At least two new parties could enter the next Knesset, but polls show that the most important figure – the split between the two major blocs – is surprisingly static.
It’s official: The coalition has decided to call early elections, which are to take place on September 4, 2012. The final confirmation of the date is expected next week, once the Likud’s bill on early elections acquires the necessary Knesset votes.
Benjamin Netanyahu enjoyed a rather stable coalition, yet the government expected major hurdles in the coming Knesset session – most notably, the need to come up with a new bill regarding the service of the ultra-Orthodox in the IDF – and the prime minister concluded that it would be better to control his political fate by choosing the earliest possible date for the coming elections.
By going to the polls sooner rather than later, Netanyahu wishes to capitalize on his high approval ratings and not let possible challengers gain momentum. The prime minister would also like to avoid discussion on the 2013-2014 budget, which will include calls for increased government spending at a time when tax revenues are going down, and might prove too hard to control during an election cycle.
The prime minister may also be hoping that the election cycle will overshadow grassroots efforts to reignite last year’s social protest. Activism around common goals is almost impossible during election campaigns, when different parties try to distinguish themselves from one another.
Additionally, a victory by U.S. President Barack Obama in November could also hurt Netanyahu locally. The prime minister is probably hoping that the GOP takes over the White House, but would like to be prepared for a second Obama term in case it doesn’t.
Early September is considered a favorable time for the right, since many in the upper middle class take their vacations abroad. Israel doesn’t allow voting absentee or by mail or internet. In close elections, a few thousand votes could go a very long way.
The elections to the 19th Knesset, however, are not expected to be that close. Netanyahu is considered a decent leader by a majority of Israeli Jews, and support for the main opposition party – Kadima – has collapsed. These elections will be a sort of referendum on Netanyahu and the pillars of his politics: maintaining the status quo of the occupation, increasing war threats against Iran and continuing his conservative fiscal policy. Most people in Israel can live with that, and those who can’t – mainly the Palestinians in the West Bank – don’t get to vote.
Game of blocs
In the coming weeks, I will post updates on new polls, as well as analyses of political trends, candidates and issues. I will try to combine basic explanations with more in-depth material, so that readers who don’t follow the Israeli political news cycle closely can also make some sense of these reports. It is something that even Israelis are finding harder and harder to do, since the local landscape is becoming increasingly fragmented.
The Israeli political system can be roughly divided into two blocs, each one comprised of several parties: The first bloc consists of the parties formally known as “centrist,” the left and the non-Zionist (*); the other bloc includes the religious and secular rightist parties.
In the current Knesset, the center-left bloc includes Kadima, Labor, Atzmaut (a Labor breakaway party), Meretz, Raam-Taal, Balad and Hadash. The religious and secular rightist bloc includes Likud, Israel Beitenu, Shas, Yahadut Hatorah, Habayit Hayehudi and HaIchud Haleumi (Shas and Yahadut Hatorah are Orthodox parties; Habayit Hayehudi and HaIchud Haleumi are national-religious).
Governments usually take one of the following forms: A narrow government, consisting of the bloc that enjoys a majority of the Knesset’s 120 seats, or a “national unity” government, which is a combination of the larger parties at the system’s center. Netanyahu’s current government, just like his previous one in the 1990s, is the perfect narrow, right-wing coalition, with two exceptions: the centrist Atzmaut party, headed by Ehud Barak, is in the government, while the ultra-right HaIchud Haleumi is, at least technically, in the opposition.
While there will be some adjustments in the allocation of seats within the blocs (more so on the left), recent polls suggest the current distribution between the two blocs will be maintained – roughly 65-55 in favor of the right (the most recent poll has this exact result). This is somewhat surprising, considering Netanyahu’s high approval ratings and the lack of a dominant opposition challenger. One explanation could be that Netanyahu still has difficulties breaking into new demographics, especially in the Jewish secular middle class.
