“You’re the head, you’re guilty” is a poster that keeps Netanyahu up at night. It is blunt, it hurts, and it is effective. The people behind it are the 1973 Yom Kippur war combatants, people in their seventies who are fighting for the country’s soul. These former soldiers are part of a wider campaign by protest organizations demanding elections now. In their eyes, Netanyahu, who is at the mercy of extremists Itamar Ben Gvir and Betzalel Smotrich, forms an existential danger, prolongs the Gaza war indefinitely for political reasons, and remains indifferent to the fate of the hostages. This is in addition to the planned Conscription Law that exempts the ultra-orthodox from serving in the army, the state budget that favors settlers’ needs at the expense of war victims, and the relentless attack by cabinet members against chief commanders of the security forces. All this boils the blood of protestors, who see Bibi as the primary person responsible for the October 7 disaster.

However, the demand for “elections now” seems disconnected from the political reality created after Black Saturday. On that day the full-on right-wing government completely stopped functioning, the military command was shocked and awed, and the only way to save the country was through formation of a war cabinet and inclusion of moderate Benny Gantz and Gadi Eisenkot in the government. From that moment the right-wing government completely ceased to exist, the Judicial coup d’état was buried, and Netanyahu returned to his natural position as the balancing factor between the extreme right-wing and moderate camps. The only way for elections to take place by the summer, as the protesters demand, is to create a majority in the Knesset that will vote no confidence in the government. Undoubtedly, the first step to accelerate such a move would be the departure of Gantz and Eisenkot from the government. This would fatally harm Netanyahu’s legitimacy, both on the local and international levels, and the path to disintegration of his coalition would thus be shortened.

Surprisingly, the protesters are not demonstrating in front of Gantz and Eisenkot’s homes, demanding they resign from the government. Rather, they demand that the two continue serving in the war cabinet. The reason for this is also clear. Their resignation may lead to dissolution of the Knesset and elections in the summer, as protesters demand. However, in that case the government of Netanyahu, Ben Gvir and Smotrich would continue to serve as a transitional government for many months. Such a government is everyone’s nightmare. Security establishment officials would be viciously attacked on a daily basis, the hostages abandoned in captivity, the right-wing would run amok, and disasters of all kinds would occur. This is the root of the matter. If Gantz and Eisenkot do not resign from the government at this time, Bibi and his ultra-Orthodox and messianic partners will have no reason to bring forward the elections. It is no coincidence that Netanyahu announced that elections will be held as scheduled, in three years. The protest organizations’ position that Gantz and Eisenkot should remain in the government expresses a broad public sentiment. This unity is currently needed, and that is why the demand for elections now is not gaining momentum.

The truth is that Gantz remains in the government not only because of this need. There is broad agreement between him and Netanyahu on the nature of the war’s course and its goals. Not long ago Gantz clearly announced that “the war will continue until all our goals are achieved”. This means, until the Hamas government and its military capabilities are decimated, and all the hostages are returned. Until an agreement is reached with Hezbollah in Lebanon, Gantz and Eisenkot will likely continue to serve in the Netanyahu government. If the protestors’ accusations are true, meaning that Netanyahu is deliberately working to prolong the war indefinitely, abandoning the hostages, and sacrificing relations with the US because of political considerations, every additional day of Gantz and Eisenkot in the government would be no less than a political crime.

From all of Gantz’s statements to date, it is impossible to discern any fundamental differences of opinion between him and Netanyahu. Not regarding the need to expand the war to Rafah, the rejection of Hamas’ terms for the hostage deal, and recently supporting the government’s rejection of unilateral recognition of a Palestinian state, contrary to the position of the Biden administration.

The partnership between Gantz and Bibi has continued over many years. Although Bibi is the primary person responsible for the concept that preferred to feed the Hamas monster and to starve the Palestinian Authority, Gantz, in his role as Chief of Staff and then as Minister of Defense in the Netanyahu and then the Bennet’s Change governments, was a full partner to the concept that shattered on October 7.  Gantz’s position as an alternative prime minister in the Netanyahu government minister was no accident. The political differences between him and Netanyahu were and remain miniscule.

