This is Costa Black’s 38th week demonstrating on Kaplan Street in Tel Aviv. Like many other activists he left everything to dedicate himself to the fight against the right-wing coup d’état. But Costa’s story is a little different. He came over to Israel at age 11 from Ukraine with his mother and sister experiencing no little social and economic hurdles. Costa unfurls huge posters in English that photograph well from a bird’s eye view. They feature an American flag next to the Israeli flag, that call President Biden not to meet with Bibi, and to support the protest. When Biden was previously asked if he would invite Bibi to the White House and answered with a categorical “no,” he gave hope and encouragement to Costa and his friends. Yet two weeks ago Biden met with Bibi and presented him with a gift – the prospect of a peace agreement with Saudi Arabia’s MBS. Could it be that Biden has thrown up his hands and thus, in one fell swoop, the judicial coup is off the agenda, and peace with Saudi Arabia brings Bibi back to life?

With sadness, Costa tweets an innocent question, which he says no one has yet answered: “What does Israel gain de facto from this agreement?” The political reporter Barak Ravid replied to this: “This tweet shows how politics sometimes clouds judgment and causes people in the liberal camp to lose all ability to examine life in a complex and straightforward manner.” Costa did not have time to recover from Ravid’s patronizing scolding before another tribal elder, Ben Caspit, joined him and added: “We are sorry that we were unable to explain to you, Costa. But it is simple: peace with the most important and wealthiest Muslim country in the world, which controls the holy cities and symbolizes Islam’s Holy of Holies is a historical event on a biblical scale that completes the circle of peace around Israel (as opposed to peace with the Palestinians, which is within Israel) and brings the rest of the Arab world into it. It is unlike anything and is more important than all of us together. Yes, even if it has something to do with Bibi.”

So, this is it Costa, you have been turned into a “power broker” whose understanding is vague, so you do not see that peace with Saudi Arabia is an event on a “biblical scale”. You demonstrated for 38 weeks, Costa, getting beaten, arrested, and managed to stop the coup d’état with your friends, but it turns out you must now return to your natural dimensions. How dare you compare the coup d’état with the “biblical” peace, even if it is “somehow” related to Bibi! The problem is that those elders of the tribe such as Ravid, Caspit and even the anti-Zionist elder, Gideon Levi, have already proven in the past that their great wisdom has left your generation, to eat their rotten fruit. This does not prevent them from teaching you a lesson in political wisdom – as people who support you, of course, some of whom even go out to demonstrate with you from time to time.

It’s no coincidence, Costa, that you find it difficult to believe them and accept their learned opinion, since you could have asked them the same question about the Abraham Accords as well. After all, you know very well that what we got out of the Abraham Accords is a fascist government that threatens the very existence of the state. The elders of the tribe try to convince you that “somehow” it has to do with Bibi, but the truth is it has to do not only with Bibi, but also with those who surround him: Trump, Putin and other lower-level dictators. Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) himself is a friend of Putin, of Xi Jinping, and like Bibi, he also wishes for Trump’s return to the White House. They are made from the same dough and have no bounds. They are ready to do anything, literally anything, to hold onto power.

MBS is not looking for “biblical” peace. Like Bibi, Putin, and Trump, he is looking to transform his leper status following the murder and dismemberment of the body of critical Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi inside the Saudi embassy in Turkey. The Americans also did not forget the Saudis’ 2001 attack on the Twin Towers in New York, which was planned by Osama bin Laden and carried out with the participation of 15 Saudi citizens and with the Saudi regime turning a blind eye. It is no secret that Mohammed bin Salman worked with Bibi against President Obama and on behalf of Trump, who cancelled the nuclear agreement with Iran in accordance with the Israeli-Saudi demand. Before being elected president, Biden promised to turn MBS into a pariah and refused to meet with him. Yet the coronavirus pandemic and the Russian invasion of Ukraine threw everything up in the air.

This is how MBS became the kingmaker. Not only does he coordinate oil production with Putin to maintain its high price and shows utter contempt at Western sanctions that set a low ceiling price for Russian oil, but he also helps Putin finance his criminal war in Ukraine. On the other hand, bin Salman pokes Biden in the eye by creating a strategic partnership with China, and renews diplomatic relations with Iran through Chinese mediation, steps that flashed a warning signal in the White House. While MBS is another bloodthirsty dictator, like most leaders of the Arab world, China is a world power that aspires to achieve global hegemony and has the means to fulfil its ambitions. Today China leads the Autocracy camp and is trying to push America out of Africa, Latin America, and the Middle East. This situation left Biden no choice, he must tie MBS’s hands, and Bibi can provide him with the rope to do so.