Who’s who in the coming elections
Like most ruling powers, the right will bring forth the same faces as in the previous elections. There is, however, one wild card: criminal charges against Avigdor Lieberman might force the leader of Israel Beitenu to sit this cycle out, which could result in a flow of voters to Likud. Also, the two national religious parties might try to unite again, especially if they sense a danger of not passing the 2-percent threshold.
The Orthodox Shas party is at the center of many speculations: the party’s former leader, Aryeh Deri, is expected to announce soon whether he will head a more dovish Orthodox party. But Deri doesn’t have the support of the legendary Shas spiritual leader, Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, and it’s not clear how strong his appeal is if not backed by the party’s powerful machine.
At the political center, Kadima’s newly elected leader, Shaul Mofaz, is struggling. Recent polls had him holding onto only 11 of the party’s current 28 seats. Most of the voters turning away from Kadima seem to be heading toward Yesh Atid (“There is a Future”), Yair Lapid’s new party. Labor, which got 13 seats in the last election, is polling well.
The problem is that no party but the Likud is expected to get more than 20 seats, and both Lapid and Mofaz have expressed in the past a desire to join Netanyahu’s government. This means that regardless of the actual results, the next government will be formed by the right, joined by a mid-size party to its left, which will shield it from the parliamentary opposition. This is exactly how the current Netanyahu government looked before the split in Labor. In short, the next government will be very similar to the current one.
_______________________
(*) Many Israelis group Hadash, Raam-Taal and Balad into one bloc of “Arab parties.” I prefer to use the term non-Zionist, since Hadash is an Arab-Jewish party. “Non-Zionist” is not an ideal term either, since the Orthodox parties don’t consider themselves Zionist; but I think this is becoming more of a formality, as the political behavior of the Orthodox places them solidly within the right.
For additional original analysis and breaking news, visit +972 Magazine's Facebook page or follow us on Twitter. Our newsletter features a comprehensive round-up of the week's events. Sign up here.
caden
Noam, I understand the political complications over expat voting. But are you saying that a family on a cruise or a guy out of army who is backpacking though India can’t vote by absentee.
Noam Sheizaf
@Caden I am not advocating this situation, just saying that this is how things are right now. The truth is I haven’t given it much thought. I can say that I don’t like the idea of expats voting, so my only concern regarding the backpacker example is that it would open the door for the family that is in the States for 20 yrs, but still consider itself Israeli.
caden
Interesting. Another question. I think everybody would agree that the electoral system in Israel leaves a lot to be desired on a practical level. Whether your left or right. If you could start from scratch what would you do?
Mitchell Cohen
Well, at least I will get an extra vacation day to use towards the Chagim, as election day is considered a “national holiday” and if you go into work on it you get an extra vacation day. They also take away a FULL day pay if you don’t come in on Erev Chag (at least where I work), so this extra vacation day will come in handy….:-)
XYZ
Caden-
I would like to see the Knesset elected on a constituency system, with each MK representing a geographical district. This is the only constitutional change I support. This would make the MK’s respsonsive to a particular groups of people, unlike the current MK-list system. The big problem is that of gerrymandering…i.e. what do you do with a place like Benei Braq? Do you give the Haredim living there a compact district that will return a Haredi MK, or do you break it up and attach each part to a surrounding area that has a non-religious majority, thus diluting their vote? Same with Arab areas. However, I believe with good will this problem could be solved.
pabelmont
Often, Israeli leaders think it useful to start a war on the eve of an election. Iran, anybody? And wouldn’t that present an interesting challenge to Obama as he heads into USA’s election?
Rowan Berkeley
There is sometimes wheat among the chaff in DEBKAfile’s disinfo, so I was intrigued by this:
“Shelly Yachimovitch is reported by her associates as determined to take her party across the aisle. The word going around is that she aspires to the job of finance minister, but dare not go public on this ambition because it might cost her the potential support of the Social Justice protest movement. Some say she is already quietly negotiating with Netanyahu for a cabinet post. Netanyahu may offer her the social welfare portfolio (Likud will keep finance).”
pabelmont
XYZ proposes a “constituency system, with each MK representing a geographical district.”