As someone entrusted with Israel’s security for over a decade, and for the historic failure that put Israeli society in existential danger, Gantz also bears responsibility. Today, as Netanyahu’s full partner in conduct of the war, Gantz has no alternative political program. His position regarding a Palestinian state is consistent with that of Netanyahu. He might have preferred to go easy on Biden and tell him “Yes, but” instead of a resounding “No,” but that doesn’t change the essence. Gantz is willing to compromise with the ultra-orthodox to draw them to his side, and he has no socio-economic alternative plan to the neoliberal one that Netanyahu has been leading for the past twenty years and which led to the destruction of public services.

That is why the demand for elections now, and the attempt to reproduce the protest against the Judicial coup d’état of 2023 are not gaining momentum. Democracy – the slogan of the previous protest, touched upon an irreversible threat to Israel’s political regime, and it thus succeeded in drawing crowds. A decisive majority was clear that democracy is a supreme value that ensures civil freedom. The call for elections without adding to it political content seems like a magical solution, the whole purpose of which is to get rid of Netanyahu without presenting a political alternative.

Representatives of the protest claim that elections can be held while the war against Hamas continues, thus rendering Netanyahu’s removal as more important than the defeat of Hamas. It is possible they believe that as long as Netanyahu is in office, it is impossible to defeat Hamas, or alternatively, that contrary to what Gantz claims, it is impossible to defeat Hamas. In both cases, elections do not solve the existential problems of Israeli society. If Hamas prevails, it will be a huge victory for Iran and its proxies and will put an end to any peace settlement with the Palestinians. If, however, Netanyahu had been an obstacle to defeating Hamas, the protest should have demanded that Gantz and Eisenkot resign from the government immediately.

It is difficult to predict how events will unfold, but we can be sure of one thing: Netanyahu is finished. As Eisenkot said, “He doesn’t need to take responsibility – it’s on him from the moment he swore allegiance.” The question that has not yet been decided is what will happen to Hamas, and this is what will decide the fate of relations between Israelis and Palestinians. As long as this question remains open, any attempt to present a political alternative to the extreme right will remain solely theoretical. The call for a Palestinian state and peace with Saudi Arabia, as Biden wants, or alternatively a single, egalitarian democratic state for Israelis and Palestinians, are hopeless possibilities as long as Hamas remains the spokesman of the Palestinian people. Hamas is not an existential danger only to Israel.  It has proven to be an existential danger to the Palestinian people themselves, while Iran and its partners are an existential danger to the peoples of the entire region. Hamas is an affiliate of Iran, and the Iranian regime has made the lives of millions of its citizens hell. Therefore, the war in Gaza will not only determine the fate of Israeli society, but the fate of the Palestinians and the entire region. Elections? Yes! Now? – This depends more on the decision of Gantz and Eisenkot than on demonstrations in the streets right now.  

The post You’re the head, everyone is guilty first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

Israel’s new right-wing government loves the army and hates its commanders. They are especially hated by ministers Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben Gvir. The first served in the army only partially and was suspected of planning a terrorist act during the Gaza disengagement. The second did not serve at all: the army disqualified him because of his identification with the racist Meir Kahane and his involvement in violent acts. The two are today working vigorously to save the army from its senior officers. Smotrich accuses Chief of Staff Aviv Kochavi of politicizing the army, tweeting: “Those who want to keep the IDF united as the people’s army, consensual and outside of politics, should enact a minimum ten-year cooling-off period for chiefs of staff” before they can enter politics. Ben Gvir joined him in tweeting “keep the IDF free from politics.” According to them, the Chief of Staff has become a divisive figure that harms the “people’s army,” and in their eyes the last three chiefs – Benny Gantz, Gadi Eisenkot and Kochavi himself – are evidence of this. These generals were previously objects of admiration symbolizing national unity, but in the eyes of those mandated to establish a right-wing government, they are despised.

The Elor Azaria affair was a defining event. In March 2016, this soldier shot a Palestinian who had attacked soldiers with a knife in Hebron and was lying wounded and helpless on the ground, killing him even though he no longer threatened anyone. Then Chief of Staff Eisenkot issued an unequivocal statement: “These are not IDF values and this is not IDF culture,” and he was backed by Defense Minister Bogi Ya’alon. At first PM Bibi Netanyahu supported his Chief of Staff and Defense Minister, but when he understood that the most of the Israeli public favored Azaria, he changed his position, calling the soldier “our child.”