Here we will return to Costa’s question – “What does Israel gain de facto?” To answer, you should ask – what do the people of Saudi Arabia gain from the agreement? In Saudi Arabia, as in Israel, there is a difference between the regime and the people, and not everything that benefits the regime also benefits the people. The Saudi people live under a dictatorial regime based on Sharia law. Oppression of women, the LGBTQ community, and freedom of expression are offenses punishable by death. In Israel, too, we are fighting against oppression of women, the LGBTQ community and attempts to impose Jewish religious law on us. The difference between us and them is that here there is a will to hold on to these vested rights, while in Saudi Arabia the people have never had even one day of freedom and democracy. And those who demanded freedom in Saudi Arabia ended their lives like Jamal Khashoggi.

The Saudi regime is not only oppressing its own people, but also spreading its Wahhabi and Messianic Islamic ideology throughout the Middle East. It was the Saudis who helped Abdel Fattah al-Sisi eliminate the Arab Spring. They also brought the jihadist militias into Syria to drown the civil resistance in blood, thereby aiding the Syrian regime’s massacre of the Syrian people with the aid of the Iranians and the Russians. Not many Israelis bothered to learn the details. The Saudi regime is no better than the Iranian regime. Like it, Saudi Arabia wants to arm itself with nuclear weapons to secure its rule, and like in Iran, its own people demanding freedom are its main enemy.

That’s why, together with you, Costa, we go out every week and shout “de-mo-cra-cy” and repeatedly state that we will not become Poland, Hungary or Iran. Does it make sense that we would be unwilling to compromise with illiberal “democratic” regimes, but are ready to make “biblical peace” with the bloodthirsty Saudi regime? Look what happened to Israel, which always prided itself on being the “only democracy in the Middle East.” Instead of us spreading democracy, dictatorship threatens to devour us.

The lesson is clear – it is impossible to maintain a long-term democracy in an environment infested with dictatorships. Our interest as democrats is to spread democracy to our neighbours so that our democracy will be sustainable. As for your question, Costa, what will come out of peace with Saudi Arabia in reality, I’ll leave it to you to answer. One thing I ask of you, don’t stop protesting for democracy, and don’t give in to all those sages and their advice.

The post Costa’s Question first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

David Ben-Gurion, Israel’s first prime minister who declared the establishment of the State, took four steps that shaped the nature of Israel’s regime and thus laid the foundation for the current constitutional crisis, the most serious the country has ever known.

Ben-Gurion deleted the word “democracy” from a concluding draft of the Declaration of Independence; postponed establishment of the Constituent Assembly; did not separate religion from state, and refused to determine the new state’s borders. Israel has since then been a crippled democracy, as former Attorney General Dr. Avichai Mandelblit ruled: “The country’s founding fathers understood that the state structure was that of a weak democracy.” So weak, in fact, that recently, in the concluding session of the high court appealing against the abolishing of the “grounds of reasonableness”, attorney Ilan Bombach, representing the government argued that “The Declaration of Independence cannot be used as a constitutional basis.” With this, he astonished all Israelis who believe that Israel is not only the sole democracy in the Middle East, but that its democratic foundations are firmly anchored in the Declaration of Independence.

The question is why did Ben-Gurion decide to delete the word “democracy” from the declaration, why did he not convene the Constituent Assembly for writing a constitution as the Declaration of Independence demanded, and why did he easily agree to a status quo that gives the ultra-orthodox minority enormous power over the secular majority. The answer to these questions is simple. He did it because he could, meaning he built a country according to his whims as the all-powerful ruler. Ben-Gurion was not interested in strict separation of powers and did not want a regime of checks and balances, especially at a time when the country was in the making. Although the state adopted a democratic system, it was a democracy that adapted itself to the all-powerful needs of the Mapai party (later known as the Labor party). The government, army, economy and Israel’s General Union the Histadrut, were all under the absolute control of Mapai, as was the Knesset.

Mapai’s rule survived 30 of Israel’s 75 years of existence, ending in the 1977 dramatic change when the Likud came to power. Since then, Israel has been completely transformed: the economy was privatized, the Histadrut passed into the hands of the Likud, the kibbutzim were privatized, the Likud itself underwent a metamorphosis, the religious Mafdal party morphed from a moderate ally of Mapai into a messianic-nationalist-activist movement and the ultra-orthodox Agudat Israel party participates in the government and dominates the Knesset’s Finance Committee. This group, does not participate in the workforce or in the army, but fill up the inflated “yeshivot” where they study the Torah all day, living on government budgets.

