+972 Magazine's Stories of the Week

Directly In Your Inbox

Analysis News
Visit our Hebrew site, "Local Call" , in partnership with Just Vision.

It’s time to stop asking why the Israeli left has disappeared

For Israeli left-wing voters, nothing is more important than overthrowing Netanyahu. Yet despite their common cause, the left remains anything but united and it is polling at unprecedented lows.

Avi Gabbay, leader of the Labor Party seen alongside Labor party MK members Stav Shaffir and Itzik Shmuli at a party meeting in Tel Aviv, February 13, 2019. (Tomer Neuberg/Flash90)

Avi Gabbay, leader of the Labor Party seen alongside Labor party MK members Stav Shaffir and Itzik Shmuli at a party meeting in Tel Aviv, February 13, 2019. (Tomer Neuberg/Flash90)

There is one thing shared by nearly every Israeli who does not define her or himself as right-wing: a profound desire to oust Benjamin Netanyahu. And yet, despite all their efforts, none of the left-wing parties today look capable of doing so.

Polls show the left-wing Meretz party hovering near the four-seat minimum threshold to enter Knesset. and at least one poll had Labor down to just five seats in recent weeks. After Ahmad Tibi’s recent announcement that he would leave the Joint List and run independently, the two Arab parties reach 12-13 combined seats in most polls, the total representation of the Israeli left — notwithstanding wide variations between them — could be down to 21 seats (4, 5 and 12). Such a result would be unprecedented. These parties won 42 seats in the 2015 elections. When Labor had its lowest showing ever in 2009, the total still reached 27 seats.

Nearly 20 years after the Second Intifada precipitated the collapse of the Israeli left, it’s time to stop asking what happened. The real question is why after so many years has the left failed to resurrect itself — and whether it could do so in the future?

In the mid-2000s a fresh generation of leaders who were either young or new to politics seemed poised to put the party back on the map. Campaign billboards in 2006 showed “the team” — beaming faces including Ofir Pines, Yuli Tamir, Ami Ayalon, Avishai Braverman, Shelly Yechimovich, Eitan Cabel and the newly-elected leader Amir Peretz, who was generating a wave of excitement.

Tamir, Ayalon, Braverman and Pines have since abandoned politics altogether. Similarly, journalist Daniel Ben Simon entered Knesset during the term from 2009-2013, and then left.



If leaders flee, is it any surprise that voters do as well? This week, the Labor Party elected a young and energetic crop of leaders to its top slots, while Meretz will hold its primary on Thursday. Can the two parties most closely associated with the left avoid the same fate?

I asked some of those would-be leaders from the mid-2000 what went wrong. Their answers ranged from the personal to the political to the profound. Both Ben Simon and Ayalon felt they weren’t personally suited for what I call the “politics of politics.” This includes the necessary wheeling-and-dealing within each party, or the grunt work of legislative activity: reviewing each bill, doggedly submitting revisions. “You feel like a clerk,” said Ben-Simon, recalling his idealistic vision of truly influencing policy.

But personality mismatch is actually in itself political. Ben Simon resented the legislative grind primarily because “we participated in 1,500 votes and didn’t win any.” The feeling of being ineffective was soul-crushing. “Whether we showed up or not — it didn’t matter.” Ami Ayalon, the former head of the Shin Bet, also recalled, painfully, that beyond the legislative tasks he felt limited in his ability to influence policy, especially after narrowly losing a Labor leadership primary to Ehud Barak in 2007. Each wanted to have greater influence, which ultimately meant joining the governing coalition.

Former Labor MK Ami Ayalon seen in the Knesset before his swearing in, September 24. 2004. (Olivier Fitoussi/Flash90)

Former Labor MK Ami Ayalon seen in the Knesset before his swearing in, September 24. 2004. (Olivier Fitoussi/Flash90)

By 2009, coalition membership had become a devil’s bargain. Netanyahu was re-elected that year and has led every government since. It was also the year Ehud Barak decided Labor would join Netanyahu’s coalition. Yuli Tamir recalls the moment as “the beginning of the end.” She left by February of 2010 — around the time Pines and Ben Simon left as well.