.
If this system were in place, what would be the geographical unit for settlers? In East Jerusalem? Would Israel make claim to allow an electoral district outside the commonly agreed (by non-Israelis, that is) territory of Israel?
.
And why not a district for USA (for instance): what requirement would there be for a geographical place to be a “constituency” for Israel?
caden
Rowan, Pablemont, why don’t you give the Israel conspiracy theories a rest for one comment thread.
XYZ, What about making the electoral threshold higher. The ability to get on the ballot. It seems like there are way too many parties and a little concentration would go a long way
AYLA
NoamS–thank you thank you thank you. I am hereby your student.
Kolumn9
Noam, I think that the stability of the numbers of voters for the right-wing block despite the high personal popularity of Bibi is based on people that support Bibi to be the next PM but want to influence his coalition choices by voting for Lapid’s party or Mofaz’s party.
.
There are too many possible gerrymandering issues with electoral districts based on territory. The demographics change rapidly and it would be regularly destabilizing to have politicians having little wars about borders every four years.
.
What might make more sense is government sponsored efforts to promote more democratic governance of the political parties and initiatives to increase the party membership rates of citizens. At the moment there are too many parties that either have no internal elections or where policy and list order are controlled by corrupt coalitions among a small member base. When it comes to an actual election citizens only have a choice to vote for a list with the order of the list being determined either through fiat by a dictator (Lieberman) or by shady backroom deals with sector-based vote brokers.
caden
Are there term limits for the Knesset/ Should there be?
Piotr Berman
Israel is a small country, so single-mandate constituencies would be minute and gerrymandering potential enormous. Packaging parties and votes in large and small parcels makes moderate difference.
Perhaps 5% threshold to enter the parliament is a good idea in the sense that it would punish the most quarrelsome politicians who cannot agree with others who have almost identical views. The net effect would be small.
Kolumn9
Caden, there are no term limits on MKs. I am not sure it would make sense to have them. On the one hand it would force political parties to create internal structure for grooming new candidates to deal with turnover. On the other hand there is a lot of value in having some stability in the senior membership of the Knesset.
.
Piotr, increasing the threshold could make sense if it forces a smaller number of larger and broader parties. It could make coalitions easier to build and less prone to blackmail by small parties. 5% would certainly do that by pushing the sectoral parties into more mainstream parties. It would probably cut down the number of parties in the Knesset from 13 to maybe around 7.
caden
Who is going to be the main opposition to Netanyahu? It wouldn’t be the worst thing if he had to answer some serious questions in a series of debates. Good for him, good for the country.
Rowan Berkeley
Caden, what you dismiss as “conspiracy theories” is what politicians, and for that matter entrepreneurs, do routinely all day, every day. If you dismiss this form of activity, then there isn’t much point in making suggestions such as “What about making the electoral threshold higher,” because they only way to achieve that or anything else is via what you call a “conspiracy,” i.e. politicians getting together behind closed doors and asking each other, “how would it work for you if I did so-and-so?” Now if it were true that Yachimovitch was considering bringing Labour into a Likud coalition, it would be for one reason only, namely, to enable Netanyahu to dispense with the religious parties (not with Beiteinu), and push through some really radical update to the Tal Law. And I think most Labour voters would see that as a deal worth making, given the current agitation about the haredim, and in fact decades of fed-up-ness at the way they play swing votes for and against coalitions of larger parties.
Kibbutznik
” (*) Many Israelis group Hadash, Raam-Taal and Balad into one bloc of “Arab parties.” I prefer to use the term non-Zionist, since Hadash is an Arab-Jewish party. “Non-Zionist” is not an ideal term either, since the Orthodox parties don’t consider themselves Zionist; but I think this is becoming more of a formality, as the political behavior of the Orthodox places them solidly within the right. ”
.
as a Hadash voter I would prefer to be described as a Post-Zionist Noam .