Since then, the rift between the top army brass and Netanyahu has only widened, culminating in the moment of coalition-building when he allowed Smotrich and Ben Gvir to dismantle the army. The powers related to West Bank settlements, as well as Civil Administration in the occupied territories, have been taken from the army and transferred to Smotrich, who has received (in addition to the Finance Ministry) the curious title of “Minister within the Defense Ministry.” Likewise, the Border Police units stationed in the West Bank have been reallocated to Ben Gvir. In short, control over 3 million Palestinians passes from the military to Smotrich and Ben Gvir. When Kochavi met with Netanyahu and expressed his disapproval, he was accused of “politicizing” the people’s army.

After Israel’s founding, when the people’s army was established, it reflected a wall-to-wall Israeli consensus. This has long ceased to be the case. Today, Elor Azaria is an authentic expression of what the right wing (elsewhere too) glorifies as “the people,” and Netanyahu, with his populist sensibilities, quickly understood this. The values of “the people” are remarkably compatible with the values of Smotrich and Ben Gvir, while the values of IDF leadership no longer fit the Zeitgeist.

Since 1967, hundreds of thousands of Israeli men and women have done their mandatory military service in the occupied territories, the West Bank and Gaza. Here they have been forced to perform the most despicable actions, such as standing at checkpoints, entering civilian homes at night, demolishing houses, arresting suspects, enforcing closures, protecting settlers and sometimes killing Palestinians. All this with one goal: to maintain Israeli control over the West Bank and Gaza. The myth of being the most moral army in the world, valuing purity of arms and human rights, has long been eroded.

Over the years, a fracture has formed within the people’s army, reflecting a deep division in Israeli society. Urban, wealthy, liberal Israel, whose members carry a foreign passport for a time of need, does not police the West Bank. Its children find themselves in cyber units, and for them the army is a springboard to higher education and enrichment in private high-tech companies. The peripheral, poorer Israel, the Israel that does not have the option of an extra passport, is more conservative and patriotic by default. Most of them see Arabs as enemies and liberals as traitors.

The youngsters with only one passport eagerly wait to enlist in “meaningful” military service. The Kafir Brigade, responsible for policing the West Bank, welcomes them with open arms. After all, someone has to do the dirty work. After military service, they will find themselves in jobs that don’t require academic qualifications, jobs without promotion or appreciation. Their frustration, channelled toward abuse of Palestinians in their army years, is channelled post-army to support for the likes of Ben Gvir.

At the end of 1988, when the IDF was still the people’s army, and in an attempt to forcefully suppress the first intifada, Defense Minister Yitzhak Rabin gave the order to “break the arms and legs” of stone-throwers. The sight of Israeli soldiers abusing Palestinians ignited a huge international protest. The security establishment recognized that excessive force would transform the IDF into an army of thugs.

Four years later, in 1992, Rabin was elected prime minister. A year later he signed the Oslo Accords with PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat. The ingenious Israeli idea was to quit policing the population centers in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, handing them over to the newly created Palestinian Authority. In response to his critics, Rabin issued his famous statement that the Palestinian police would fight Hamas “without the [Israeli] High Court and without [the human-rights organization] B’Tselem.” That did not appease Rabin’s critics on the Right. He was assassinated, the Oslo Accords are forgotten, and the Palestinian question has completely disappeared from public discourse. Israeli governments of various political shades have succeeded, in cooperation with the Palestinian Authority, to create a semblance of security and stability that has so far kept the situation from exploding. Employment permits for hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in Israel, as well as a certain restraint on settlement construction, has created a veneer of economic peace.

Yet this economic peace has been based not only on Israel’s iron hand but also on the Palestinian Authority, which has now lost the trust of its people. In fact, the new Israeli government wants to go back 30 years, take off the gloves and bring back what it calls “governance.” Settler-fascists like Smotrich and Ben Gvir have decided to end the economic peace, and the rift with the military brass cannot be patched over. The division of labor is clear. Smotrich will legitimize the illegal outposts and expand the settlements through his power in the Civil Administration, while Ben Gvir’s security forces will break the arms and legs of Palestinians who dare to resist.

