A SWING TOWARDS THE CENTRE

To me the most significant recent event of the week was the Israeli election. Candidly, I waited for the election results with a sense of dread: a further swing to the right which in turn would lead to Israel’s continuous isolation, strained relations with US, and the reinforcement of the general perception, especially on the campuses, that an organization such as Hamas, an undeniably terrorist entity, occupies higher moral ground than the Jewish state.  This did not happen. No matter what the right wing pundits say the electorate sent a clear and unambiguous message to Netanyahu: address the issue of an equitable distribution of service to the state and the issue of Israel’s standing in the international community. The first is clearly aimed at the religious segment of the population, which is exempt from compulsory military service; the second would necessitate a renewed commitment to the two state resolution of the conflict and a resumption of talks with the Palestinians.

I suspect that once the coalition has coalesced, we will begin noticing some encouraging trends.

Meanwhile, below is a table of political parties in the Knesset, their leadership and their place on the political spectrum.

Name of party	Leader	Position	18th Knes-set	19th Knes-set	COMMENTS
Likud-Beitenu	Netanyahu	Centre Right	42	31	Will lead the coalition.
Yesh Atid	Yair  Lapid	Centre left	0	19	Universal military service, resumption of talks. Dismantling of far flung settlements.
Labour	Shelley Yachimovich	Left of Centre	8	15	Favours resumption of peace talks; primary focus on economy and security
Habayit Hayehudi (The Jewish Home)	Naftali Bennett	Extreme Right Settlers’ party	3	12	Settlers’ Party; Opposed to two state solution.
Shas	Reb Ovadia Yosef (Sephardi)	Zionist religious party	11	11	Supports two state solution
United Torah Judaism	Haredi-Ashkenazi rabbis	Non Zionist	5	7	Not really a party; coalition of Hassidic groups. Not likely to be in the forthcoming government.
Hatnua	Tzipi Livni	Centre Left	-	6	Broke away from Kadema to form the new party.
Kadima	Shaul Mofaz	Centre Left	28	2	Favours resumption  of talks; unlikely to be influential.
Meretz	Zahava Gal-On	Left	3	6	Roots in the hard left Mapam party. Committed to two state solution.
TA’AL United Arab List	Ibrahim Sarsur,	Represents the Islamic movement		4	Religious Muslim Party
Hadash	Mohammed Barakeh	Far Left. Former Communist party.		4	Two state solution and abandonment of Jewish state concept.
Balad	Jamal Zahalka	Pan Arab	3	3	Opposed to a Jewish State.
				120

 Coalition Partners in the previous, 18^TH Knesset:  Likud-Beitenu,  Habayit Hayehudi, (The Jewish Home), Shas,  and United Torah Judaism. 

61 IN TOTAL 

BIBI'S FOLLY

I am trying hard to remember an armed conflict which ends with no losers, only winners. The last conflict in the Middle East ended with just that: winners all round. Maashal, the leader of the political wing of Hamas, claimed victory, Bibi bowed to international and US pressure not to resort to a land incursion of the West Bank, thus winning a few brownie points and a promise from Hamas that they will stop raining missiles on Israel, US reasserted itself as a major player in the region; Hilary made all the right noises, and Morsi emerged as a statesman demonstrating that he is not entirely shackled by Muslim Brotherhood ideology.  

Actually, there was a loser, albeit a temporary one:  Mahmoud Abbas, the President of the Palestinian Authority, a secular Arab leader who has acknowledged publically and unequivocally, the right of Israel to exist within secure borders. His only precondition to direct negotiation is that Israel stops building new settlements in West Bank.  Since direct talks did not eventuate, he reneged on his promise and went to New York, from which he emerged a clear and unambiguous winner. Bibi responded by announcing that more than 3,000 housing units will be built in the E1 zone, also reneging on his promise to US not to do so.

The UN vote in the status of Palestine is not just a diplomatic defeat for Israel; it is a slap on the face; a well deserved one, some may add.  Just take a look who voted against the resolution: Israel itself, US and Canada, (staunch allies) Panama, the Czech Republic (who did more protecting its Jewish citizens during the war than any other East European country) and several Micronesian states. All the friends of Israel, including Australia who never wavered in its support, could only manage to abstain. Israel is losing friends and allies and the old standby of blaming all anti-Israeli sentiments on anti-Semitism, no longer works. Germany, who has backed Israel both by words and deeds since the formation of the Jewish state, no doubt as partial compensation for the Holocaust, is finding increasingly difficult to do so. Five European countries have summoned the Israeli ambassadors to voice their disquiet; liberal Jews throughout the world are questioning and condemning, some for the first time, recent Israel’s policies.