Barak’s decision was one of several that indicated party leaders felt Labor needed to tack right to win votes from a society that had shifted sharply right. That could mean proving security credentials, as Amir Peretz tried to do by accepting the post of Defense Minister in 2006 with no experience in the military field. Yechimovich would try to ignore the conflict in her campaign message in 2013, and in 2015 then-party head Isaac Herzog made plaintive references to his background in the 8200 intelligence unit. This time around, Labor leader Avi Gabbay, who was elected party chair in 2017, has simply made so many right-wing appeals that he quickly alienated nearly everyone.

Tamir believes that pandering to right-wing attitudes is a mistake. “I’m sorry to say that I was right,” she says, regarding her criticism of Labor joining Netanyahu’s coalition in 2009. “They think it will bring right-wing voters, but it doesn’t.” Referring to Gabbay, she noted that not only did the strategy fail to win right-wing votes, the attempt to turn Labor into something else actually hurt the party.

Tamir believes the only course of action is to embrace Labor’s core values. She is also realistic: “I can’t say it will bring more votes, but at least we’ll be responsible with our values in politics,” she says.

Former Labor MK Yuli Tamir seen in the Knesset, December 15, 2009. (Abir Sultan/Flash 90) ????

Former Labor MK Yuli Tamir seen in the Knesset, December 15, 2009. (Abir Sultan/Flash 90)

But what exactly are those values? It’s easy enough to say that in Israel, the left-wing stands for peace through territorial compromise, mainly through a negotiated solution. The left claims to stand for a social-democratic economic system that encourages greater equality, and supports minority rights, civil rights, and liberal values.

Ami Ayalon thinks that these very values are on the decline, in Israel and in general. The global trend is moving right, he argues, mainly expressed in the preference for collective identity rather than the individualism that has become so deeply associated with the left. Ironically, considering the socialist and collectivist roots of the left in Israel, the camp has moved towards a strong focus on individual rights — including through promoting universal human rights, civil rights in Israel, and the defense of Palestinians in the occupied territories.

In the argument between tribalism and cosmopolitanism, what does tribalism actually mean? Ayalon says these voters prioritize collective identity over the idea of individual rights. The right-wing, he says, will sacrifice individual preferences to defend against threats — real or perceived — to their culture or to the material well-being of their group.

As Ayalon spoke, I realized that not only will voters who prioritize collective identity sacrifice Palestinian human rights or the individual rights of minorities in Israel — they are prepared to sacrifice their own individual desires for the sake of their group. That could mean falling in line with party decisions, or voting Likud, as a taxi driver once told me, “even though we know it’s bad for us, just like cigarettes.”

Perhaps left-wing leaders prefer a pure commitment to their ideas, and if they can’t act on them personally, they’d rather leave.

This explains the anatomy of fear: rallying the collective identity round the flag of that specific in-group. Ayalon explains that terrorists wish to sow fear, but instead of demonstrating that Israel rejects fear, Netanyahu and the right exaggerate it, knowing that fear unleashes a force of collective support stronger than other quotidian concerns. Racism comes easily. In this view, a single terrorist represents Palestinian collective identity, because they view themselves as a part of a collective identity.

A giant portrait of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at a protest against the Jewish Nation-State Law in Tel-Aviv on July 30, 2018. (Photo by Tomer Neuberg/Flash90)

A giant portrait of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at a protest against the Jewish Nation-State Law in Tel-Aviv on July 30, 2018. (Photo by Tomer Neuberg/Flash90)

The rest of the country is so put off by Netanyahu’s leadership that replacing him is a higher strategic priority than voting based on ideology, says Deddy Zucker, a founding member of Israeli anti-occupation organization B’Tselem, and a longtime politician who left politics in 1999. “Everyone is obsessive about him,” says Zucker. “It’s not entirely rational.”