The Haaretz headline on December 28 was “Chaos.” The writer David Grossman, whose son was killed during military service, predicts chaos under the new government. While lamenting the mutual hatred and disgust between Jews today, he writes that “the occupation also evidently won’t end in the foreseeable future; it is already stronger than all the forces now active in the political arena.” For him, this is one of many issues on which he disagrees with Netanyahu. He does not view the occupation as the engine that drives fascism, hatred for Arabs, and hatred for those who speak of Israel’s presence in the West Bank as “occupation.”

Contrary to Grossman, the occupation is not “stronger than all the forces now active in the political arena.” Fact: the occupation encounters fierce opposition from the Palestinians. The weakness of Grossman and his camp vis-a-vis the fascist right stems from the fact that they have never seen, and still do not see, the Palestinians as allies in constructing a shared democratic and egalitarian state. The Zionist Left that Grossman represents sees Palestinians as a demographic threat to Israel’s existence as Jewish and democratic. Therefore, it has always sought a political solution involving separation, even though this is no longer possible. In reality, there remain only two alternatives: either an apartheid state or a single democratic state between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean. The opposition to Netanyahu opposes both, so it had no concrete program to offer the electorate, thus opening the way for Netanyahu’s sixth term.

The post What Happened to Israel’s “Army of the People”? first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

Half a year since the so-called “government of change” launched Operation Breakwater in the northern West Bank, and given the increase of shooting incidents between Palestinian militants and the army, Israeli Chief of Staff Aviv Kochavi has issued an exceptional statement accusing the Palestinian Authority (PA) of lacking in governance: “Part of the increase in terrorism stems from incompetence of the Palestinian security forces, which leads to a lack of governance in certain areas of the Palestinian Authority, and these constitute fertile ground for the growth of terrorism.”

The government of change wanted to restore a sense of security to Israelis following the wave of attacks that hit their cities in March and April this year. Accordingly, it began acting in the areas of Nablus and Jenin. Although the attacks inside Israel have since stopped, shooting incidents between the army and Palestinian militants in the West Bank have increased. Additionally, Palestinian security forces have stopped buffering the Israeli army from Palestinian militants. The result is not only a “lack of governance” by the PA, and rapid deterioration into chaos, but a lack of governance by the Israeli army, which considers itself entrusted with overall security in the region.

However, Operation Breakwater is not Defense Minister Benny Gantz’s sole response to the increasing wave of shooting incidents in the West Bank. Israel has realized that the stick alone will not yield results and must be accompanied by carrots. The goal is to separate the peaceful Palestinian population (the silent majority who want only to provide for their families, go to work in Israel and return home safely) from the armed groups. Both systems operate simultaneously. The Israeli army operates inside the cities and refugee camps, exacting from the Palestinians a daily dose of blood. The Palestinian armed groups, in turn, feel more challenged to confront the army. At the same time, this battle between the most powerful army in the Middle East and the militants does not stop hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from going through the crossings every day to earn a living in Israel. The separation is absolute: the workers do not cooperate with the militants, because they are preoccupied with earning a living.

This is the formula used by the government of change to avoid political negotiations with the PA and reduce the conflict to a minimum. “Economic peace” has become a substitute for political peace, and it has been strengthened by the “regional peace” between Israel and the Gulf states (an achievement of the Netanyahu government). However, that same “economic peace” is also the prime contributor to the PA’s “lack of governance.” Why? Because the PA has become irrelevant to most West Bankers. Israeli economic control is absolute. Israel issues Palestinian ID numbers; it ordains the shekel as the currency; it collects Palestinian customs, which it may pass to the PA or withhold. Above all, the Israeli economy has become the main source of income for the Palestinians of the occupied territories.

The PA is seen by its residents as a parasitic and corrupt entity, whose entire function is to maintain itself and its privileges at their expense. The fact that a Palestinian construction worker can earn a monthly minimum wage of NIS 6,000 in Israel, while a Palestinian teacher earns NIS 2,500 in the PA, tells the whole story. No one wants to work for a salary paid by a Palestinian employer, which amounts to a third of that in Israel. The economic peace eliminates what remains of the enslaved Palestinian economy. When Palestinians consider the free hand of the Israeli army in West Bank cities, and the PA’s zero contribution to the well-being of its people, the question arises: “Why do we need the PA security forces, which employ tens of thousands of police officers, in addition to hundreds of thousands of idle bureaucrats?”