There is some suggestion that Bibi is acting out  elaborate Machiavellian play to win Israel’s hard right. Once elected he would find a face saving way to back out of a plan that is likely to finally alienate US. However, as Tzipi Livni said: “by then we will have lost [the support of] the entire world and Israel’s closest friends.”

 

THE ARAB SPRING -- THE ARCTIC WINTER

The Arab Spring, especially in Egypt, is over. The arctic summer which followed was short lived and fall is fast approaching. The northerlies began to blow and the long cold winter is about to set in.  Soon the long arctic nights will blanket the land.

What gave us hope to think otherwise?  Democracy is a profoundly Western concept. We own it. It has its roots in Greek antiquity; it developed slowly and torturously in Europe, made its way to the New World, and finally was accepted by the western world as the expression of the highest form of our collective political development. We were so enamoured by this system that after WWII we began to graft this system on to the bodies of Asia and Africa, and more recently on East Europe and the Middle East.  We compared socialist systems with democracy and rightly found them wanting. We looked at oriental despotism in its various forms, and found them to be unquestionably unacceptable. So, we came to the conclusion that democracy is far better than anything else on offer. George W. Bush said: “ I believe that freedom is the deepest need of every human soul “. (April, 2004) This was accepted as a truism; it became mandatory for all nations to adopt democracy and those countries that balked found themselves ostracised. Unless, the country is rich in oil.

I would argue that the demonstrators that toppled Mubarak were not representative of the broad spectrum of the Egyptian population.  Like many others, I sat glued to the TV and following the protest on the internet. What I saw was a large number of young men and women, primarily students or recent graduates, well dressed, well spoken and articulate. Most spoke good English. These people embraced western ideas, and were demanding a say in the decision making process and, more than anything else, they wanted jobs. Overwhelmingly they were scions from families that were not part of the elite, had no political clout or social influence. They laboured to give their children an education and a chance for a better life. However, there is a downside to education: it creates expectations, and when these expectations are not suitably addressed, it leads to discontent. These young people, armed with mobile phones, twitters, and face books, made the revolution happen without really knowing what they were doing.  They were neither organised nor did they have clearly defined goals.  The election which followed proved this: the farmers who live under near-feudal conditions, the uneducated masses who are fundamentally conservative, the religious that are numerous, voted for the religious parties, including the Muslim Brotherhood. The people who started the revolution, i.e. the young educated and westernised elite, were left out in the cold.

Morsi will, or, I should say, already has, bulldozed the new constitution through the parliament and by doing so, set the country on the road to becoming an Islamic republic. The constitution will then go to the people for endorsement, a referendum. I have no doubt whatsoever that it will receive overwhelming support because the majority of people in Egypt, as elsewhere in the Arab world, are conservative and suspicious of western ideas. Moreover, questions will be couched in such a manner as to make its acceptance of the constitution a foregone conclusion.

Finally, there is the question of the military. In most countries, there is a clear delineation between the role of the army and the police. The latter is there to ensure that the laws of the country are obeyed; the former to protect the country from outside enemies. In democratic countries any blurring of these lines are not tolerated.  In the Arab world, and indeed some other countries, often the role of the army is to support the government. It certainly was the case in Egypt; only when this support was withdrawn, did Mubarak’s regime fall.  Quite often the military also act as a bastion against religious extremism, as in the case of Turkey, Pakistan and Egypt, at least in the past. Now a major problem is about to develop: Egypt is the second largest recipient of US military aid. The Egyptian military is keen for this to continue. Meanwhile, politically, Egypt is drifting towards becoming an Islamic state, and the Muslim Brotherhood which is the spiritual godfather of the global Islamist movement, is jockeying for a more prominent role in the Arab world, a situation which cannot possibly be in the interest of US.  Should that happen, military aid to Egypt would surely be reviewed.

Or the military will step in and put an end to the Brotherhood and the new Pharaoh.