Indeed, adulation and hate for Netanyahu have so captivated the country that even those on the left and center are abandoning the parties that once stood for something different (Labor), or still do (Meretz and the Palestinian Arab parties). These voters largely agree with left-wing policy positions but would rather vote for someone like former IDF Chief of Staff Benny Gantz, who has given little indication of what he would do if elected, but whose party list is drifting steadily to the right. Perhaps that is Bibi’s greatest victory of all. And perhaps the secret weapon of the Israeli left is to sharpen its values, as Tamir put it, and fight for a genuine alternative over votes. After all, polls today can still change tomorrow.

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.


    * Required


    1. UnimpressedRealist

      Just get rid of him because he is a war monger who isnt interested in actually running a government. He is a facist who only wants to send Jews to die so he can enrich himself and band of mass murdering fascists.

      Likud haven’t been running a state, they have been occupying it. Pun intended. From issues like healthcare, schooling, poverty, none of it is being run. They are only interested in allocating funds into their own pockets and the settlements and buying weapons picking who they should attack.

      Reply to Comment
      • Bruce Gould

        Since you’ve mentioned poverty, here’s a report from the Jerusalem Post from last year –


        21.2% of Israeli population lives below the poverty line…the overall poverty rate increased from 18.5% in 2016…Israel has the highest rate of poverty of any OECD country, according to the report. The GINI index of inequality showed a slight improvement, but Israel remains among those countries with the highest level of inequality.

        Reply to Comment
        • UnimpressedRealist

          That is alarming, I wasn’t aware of the 2016 spike. What a coincidence that was right when Natanyahu’s blood lust for war with Iran was running wild, he was bombing Syrians left and right and Trump gets elected. Almost as if the occupation, the military exertions into other lands and keeping millions in chains does absolutely nothing for anyone but weapons sales and manufacturers.

          It was also the same year he had been selling weapons to Myanmar. We all know what they were committing.

          So it seems Likud are not only not interested in actual governing, they only exist to facilitate war crimes or are war criminals themselves and war profiteers.

          Human life means nothing to them, Jewish or no.

          Reply to Comment
    2. Hello Hello

      Is the country moving to the far right because of the re-establishment of the Sanhedrin, who fancy themselves as the rightful court and legislature of the entire world (light to the world)?

      Reply to Comment
    3. Average American

      The left declines as the far right rises. We have the Sanhedrin now.

      Reply to Comment
    4. Joel

      The Israeli left attempted to bring peace with the Palestinians. Remember Oslo? The withdrawal from Gaza? (as an aside- I supported both of these moves). These attempts failed at a horrible cost.

      The Israeli economy has been doing quite well under a right wing government, so nobody is looking for a socialist dream.

      So why should anybody vote for the left? What do they offer?

      Reply to Comment
      • Ben

        OK, you asked.

        Israel of course still occupies Gaza. Just ask Eli Ben Dahan. Just the other day, in an act of gratuitous cruelty designed to show who is the master, and how the master regards non-Jewish life, Israel denied travel for a 20 year old Palestinian cancer patient. (“Palestinian battling cancer is denied exit from Gaza for treatment,” by Amjad Yaghi, February 8, 2019, +972 Magazine). Israel occupies Gaza. It has not “withdrawn” and it does not need settler proxies living high off the hog in Gush Katif and Netzarim in order to effectively occupy it.

        Israeli backed a military coup against the democratically elected government in Gaza with the goals of destabilizing it and making Gaza usefully dysfunctional and pitting Fatah against Hamas, the same divide and conquer strategy Israel has always cynically employed, and then whines deceptively about the lack of Palestinians unity; and then bombs it to smithereens every few years and shoots dead no questions asked any Gazan fishermen trying to make a living and sprays poisonous defoliant on Palestinian crops then complains about the lack of a Singapore on the Mediterranean.

        The Gaza withdrawal was designed to obviate rather than facilitate peace negotiations. Sharon’s design was to, at the same time, annex Jerusalem, the Jordan Valley, and the major settlements like Ma’ale Adumim and Ariel which Sharon had in the meantime developed, and thereby isolate and concentrate Palestinians on the West Bank in territory that constituted less than half of what exists beyond the Green Line.

        What does anyone on Earth have to gain from an Israeli left that doesn’t exist? In Israel there is effectively only right and far right.

        Do I remember Oslo? Yes, I remember that trick.