Elections were last held in the PA 16 years ago. Since then, the successive governments have all been appointed by President Abu Mazen (Mahmoud Abbas), who has remained in office since January 2005 after being elected for a four-year term. The absence of any democratic process has helped disconnect the PA from its people. Judges are appointed by Abu Mazen, so there is no law or justice, while members of the security apparatus take bribes and extort business owners. Appointments to PA positions go to family members, as do franchises and business licenses. One word of criticism on social media is met by arrest without trial. This is how governance disappeared. On top of all that, the economic peace is another blow to what remains of the PA.

Towards the end of August, a call went out on social media for Palestinian construction workers employed in Israel to strike on Sunday the 21st of the month. The reason was to reject an Israeli government decision that employers must transfer salaries directly to the workers’ personal accounts held in Palestinian banks instead of paying them in cash. The decision would normally benefit the workers, for it guarantees the payment of their salaries according to law. It would obstruct the rampant trade in work permits (fictional companies that receive the permits sell them to workers for cash). Indeed, the main claims of the workers are not against Israel in this case.

Why then do the workers protest the decision? Their anger is against the PA, which they believe will exploit the bank transfers to impose additional taxes and take control of their funds. Their lack of trust is so complete that they also firmly refuse to allow the PA to manage their pensions, preferring that Israel do it. Palestinians believe in an old folk proverb: “The injustice of relatives is crueler than a sword over the head.”

The Palestinian social activist who quoted that proverb (and prefers to remain anonymous) expressed his thoughts after the Israeli decision to add another layer to the economic peace by opening the Ramon Airport near Eilat to Palestinian passengers. As a result, they will no longer have to cross into Jordan to fly abroad. As soon as the decision was made, the PA and Jordan objected. They dubbed those using Ramon Airport “traitors” who are prepared to “normalize” relations with the occupier, as if Jordan and the PA have not been normalizing the occupation for decades.

To the astonishment of the said social activist, “the use of the airport sparked a huge wave of controversy on social network sites and in small gatherings.” This is how the activist describes the phenomenon: “We are standing in front of a huge and politically significant popular wave, which starts in response to Israeli gestures. The occupier’s Civil Administration rides this wave and encourages it, that is, to live with Israel according to the economic peace plan.” Hence, while Operation Breakwater addressed the wave of attacks by armed militants, a “huge popular wave” has been developing that is interested in the economic peace maintained by the occupation itself.

The conclusion of this activist is clear: “It follows from economic peace that the Palestinian state will have no existence, that the PA which organizes civil affairs is undesirable, and that people are ready to live indirectly within a one-state solution.” These are the words of an activist who still believes in the vision of a Palestinian state but is watching it vanish between the economic peace of Gantz and the corruption, not to say utter dysfunction, of Abu Mazen. The Palestinian workers are voting with their feet, they do not believe in Abu Mazen or Hamas, nor in the possibility of a Palestinian state, and they understand very well that their fate is inextricably linked to Israel.

Economic peace may be able to separate the armed militant groups of despairing Palestinian youth from the majority of the population, but it will not be able to separate economic rights from the civil rights of the Palestinian people. The time of those rights will come. Economic peace unites the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean into one economic unit, but in its wake, Israel will have to deal with the Palestinian demand to become one political unit, shared by Israelis and Palestinians alike.

The post Economic peace makes the Palestinian Authority superfluous. first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

The entanglement of prime ministers and politicians in corruption, together with deep political polarization, has in recent years created the phenomenon of chronic political crises, which prevent the establishment of a stable government in Israel. As a result, centers of decision-making and implementation have long shifted to government bureaucracy, particularly to the two pillars that determine the path of a state, the Ministries of Defense and Finance. Unlike in other developed countries, in Israel the defense minister is a retired general who moves from his seat in the general staff in Tel Aviv to the nearby Ministry of Defense, which thus becomes an arm that first and foremost represents the army and its employees. As the identity of the finance minister changes frequently, the office’s bureaucrats see themselves as the gatekeepers who ensure stability and continuity. In doing so, the Finance Ministry gains immense power and is in fact decisive in all major economic decisions.