Rowan Berkeley
By the way, I think it’s worth disaggregating Halchud Haleumi (the National Union), because it is composed of an unstable combination of older Mafdal and newer Hardal elements, and a confrontation over haredi issues could splinter it into its component fractions, namely Kookists, Kahanists, and Hassidic activists.
caden
Rowan, I know that you sit in England and really obsess over all things Israel but I really was curious about this and I was hoping some actual Israelis would chip in. Not pro-palestinian English socialists, nothing personal
XYZ
The Haredi parties, are for all practical purposes Zionist parties. They may not get excited over Zionist symbols like the flag, Independence Day and the rest, but they do accept and participate in the Zionist structure of the state, accepting its basic premises of Jewish immigration, Jewish identity and a Jewish public sphere.
Regarding the National Union, I have to disagree with Rowan. While it is true that there are ideological differences between the different constituent groups added to the fact that the leaders of the different factions don’t seem to get along very well, the rank-and-file voters support the party because of their rock-solid support of the Jewish settlements in Judea/Samaria and opposition to political concessions to the Palestinian Authority (as opposed to concessions regarding day-to-day life for the Palestinians and dialogue on such issues which parts of the NU do support). The Bayit-Yehudit (old National Religious Party) is considered by many, including myself, to be unreliable, which is why I support the National Union and oppose a merger with the BY.
XYZ
Question for Kibbutznik-
Do you support HADASH only because they oppose the Zionist structure of the state, or is it also because they are a Marxist-Socialist (formerly Communist) party? Would you support a non-Marxist non- or post-Zionist party that is not socialist of the type Avrum Burg was talking about some time ago…designed to appeal to non-, anti, or post-Zionist voters uncomfortable with the Marxism-Socialism of HADASH?
the Lord
Netanyahu and elite of Israel is trying to avoid a threat of Nonpartisant Block that could overthrow them, so they are cuting a time for people of Israel to organise: https://sanation.site11.com/ But what they did to change? Nothing, wathing a television.
In meantime Hamas deputy dr. Azizi has created his Israeli Arab Party in Israel. I was warning you many times. If this elections will be held in such a form, at the end of this process you will receive a thankfull diploma for everything that your state did to the Jew.
As you are not interested in overthrowing your fallen regime, I will also accelerater my plebiscite: http://plebiscite.net76.net/act.php
Keep dreaming,
wake up in Australia,
your new homeland,
your new promised land.
the Lord
Rowan Berkeley
Caden, congratulations on your acumen in determining that I am indeed in England, but I am not a “pro-palestinian English socialist.” XYZ, thanks for your response there. You doubtless know more than I do about this, but I’m really intrigued by the contradiction in the hardal position; my thought is that the status of religious law in Israel trumps territorial issues for the haredi, and vice versa for the da’ati le’umi, so it’s quite possible that in a trade-off of national policy planks between these two groups, some would go one way and some the other. The old mafdal was always considered weak on religious issues by the religious, and weak on national issues by the nationals, so the fault-line is old and obvious.
XYZ
Rowan-
What you stated is an oversimplification. Religious Zionism is predicated on the fact that most Jews today are not Orthodox/religious and that the Jewish people are in a long, drawn-out process of returning to their true roots in Torah and Eretz Israel. Compromises must be made in order for everyone to live together. However, even the Haredim pretty much accept this position as well. The real differences are in approaches to education and philosophy. Regarding the territorial issue, there are hawks and doves in both the Haredi and Dati-Leumi camps. It is true that the Haredi leadership does not view settlement of the land as a primary value as do many dati leumi, but in practice, many do support it in the sense that they have their people live in the settlements as well. I guess you could call it a matter of priorities.
Mitchell Cohen
@Caden, regarding your ? about the electoral system (being I am an Israeli citizen) I would make the following changes FOR STARTERS:
1) Regional/District representation
2) raise the electoral threshold
3) come up with a truer system of checks and balances. For example, the Supreme Court IMO gets too involved in politics and should be only enforcing laws passed by the Knesset, not picking and choosing which laws they like and only enforcing those, while throwing the ones they don’t in the trash. Also, the Supreme Court is a good ole’ boys club where no independent body selects/approves the judges. They basically appoint themselves, which allows the Supreme Court to be VERY homogenous.