        By Noam Sheizaf |Published September 13, 2012
        An agreement on indefinite occupation: Oslo celebrates 19 years
        Regardless of the intentions of the people signing it, there is no denying what the Oslo Accords and the Paris Protocol have become: providers of the legal framework and international legitimacy for the oppression of millions.

        Reply to Comment
        • Ben

          By Noam Sheizaf |Published September 13, 2013
          Oslo years, a view from the ground
          I was sent to the Occupied Palestinian Territories on the day the Accords were signed, and got to spend the Oslo years in uniform.
          “…The control of the Palestinian population (often called “keeping peace and order” or some other euphemism) was the army’s main mission both prior to and after Oslo. It remains so today.”

          Reply to Comment
    5. Ben

      Implicit in Dahlia Scheindlin’s polling analysis is the assumption that everyone needs to sit around and wait until the average Israeli can be coaxed and pleaded with to lift his head up from reality TV and give a damn. So that the occupation will continue at the leisure of the Israeli political “wings” and the self-absorbed games they play with each other until some fine, far-future sunshiny day when, at the leisure of the Israeli Jewish voting classes of “the electorate,” which classes, right or “left,” are rather comfortable with an indefinite brutal status quo on the ground, at long last deign to “give” the Palestinians something. So the preoccupation with electoral shifts and political horse races and statistics is a kind of unwitting normalizing and pretending that the two state solution is still possible and it is all up to the Israeli electorate exclusively and just wait a little bit longer—which was being said fifty years ago too. It is the furthering of an illusion by intellectualizing. And it is not anti-intellectual to say so.

      Scheindlin is mistaken if she thinks any electoral shifts or left wing saviors or other intra-Israeli process is going to reverse the occupation and creeping annexation. Indeed, Scheindlin is on the mark when she says “…Racism comes easily….” I rather suggest to bring on the economic boycott, sanctions and divestment already, Europe and America. Get it over with. You Germans too, at long last. Get honest and move on. Stop letting yourselves be manipulated. Define your own boycott movement and take it away from branded BDS. No boycott is going to “destroy Israel,” it is only going to pressure it into coming to its senses by making the cost of the occupation steeper. Absolutely nothing will change until the cost is made steeper. (Read Shir Hever. Read Noam Sheizaf.) Economic boycotts are free speech. They were free speech in Alabama and Mississippi in the 1960s and they are free speech in Israel-Palestine.

      Or else stop already with talking about reversing the slide and about meaningless electoral “shifts” to the right and shifts to the left and shifts to the middle and start and talking about how “one state” works: A state of all its citizens or apartheid?

      And, dear Western Europeans and Americans, definitely stop talking about how Israel is a “best friend” and “the only democracy” and “shares our values.” Last time I checked the longstanding Israeli Prime Minister was eagerly sharing both the values and the anti-Semitic practices of right wing reactionary Polish and Hungarian anti-Semites (George Soros, anyone?), then cynically and manipulatively and incoherently turning around and reminding the world of the Poles’ anti-Semitism in WWII. Western Europe, Viktor Orban is your friend too? Andrzej Duda as well? Really? Let’s get real.

      Reply to Comment
    6. Michael Lucas

      The problem is that Zionists would have to disavow Zionism in its entirety and renounce it for the racist endeavor it has always been. And therein lies the rub. The Israeli “leftists” have always been stuck in this philosophical conundrum: How does one espouse a liberal philosophy while condoning Jewish “exceptionalism? How can you excuse the theft from, and brutalization of, the indigenous population of the land you have invaded? And finally, accepting that the past of the Zionists was criminal, it is far too late to expel the Jewish Zionists, so how do you find a modus vivendi allowing both populations to exist without favoring either one? If the “left” does not renounce Zionism and seek a SECULAR government with equal rights and responsibilities for all, then it should be consigned to oblivion and I would say: Good riddance. Trying to save, or excuse, a deplorable political ideology is insane.

      Reply to Comment
    7. William E Burns

      Whatever one thinks of the merits of this piece, it’s an odd choice of headline for an article literally asking “why the Israeli left has disappeared.”

      Reply to Comment