The Declaration of Independence is currently unable to settle the dispute between two camps which do not agree on the most fundamental principles of democracy. For the ruling camp, democracy is the rule of the majority as established through Knesset elections. For the opposition camp, democracy is first and foremost the protection of human and minority rights. The phrase “Jewish and democratic,” which ostensibly expresses the Zionist consensus, does not appear in the Declaration of Independence and has become the focus of debate between the opposing camps.

These camps disagree not only on what democracy is, but also on the definition of Judaism. In the absolute “rule of the majority” interpreted by the right, the Knesset can enact any law based on the “will of the people.” And regarding the state’s Jewish character, the religious argue it is expressed in powers derived from religious law (The Halacha), including Sabbath observance, kosher laws, gender separation, nature of the traditional family, privileges for men, the denial of LGBTQ rights, marriage through the rabbinical courts, etc.

While the liberal camp defines the Supreme Court as the authority that determines which law is constitutional and which law does not conform to the fundamental principles of the state as Jewish and democratic, the religious-national camp does not see the Supreme Court as an impartial judge. In his appearance in front of the High Court, Simcha Rothman, chairman of the Knesset’s Constitution, Law and Justice Committee, made it abundantly clear what the ruling camp thinks about the Supreme Court justices, when he called them, in their face an “oligarchic elite”. It could be understood that in the new mood, expressed by Rothman and gang, the Supreme Court and all the gatekeepers of democracy, the Attorney General, the Israel Security Agency, the Mossad and the military, are nothing more than remnants of the Mapai rule that passed away over 40 years ago.

In an opinion piece published in Israel Hayom on September 15, 2023, Yaakov Berdugo, a Netanyahu devotee writes that the goal of the High Court of Justice is to “bypass the choices and desires of the people at any cost and march Israel along the judges’ desired paths on the most sensitive issues.” The High Court of Justice is summed up by Berdugo as possessing three aspirations: “Engineering of relations with the Palestinians, transforming Israel into a state of all its citizens, and having the upper hand in the identity of elected officials.” In other words, the High Court of Justice is a left-wing body that works against the will of “the people” on the Palestinian issue, gnaws away at the Jewish nature of the state and works to topple Netanyahu from power against the “will of the people.” Hence, anyone who sides with the High Court or undertakes to carry out its rulings against the government’s decisions is displayed as a rebel against the “will of the people”. The gatekeepers and Supreme Court justices represent the deep state through which the Mapai rule, although long gone, continues to exist through its central institutions.

Relying on the Declaration of Independence as a founding document, and interpreting its spirit, instead of relying on clear, written clauses built on a broad consensus, is what enabled the fundamentalist right’s attempt to carry out an attempted regime coup, to transform Israel into a Jewish state according to religious law and to establish an apartheid regime in perpetuity over the Palestinians. Years of neglecting both points, whitewashing the settlements, legitimizing settlers, granting concessions and money to the ultra-Orthodox, excluding and discriminating against Arab citizens, and the unwillingness to decide on the plight of 5 million Palestinians all of these weakened the democratic foundations of the country, and created a distortion that created fertile ground for the rise of Israeli fascism

Hundreds of thousands are marching in the streets, among them the writer of these lines, loudly shouting “democracy” against these attempts to abolish the powers of the High Court. Clinging to the Declaration of Independence is not a proper answer for attorney Ilan Bombach, who claims it is not a founding document. The Declaration of Independence was intended to serve a one-party, centralized regime which responded to a historical need: to build a state from nothing, to give it a language, institutions, to wage war against the indigenous Palestinian population, to take in a million Jews to establish a Jewish majority and provide them with housing, education, health, and employment.

Since then, reality has changed. The startup nation cannot be satisfied with a sparse document that does not provide answers to all the problems in the current crisis. When a majority replaces “the people” with all its diverse components, and imposes its will on the minority, the road to fascism is paved. It is impossible to hide behind “Jewish and democratic” to cover up the system’s failings. We must enact a constitution that enshrines the rights of all residents living between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. The former head of the Mossad, Tamir Pardo, made it clear in no uncertain terms that what Israel maintains in the West Bank and Gaza is an apartheid regime.

The call for “democracy,” correct in itself, cannot mask this truth. Those who truly want democracy, and to ensure its existence for generations, should apply it to all residents living today on that piece of land under Israeli control. Democracy for everyone between the Jordan and the sea.