I’m sure there are other things I could come up with, but let’s start with those.
Rowan Berkeley
Fair enough. But if I was a centrist political strategist, either centre-left or centre-right, I would be saying to myself, here we have an enormous opportunity to reshuffle the cards. On the one hand we have all the agitation about the Tal Law, and on the other hand we have Beiteinu, which is anachronistically like the old zionist parties in that it is territorially maximalist but religiously minimalist. Beiteinu represents a very sizable constituency. In 2008, there were 1.3 million Russian speakers in Israel, out of a total population of 6.5 million. As many as 500,000 of these were not even halachically Jewish. Noam says: “Criminal charges against Avigdor Lieberman might force the leader of Israel Beitenu to sit this cycle out, which could result in a flow of voters to Likud.” I don’t quite see this; I would have thought that Lieberman personally could be put on ice, but the party and its positions would remain solid and could be exploited by the centrist coalition-builders as a battering ram to knock down the religious parties once and for all, without alienating the territorial maximalists as the left does. But this is not the place to discuss this idea; +972 oppose territorial maximalism, regarding it as portending a real threat of fascism, while they don’t consider the threat of Israel becoming a theocracy as serious. If there was an english-language discussion board for students of National Union politics, we could discuss it there.
caden
How much does a member of the Knesset make? Including perks. I would guess that much like congress it went from public service to a money making gig. Does anybody know?
Kibbutznik
” Question for Kibbutznik-
Do you support HADASH only because they oppose the Zionist structure of the state,”
.
Nope.
.
” or is it also because they are a Marxist-Socialist (formerly Communist) party? ”
.
Nope.
.
” Would you support a non-Marxist non- or post-Zionist party that is not socialist of the type Avrum Burg was talking about some time ago…designed to appeal to non-, anti, or post-Zionist voters uncomfortable with the Marxism-Socialism of HADASH? ”
.
Yes.
I’m not anti my own country and I am not a communist but I do believe in social equality
and hope that one day we can evolve into a non-ideological, secular, liberal democratic state, to be officially neither Jewish nor Arab in character.
lmnop
kibbutznik, i voted hadash last time, mostly as a protest vote against lieberman’s racist campaign. however, i wouldn’t do so again. they speak in two faces to arabs and jews. the recently re-elected chief of maki is a supporter of assad’s systematic oppression.
their record on civil rights and human rights FOR ALL (including asylum seekers, gays, etc…) is not pristine, except for dov khenin. the arab MKs don’t seem to be bothered for anything but domestic and westbank palestinian issues.
the only clean record on social, civil and human rights is found in meretz. although they are seen as elitist, they are the most consequent liberal social left party running.
a bigger meretz bloc back in the knesset would benefit us all.
xyz – you immigrated here in order to vote HaIchud HaLeumi? couldn’t deal with the KKK not catching up in american polls? people like you really make me think we should reconsider the law of return (aliyah). when the day finally comes and judea/samaria will be sovereign palestine, i hope you emigrate there and join hamas. would be a natural progression for you.
Rowan Berkeley
LMNOP, when you condemn Hadash and MAKI for “supporting Assad’s systematic oppression,” are you aware of who the Syrian insurgents actually are? If not, let me tell you: they are Al Qaeda, supported by NATO. The world does not work in the way you evidently imagine it should.
Kibbutznik
lmnop
Meretz lost my vote when they initially supported Operation Cast Lead.
I like and respect Dov Khenin and at this point in time there is nobody I would bother voting for unless Avrum Burg comes up with an alternative.
XYZ
LMNOP-
That’s the darned thing about democracy, that people you don’t agree with get to vote, too.
I might point out that the “M” in MERETZ, the party you seem to like, stands for MAPAM, a party that originally supported and justified Stalin’s mass purges in which millions died. If you can get over that, you can live with the Ihud HaLeumi.