The bottom line is that no matter which government is elected, right or center, Israeli policy has not changed in the last 30 years. It is true that rhetoric varies according to the incumbent’s character. It can be more racist, nationalist and religious in the case of the Likud, or softer, less inciteful and more tolerant in the case of the center-left, but that is the extent of change. Security and economic policies do not essentially alter. Incitement and racism, as well as words of kindness and tolerance, do not in any way affect policy. Military and civilian bureaucracy is supposedly “neutral,” and the two political camps fiercely fight each other while agreeing that security and the economy are a taboo that should not involve politics. For its part, the same security or civilian bureaucracy holds that politicians cannot be trusted since their considerations are dictated by narrow political interests.

Take for example the current so-called government of change. This is a rare political hybrid in the history of Israel. It unites a multitude of parties lacking political or ideological agreement, and its sole function is to prevent the return of Bibi Netanyahu and his gang to power. It has been a year since its inception, and apart from a shift in rhetoric it has not brought about any real change. Defense Minister Benny Gantz is responsible for the Iranian and Palestinian files. There is nothing new in this arena: Israel continues to oppose any nuclear agreement with Iran and continues to carry out assassinations on Iranian soil and frequent bombings inside Syria. This is Bibi’s legacy, this is what the army wants, and the government of change has no choice but to follow suit. Although the latter does not publicly oppose the US administration’s policy of supporting a nuclear agreement with Iran, in essence nothing has changed. The military needs an enemy, a security challenge and constant confrontation to justify the huge budget it receives to fund the exorbitant pensions of its staff. The Iranian regime, for its part, continues to develop its nuclear capacities, while using the campaign against Israel as an excuse to continue oppressing its people. Indeed, the conflict serves both sides.

On the Palestinian issue, too, the government of change continues in Netanyahu’s path. The treatment of Palestinians stems from a narrow security perception, based on the accepted assumption of the Right, the Left and the Islamic movement that there is no political solution on the horizon, so that managing the occupation is all that remains. The sole difference between this government and Netanyahu’s is that Defense Minister Gantz occasionally meets with Abu Mazen to strengthen the Palestinian Authority via economic relief.

The handling of the Palestinian issue as purely a matter of security creates chaos in the West Bank and Israel. Clashes with the Israeli army lead to the daily killing of young Palestinians, to acts of revenge by Palestinians inside Israel, and to the disproportionate response of the army (in Jenin, for example, which resulted in the killing of journalist Sheerin Abu Akle). Force was and remains the army’s only response, although it is clear this provides no solution to what is known in Israel as “lone-wolf terrorism.” The government’s decision to allow the “flag parade”, commemorating the “unification” of Jerusalem in 1967, to pass through Damascus Gate and the Muslim Quarter has only added fuel to the fire. This policy of force repeatedly boomerangs against the government of change itself. The discourse in Israel is becoming more violent and racist, populism is taking over, and members of the government are being accused of treason.

This security fixation is accompanied by a very deep economic one, best represented by Ram Belinkov, who was appointed director general under Finance Minister Avigdor Lieberman. Belinkov had already served as head of the budget department in the Ministry of Finance during the Olmert government; he resigned because he refused to increase the budget deficit, contrary to the government’s position. Yet wonder of wonders, after 14 years the same official reappears in order to implement a policy based on the understanding that the government does not know how to manage the economy, politicians are ineffective, and the treasurer’s role is to “safeguard the coffers”.

Privatization of the public sector, the creation of favorable conditions for foreign investment, and the removal of barriers to local capital have been the pillars of Israeli economic policy since 1985. This policy has proven itself to be a social disaster, creating deep social disparities, empowering capital and corporations, and leaving millions in poverty. In the United States, a similar policy brought Trump to power, jeopardizing US democracy.