The post Ben Gurion’s legacy first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

On the “day of disruption,” when hundreds of thousands took to the streets in protest against the planned repeal of the reasonableness clause, thousands gathered in front of the American Embassy in Tel Aviv, waving American flags alongside Israeli ones. The protesters’ demand from US President Biden is clear: “don’t give in,” and don’t invite Netanyahu to the White House as long as he doesn’t reject the anti-democratic legislation. In an interview with Fareed Zakaria two days before the demonstration, Biden spoke harshly against the Netanyahu government, defining it as “the most extreme in the history of Israel.” Biden clarified that not only the legal coup bothers him, but also the composition of the current coalition and its fascist positions.

To remove any doubt, New York Times commentator Thomas Friedman “translated” Biden’s intention. Friedman wrote that for generations, American administrations maintained special relations with Israel based on a “fiction” that Israel acts according to its acceptance of the two-state principle. On this basis, American administrations regularly vetoed any condemnation of Israel in the UN Security Council. Now, however, Israel’s right-wing government has put an end to this fiction. The appointment of Bezalel Smotrich as governor of the West Bank essentially buries the idea of two states. Smotrich intends to officially perpetuate the apartheid regime that Israeli governments set up for him in the West Bank. Thomas Friedman goes further and proposes, according to this logic, not to exempt the half million settlers from visas to the US, unless the same exemption applies to the 2.5 million Palestinians in the West Bank.

The Biden administration, whose support the protesters requested in front of the embassy, also presents them with a challenge. The administration is troubled not only by the judicial coup, but also by the fate of Israel, because it continues to control 5 million Palestinians who lack all rights or status. After all, the connection between the coup and apartheid is clear: first the High Court is eliminated, then the West Bank is annexed.

The American perspective is much broader, and stems from internal and global interests. The Biden administration is fighting for America’s soul. It stands against Trump and his fascist movement, which is an existential threat to the US and the world, no less than the messianic right is an existential threat to Israel. It is no coincidence that from the beginning of his term, Biden divided the countries of the world into two camps, the democratic versus the autocratic. If the judicial coup succeeds, Israel will belong to the autocratic camp represented today by Putin, Orban, and Xi Jinping.

Biden is surely aware of the dangers arising to any democracy following adoption of the market-based neoliberal approach. This conservative theory, the so-called “trickle-down economy,” was enthusiastically embraced by Netanyahu. Yet this economy, in the US as in Israel, has created tremendous social gaps, which have led to poverty and despair concerning democracy, and through which nationalism, racism, homophobia and fascism have penetrated. When elected president, Biden presented a new-old paradigm, returning to Roosevelt’s New Deal updated for the 21st century. The state, that same “fat” apparatus that Netanyahu loves to vilify, returns to play a central role in the economy.

Biden declared himself the best friend of organized labor. Today, instead of favoring multinational corporations, he prioritizes the middle class and the workers. He invests hundreds of billions to advance high-tech enterprises, renewable energy, public infrastructure and support for students and poor families. In this way he is changing the face of the United States. This is how the “Bidenomics” economy was born, putting an end to 40 years of “Reaganomics.” Biden’s victory over Trump was a direct result of huge protest movements that swept the US. Black Lives Matter and the women’s movement, among others, brought Biden a victory by 7 million votes over Trump, who to this day refuses to acknowledge these results.

Herein lies the great difference between the Israeli protest movement and the American. In the Biden administration, white, black, Latina, indigenous and LGBTQ persons serve side by side, in a tremendous display of tolerance and diversity. In contrast, Jewish Israel expresses a religious, national, and gender monolith. To eradicate Israeli messianism, much more is needed than halting legislation. Those who seek Biden’s support must look at and embrace the principles of Biden’s politics and their assimilation into Israeli reality.

Since the Israeli protest aims at the broadest common denominator, it ignores the above-mentioned “fiction” of an eventual two-state solution, taking care not to mention the “occupation” (a taboo word). This is perhaps the greatest victory of the messianic camp. Although the protest movement sees this camp as the root of all evil, detesting its claim that “we are all brothers,” it may be laying the foundations for dealing with the “fiction” after overthrow of the government. Yet that overthrow would also leave us with an unresolved issue: we don’t have a Biden, and we don’t have a party similar to the Democrats, which includes all the protest movements. The candidates to replace Bibi are Yair Lapid and Benny Gantz, both of whom advocate a hawkish security policy and the same neoliberal economic platform that created the enormous social gaps on which Bibi’s populism rides.