Maya
One of Hadash’s slogans in the 1980s and 1990s was “two states for two peoples”. I understand Zionism as the national liberation movement of the Jewish people: the movement that claims the right of the Jews as a people (not religion) to self-determination. So, “two states for two peoples”, sounds like the right kind of Zionism to me.
Historically, Socialists since the turn of the 20th century supported the idea of peoples’ right to self-determination.
Rowan Berkeley
Maya, when socialists talk about “peoples” they are referring somewhat euphemistically to nations, which individuals can and do join and leave, usually as a result of intermarriage. So when you say “the Jews as a people (not religion),” what does that imply about persons not of Jewish birth who may wish to join “the Jewish people” as a result of marrying a member of it? If you don’t have a religious formality to regularise this, how exactly do you do it? I assume you are not going to say it can’t be done, because that would amount to defining the Jewish people as a race, which one is either born into or not. At the other extreme, I assume you don’t want to render Jewishness completely meaningless, because then “the Jewish people” would gradually dissolve. Can you think of any criterion for membership of “the Jewish people” other than birth or religion? If so, who would adjudicate it?
Cortez
“Can you think of any criterion for membership of “the Jewish people” other than birth or religion? If so, who would adjudicate it?”
.
And how one loses membership and how many generations before one is excluded from the religious and or birth right? I’ve followed the law of return’s definition as opposed to the Karaite definition as opposed to the rabbinate definition and then within that the spectrum of views across the sects…I.e. reform to conservative orthodox) and can’t find a unifying theme. And what to make of Jewish people who become christian or Muslim?
Maya
To Rowan Berkeley and Cortez: these are good questions that you are asking, but I think that the are answers to them, even if they are not popular or mainstream. First, about losing membership: I have met in my life a number of people who are ‘Jewish’ by birth according to Orthodox rules, but are in no way members. They were not raised Jewis, they have no personal connection of attachment to this culture, they don’t consider themselves members, and are indeed in no way members of this people. Second, I also met people who are technically according to Orthosox rules not Jewish, but were raised and socialized Jewish, and so they consdier themselves members. As far as I’m concerned they are indeed members. The fact that the State of Israel wouldn’t recgnize them as such, means that the official rules of membership should be changed. It does not mean that no other rules can be created. Third, if we would insist that Judaism is only a religion, how can we make sense of many people (including me) who see themselves member of the Jewish people as a historical, cultural and political group, even though they are not at all religious and don’t believe in God? So you are right that at the moment the accepted and official membership criteria are birth and religion – but this should and could change! My criteria would be subjective attachment, and familiarity and affinity with the culture(s) and history. I think that this is not very different from criteria of membership in other peoples (or nations). Also, I accept that for many Jews, Judaism IS a religion and not peoplehood. I don’t think that I can claim that they are all wrong. But I think that it is important to clarify the differnce.
Rowan Berkeley
Thank you very much for that thoughtful answer, Maya. I’ll put my own cards upon the table here: I feel Jewish, I always have done, but I have examined my ancestry for four generations, and the only ancestral possibility is my mother’s mother’s father, about whom nothing much is known. The rest are very definitely English by descent. The real question here is about the nature of religion. Is it possible to love the Jewish people (to use that ambiguous term again) without something that might as well be called religious feeling entering into that love? I have a very personal reason for being interested in the parameters of conversion. If I had been able to deal with this question properly, I would have become a Jew (and an Israeli) several decades ago. As it is, even my attempts to learn hebrew (which I also love) have been obstructed, for mere political reasons, which makes me very sad indeed.
Maya
I understand that the issue is personal for you, and so I’m sorry that I cannot properly continue this conversation at the moment. I’ll be travelling for a couple of weeks with scarce access to the Internet. In brief, I’m not so sure about loving a people. Isn’t a people too abstract? But I’m pretty sure that one can Jewish without being religious. Indeed, it is a quetion of what is the nature of religion.