Developed countries today are increasingly turning to an egalitarian and green economy, imposing taxes on corporations, increasing the state’s investments in infrastructure, and encouraging organized labor, but all of these measures do not affect Israel. Israel sees itself as an “economic miracle” that the world recession has bypassed. “We will not be Greece” has become a convention of both Right and Left, and the start-up nation places itself at the pinnacle of world economies. However, the same start-up nation is very limited demographically and geographically: it amounts to about 300,000 programmers, most of whom are Ashkenazis living in Tel Aviv and environs. The rest of the country lives the life of a low-tech nation, with millions of workers in the private and public sectors who must make do with starvation wages.

Those who have money can purchase an apartment, even two, give their children private education, health, and all the services that the state has stopped providing in accordance with the theory of Belinkov and the finance bureaucrats. The cries of teachers, the demonstrations of doctors and interns, the concerns of young couples who cannot afford an apartment, the frayed nerves of those stuck in traffic jams on the way to work, the suffering of the mentally disabled who do not receive proper treatment, the plight of senior citizens who cannot survive on their pensions – none have any impact on residents of the Tel Aviv towers, including finance officials and retired generals who receive exorbitant pensions.

Israel is sinking into a crisis of security, society, politics and values because Israeli politics has degenerated. There exist no parties with a social and political horizon, and all that remains is lust for power to satisfy narrow sectoral interests. The government has delivered the country into the hands of officials from the defense and finance ministries, and its only function is to take care of sectoral funds that benefit the electoral bases of its ministers. The start-up nation cannot meet Israel’s growing social needs. It causes social gaps and splits to widen between Ashkenazis and Mizrahis, religious and secular, Arab and Jewish, a split that reinforces racist populism.

Elections have lost so much of their significance that most politicians and the public do not see them as a solution to the political crisis plaguing Israel, and the reason is simple: differences between the parties have faded. Accepting the occupation as an unfortunate necessity, coming to terms with the deep gaps that the economic reality creates, and a lack of courage to change direction and chart a new path, all lead to a combined security and social disaster. The government of change will not survive because it has failed to change the policies of Netanyahu.

The post A government without policy enroute to dissolution first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

Since 1948, Israel has nurtured an ethos according to which its very existence is imperiled. Even before it was born, the country was in danger of extinction because Syria, Iraq, Egypt and Jordan rose up to annihilate it.  Since then, a new oppressor has risen periodically, threatening to “throw us into the sea.” Once upon a time it was ‘Abd al-Nasser, and when he disappeared, it was Saddam Hussein. After Saddam was defeated with American help, it has become the turn of the Iranian tyrant, who is developing nuclear weapons to eliminate us and proclaim a Shiite victory throughout the Middle East.

In the past, however, it turned out that things were not quite as they were mooted. The monarchical and backward Arab regimes which invaded in 1948 did not truly intend to conquer Palestine, and their armies mirrored the weakness and decay of their regimes. In 1967, ‘Abd al-Nasser entered the war in an ill-conceived way and was utterly defeated. The “existential threat” turned out to have been imaginary, while Israel expanded its territory threefold. The bluff of Saddam Hussein was revealed when the Americans invaded Iraq in 2003, claiming he had “weapons of mass destruction.” What he had, it turned out, was a factory for cap pistols. This adventure cost the Americans many billions, with thousands of soldiers killed and wounded, and it took away their desire to continue fighting in the name of an “existential danger” to Israel.

Yes, the world is fed up with Israel’s “existential danger,” so Barack Obama decided to reach an agreement with Iran and limit its ability to develop nuclear weapons. Israel stomped its feet in anger. Netanyahu went all the way to the US Congress to incite against Obama, but in vain. Nothing helped until Donald Trump came on the scene, and Israel breathed a sigh of relief. The agreement with Iran was rescinded, Trump imposed severe sanctions on the Iranians, and the Mossad did in Iran as it pleased, from the assassination of scientists, through cyberattacks, to the theft of the nuclear archive.

The end is known – Trump was defeated by Biden, in Iran an even more radical president was elected, the centrifuges work overtime, and all parties to the original nuclear deal have returned to the table in Vienna. Once again, Israel is alone, and once again it is trying to convince the world that an “existential danger” is at its door.

