." 

Here he is putting the spokes in any negotiated peace plan. The Palestinians will not agree to anything that does not give them at least some parts in Jerusalem  Why or how  he thinks the Palestinians "can be brought to understand this" when they haven't done so yet, is completely beyond him. (And why they need to understand anything - when he has already stated they don't want peace and he favours unilateral action - is just one of many contradictions in his "made for TV" platform.)

And his final remarks, re symbolic importance to Israel's heritage of the Tower of David, is just laughably ignorant (though perhaps sadly typical of too many Israelis). The Tower of David is a citadel complex and tower standing next to the Jaffa Gate in the old city of Jerusalem.  It was built by the Ottoman Turks in 1541.  The tower itself was originally built as a minaret  The Ottoman complex was built on the site of previous fortifications (Crusader, Arab, Byzantine, Roman.) The very first fortification on the site was built by King Herod (hardly a glorious Jewish figure) just as Judea was slipping from a Roman vassal state to a direct province of the Roman Empire. Nothing remains of the Herodian structures. The site was first misidentified as the location of King David's palace by the Byzantines, and the tower itself did not begin to be called The Tower of David until approximately 1600. During the British Mandate period it was turned into a museum of Palestinian Arab folklore.

This kind of cheap - and ignorant - emotionalism should not surprise us. We should not forget that Yair Lapid's only claim to fame before entering politics a year ago was a a handsome television host, who never offended of challenged his guests. And of course, that his father also started a political party that meteorically shot to ascension. That party, Shinui, garnered 15 seats in the 2003 elections, and the elder Lapid served as Minister of Justice in the government of Ariel Sharon. The party managed to get almost none its platform implemented, was wracked by internal dissension and completely disappeared from the electoral scene in the elections of 2006. It is generally believed that the elder Lapid was a lot smarter and more principled then his son. Although a lot less photogenic.

MeAyin Ya'avo Ezri? Certainly not from this election.

The headlines say things like “Israeli Election Stunner: Right and Left Tied!”, or “Israel Election Opens Dialogue on Settlements”. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

While yesterday's election indeed showed us a few surprises, and many new faces have now made it into the Knesset, and while the election results were in many ways a rebuke of Prime Minister Netanyahu - there is certainly no opening whatsoever here for peace, justice and/or reconciliation with the Palestinians or even a serious "dialogue on the settlements." That will come – if at all – because of outside pressure, either from the Palestinians themselves or from the West. And it will come – again, if at all – only after the next elections, not from this newly elected Knesset.

The chart above shows the official election results as of Wednesday afternoon Israeli time. The results so far are: Likud 31 seats, Yesh Atid (Yair Lapid) 19, Labour 15, Shas 11, HaBayit HaYehudi (Nafatali Bennet) 11, United Torah Judaism 7, Hatnuah (Tzipi Livni) 6, Meretz 6, Raam-Taal 5, Hadash 4, Balad 3, and Kadima 2.

Final results will not be known until Thursday or Friday when the military vote is added in. Typically this adds a seat or two to the “right”. But even if the seat allocation remains the same or (and this is highly unlikely) shifts against Netanyahu’s current coalition there is zero chance of a peace-advancing government arising from this election.

The optical illusion of a close race occurs because of the popular, but incorrect framing of Israeli electoral politics as being composed of two blocks: the “religious – right" on the one hand, and the “centre – left” on the other. Using this flawed analysis we see that "the blocks" are indeed tied. The “religious - right block" consists of Likud, Habayit Hayehudi, Shas, and United Torah Judaism. They currently have 60 seats. The “centre - left block” consists of Yesh Atid, Labour, Hatnuah, Meretz , Raam-Taal, Hadash, Balad, and Kadima. They too have 60 seats. And while the two block theory may well describe the nature of the governing coalition versus the opposition in the outgoing Knesset, these are not stable or cohesive blocks.

More importantly the two block model does not reflect the parties’ range of positions on the crucial “Palestinian” question. In regard to this – the most existential question facing Israel – there are at least three blocks:

• “the hawks” who wish to strengthen Israel’s hold on the occupied territories and increase Jewish dominance over the Palestinians; 
• “the doves” who wish to end the occupation and wish for greater equality between Jews and Palestinians; and 
• “the chickens” who – for whatever reason – don’t have an extremely strong opinion about these issues one way or the other, and who, more importantly, and as a matter of practical policy, are content to maintain the status quo vis a vis the Palestineans.

Using this analysis we have the following election results.

• Hawks (Likud, Habayit Hayehudi) 42 seats
• Doves (Hatnuah, Meretz, Raam-Taal, Hadash, Balad) 24 seats
• Chickens (Yesh Atid, Labour, Shas, UTJ, Kadima) 54 seats. (And yes I know that Shas – for most practical purposes – behaves like a “hawk” party, but this is not essential to its platform or raison d’etre.)