But the world has moved on, and Iran’s existential threat to Israel has given way to more tangible existential threats. The Biden administration has set new priorities for the world, with three existential threats that demand vigorous, global action. The first is the climate crisis, which threatens the existence of life on earth. The second is the pandemic. And the third is the threat to democracy from totalitarian regimes like China and Russia, not to mention the neo-fascist currents headed by Donald Trump.

Iran’s place in the range of threats is marginal, and the new Israeli government’s cries of “existential danger” fall on deaf ears. For Israel, climate change is an anecdote, the pandemic is something we can live with, and there is no concern about totalitarianism. Israel’s conciliatory attitude toward the Chinese, its warm relationship with Putin, its longing for Trump, and its alliances with Bin Salman, al-Sisi, Abdullah, and the Emirates show where its heart is.

In fact, the “Abraham Accords” with the Gulf States tell the whole story. While Iran is verbally threatening Israel, in practice its eyes are fixed on the Arab regimes, led by Saudi Arabia, for which Iran really does pose an “existential danger.” It was this threat that threw them into the arms of Israel, with the generous assistance of Trump and his son-in-law, Jared Kushner. Iran has managed to undermine Syria, Yemen, Iraq and Lebanon, all on the pretext of liberating Jerusalem. To judge from its actions on the ground, it poses an existential danger not to Israel, but to millions of Arab citizens who are forced to leave their countries and become refugees. Israel is not a target and never was. It is and was a pretext. Syria, Yemen, Iraq, and Lebanon are the real targets, and they are paying the price for Iran’s expansionist aspirations.

At the same time, while the Iranian regime is playing the Israeli card to make gains abroad and suppress domestic opposition, in Israel the word “Iran” has become a code to continue inflating the defense budget at the expense of the resource-hungry sectors that are needed to reduce social gaps. However, the world is no longer buying the security bluff, and many Israelis are fed up with it too.

In an opinion piece against raising the budgetary pension for members of the standing army (Haaretz, November 28), Iris Leal writes: “In a land beset by enemies, everyone gripes about the cost of living, the labor market, wage gaps and the housing market, yet time and time again we vote on one issue along: security. Existential dread drives most of Israel’s citizenry, and the people’s army is the apple of their eye.”

To this Leal adds, “The overwhelming rage at Defense Minister Benny Gantz’s decision to raise the budgetary pension of already retired standing-army personnel surprised even him. Gantz is still living in times when every word uttered by the Israel Defense Forces is accepted as true by definition, every demand met, and every hint of resistance quelled through emotional blackmail and unsubtle warnings of the military catastrophe on the horizon.”

And what would the Israeli army have done if the sanctions imposed by Trump on the Iranian regime had indeed achieved their goal? What would have happened if a new Iranian “green revolution,” like the one suppressed by the regime in 2009, had established democracy there? There is one answer: the Arab Spring would have returned in full force. And what would have happened if the second revolutionary wave had overthrown al-Sisi’s regime while eliminating Iranian militias in Iraq and Hezbollah’s control of Lebanon? The answer is clear:  all of Israel’s autocratic allies in the region would have fallen, one after the other, starting with the Saudis. Democracy is the real existential threat to the Saudis and the Emirates, who supported all the coups to quell the Arab Spring. In the end, it is not the Iranian regime that poses an existential danger, but the possibility of a democratic revolution, which will raise the Arab world from its ruins, the same ruins that Israel and its accomplices thrive on.

The overthrow of the Iranian regime is an existential interest first and foremost for the Iranian people themselves, who suffer from political and cultural oppression, as well as deep poverty. It is also in the interest of the Arab peoples whose countries were destroyed by Iranian intervention. It is in the interest of the Palestinian people, who are groaning and fighting against Israel’s denial of their basic rights. In contrast, the Israeli interest is to keep the Middle East devastated, backward, poor and oppressed, in order to continue maintaining its schizophrenic regime, which ranges from democracy for Jews to apartheid for Palestinians. The world has already moved on to another era while Israel continues to educate itself from faded pages written during the Cold War, which depict it as the bulwark of the democratic West in a totalitarian sea. The world is changing, but Israel and its partners in the region, and with them the Iranian regime, remain mired in the past.

The post “Wolf! Wolf! Iran! Iran!“ first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.