Using this lens we clearly see that there is no possible majority coalition for making the needed moves to achieve peace justice and reconciliation with the Palestinians  Add to that the fact the 12 of the seats in the “doves” block are from non-Zionist “Arab” parties – parties that none of the “chicken” or “hawk” parties would ever agree to admit into the government, and you see how far we really are from a “tie” or from an “opening and dialogue on settlements.” [Update: As if to highlight my last point the Jerusalem Post reported most recently: "Lapid says no to Labor effort to block Netanyahu from forming a government. "We won't cooperate with Haneen Zoabi." Zoabi is a Knesset member of an "Arab" party.]

As the Globe and Mail reported: “Whatever this election was about, it wasn't about making peace with the Palestinians …. It was about what Israelis want in their daily lives.” What is so sad about this is that most Israelis don’t think their government’s policies in the West Bank or towards Palestinians has anything to do with their daily lives. Out of sight is out of mind, and the status quo is the best of all possible worlds. Or, at least, it is until one day it isn't. When and from where will the pressure come to change this perception? I don't know. A "dove" can legitimately ask, "MeAyin Ya'avo Ezri?" Certainly not from this election.

Meddling in Israeli Politics

The purported meddling of Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyau in American politics has been much in the news lately. But what is equally, and perhaps more significant, has been the meddling of foreigners - mostly rich American Jews - in Israeli politics. Haaretz reports that "More than half of contributions to Israeli politicians come from foreign donors". The headline actually underplays the issue:

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu raised 96.8 percent of his NIS 1.2 million in campaign contributions from foreign donors, according to the State Comptroller's Office, which published the candidates' campaign contribution reports for the last two years on its website on Thursday. ... 

Among political parties, Likud raised the highest percentage abroad - 67 percent - while Kadima raised 65 percent overseas. By contrast, Meretz raised zero percent overseas ... 

Meretz leader Zehava Gal-On, whose party members raised campaign funds only in Israel, said contributions from abroad could give foreign individuals or bodies improper influence on Israeli politics. 

"Politicians should be accountable to the public. As long as they raise money transparently, the public must be permitted to judge them in the elections," she says. ...

... Party leadership candidates may raise up to NIS 11,000 from a single donor, but the number of family relatives who may contribute is not restricted. Thus, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu received several donations from members of the Falic family of Miami, Florida. ...

Israeli politicians have two fundraising methods. The first, used by Labor leader Yacimovich and Moshe Feiglin of Likud, is to raise several small contributions, mainly from Israelis. The other way, favored by Netanyahu, is raising large sums from a small number of contributors, mostly from abroad. 

The latter method proves much more beneficial. A foreign donor contributes an average of NIS 12,565 - five-and-a-half times more than an Israeli one, whose average contribution is NIS 2,260. 

This means a relatively small group of about 550 foreign contributors are responsible for the big money behind Israel's politicians. 

The date for Likud's primaries has not been set, but party members have begun raising funds. At this stage, 261 foreign nationals have contributed NIS 2.72 million to Likud members - 67 percent of the contributions they have raised so far. ...

Kadima's candidates have raised 65 percent of their contributions from abroad. Dan Halutz, who has left the party, raised 93 percent of his NIS 72,000 from abroad. Avi Dichter raised 88 percent of his NIS 320,000 overseas. Shaul Mofaz raised 67 percent of his NIS 1.475 million abroad. Tzipi Livni raised 58% of her NIS 1.6 million from foreign sources. 

Yair Lapid has raised NIS 132,000 for his party from 38 donors, 40 percent of the money from overseas. 

Labor's members raised NIS 4.1 million in contributions for the primaries, 38.5 percent from abroad. Dr. Roby Nathanson raised 87 percent of his NIS 87,000 from overseas. Next, in terms of percentage, comes MK Isaac Herzog, who raised about half of his NIS 1.2 million from abroad, followed by Amir Peretz, who raised 42 percent of his NIS 1.3 million from overseas. 

Yacimovich, who won the [Labor] primary elections, raised NIS 603,000 from 1,756 donors, only two of them from abroad, who gave small sums each. 

Money talks, and in Israel too. And we shouldn't be so naive as to believe that big donors don't also have influence. So, it seems that Israeli politics is at least as much under the control of ideologically committed rich American Jews, as of its own citizens. And most of these American Jews, it seems, are ready to fight to the last drop of Israeli (and Palestinian) blood in order to maintain their fantasy Jewish State and their inspirational vacation homes.

Something to think about next time you are told that Israelis need to be allowed to make their own decisions about security matters, and that foreigners - whether foreign governments or diaspora Jews - should not meddle and should not press Israelis to take risks that the foreigners will not have to live with themselves. When it comes to Israel, it seems, everyone is meddling everywhere.