And another obstacle: when the Israeli protest movement waves the American flag, the Arab society in Israel and the Palestinians in the occupied territories remain indifferent and inactive. While the black movement in the USA supported Biden wholeheartedly and rallied for his victory, here the Palestinians and the Arabs in Israel cling to the old clichés. They view Biden as a representative of “American imperialism” that supports Israel unconditionally. This is a great historical tragedy. Not only does the Israeli protest remain without a Palestinian ally, who could influence its attitudes and shape the identity of a future state, but the Palestinians themselves are perpetuating the horrible reality in which they live. The anti-democratic and homophobic movements set the tone, and all that is left for the Palestinian intellectual is to blame the occupation, Israel, the protest, Biden, the Arab world and the rest of the world for his troubles, never himself.

The guarantee of the protest’s success is not only the infinite dedication of its members, but also the support of the American government. However, in order to turn this support into a sustainable relationship, the protest must embrace Biden’s worldview, his fight for democracy at home and abroad, his uncompromising support for Ukraine against the Russian invasion, and an economic doctrine that strengthens democracy in the United States and in the world. Biden’s victory will guarantee the victory of democracy in the United States, in the world and in Israel. A Trump victory would give Israeli fascism a huge boost, and be a fatal blow to the protest movement.

The Israeli protest movement is moving in the right direction. The very fact that it knew how to draw the dividing line between democracy and dictatorship puts it on the right track, and it flows with the direction of human history. If one day millions of Palestinians join it in a broad Jewish-Arab democratic movement, democracy will win and ensure its existence for many years.

The post Biden and Israel’s Protest Movement first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

The most urgent item on the protest movement’s agenda is halting the legislative blitz, which resumed in full force after the government blew up talks with the opposition by violating understandings reached regarding last month’s Bar Association elections. If the reasonableness standard is indeed revoked, that is, denying the legislative powers from banning un-reasonable government decisions, but mainly appointments, a legislative tsunami will wash away the democratic regime in Israel, leaving not a trace.

The chaotic reality dictated by ministers Yariv Levin, Betzalel Smotrich, and Moshe Gafni wakened all the couch potatoes, and coffee shop lovers who rallied as one to defend the remaining liberal space they have hitherto enjoyed. Many of them hold foreign passports. Some already deciding that if the anti-democratic coup d’état succeeds and Israel becomes Hungary or Poland, they will emigrate. For them, this would mark the end of the Zionist enterprise. For the sake of halting the fascist coup they are prepared to take extreme measures, including causing disruptions and even refusing to serve in the military.

There is no doubt that the mass waving of Israeli flags, and singing the national anthem in rallies reveal a nostalgia for Israel in its early days, when the Declaration of Independence indicated a desire to establish a democratic and secular state supported by the family of nations. The current symbols of the state, however, are very far from what they previously symbolized, and embracing their values is incompatible with the “Bibism” that has emerged. The 2023 protest undoubtedly created an entire new camp while setting firm boundaries between it and the opposite camp. The liberal democratic camp is being formed on the fly, annulling the former consensus of Jewish brotherhood dissociating itself from the autocratic right and theocratic-messianic camp.

No more the internal deliberations and soul seeking that followed the 1995 murder of Prime Minister Rabin after the Oslo agreement. Today, members of the liberal camp view the opposing side as the embodiment of evil with whom one must not cooperate, negotiate, and certainly not compromise. In the eyes of the pro-autocratic camp such liberal radicalization poses a danger to the very existence of the Jewish state. MK Yitzhak Pindrus (United Torah) stated that the LGBTQ rights movement is more dangerous to Israel than Hezbollah, and Oved Hogi, an assistant to former Minister Katz laments: “Hitler, you killed 6 million instead of killing (former Supreme Court President) Aharon Barak.” The lines of separation have been drawn and there is no choice but to enter the frontlines of battle.

The advantages of Bibi’s coalition are clear. It controls the government; it is ideologically cohesive; relies on an articulated ideology imported directly from American conservative circles and disseminated by the many-armed octopus the Kohelet Forum think tank. It strives to establish official apartheid in the occupied Palestinian territory; actively works to control the gatekeepers and justice system; and strives to control the media, education system and academia to instill its nationalist and fascist values. While the liberal camp was living well in La La land, the aggressive right diligently enacted the “Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish People basic law”. Compared to the fans of dictatorship composing the coalition, liberal democrats are in the opposition and divided among themselves. Some strive for a compromise with the dictator, while others now realize that the past decades’ compromises served only to strengthen the fascists, encouraging them to act with all their might to establish a messianic dictatorship in Israel and apartheid in the occupied Palestinian territory.

And yet, the liberal democrats radiate admirable strength, determination, and perseverance, expressed in weekly mass demonstrations and other disobedience actions for the past six months. The protest, has so far blocked the proposed fascist legislation. Its members represent the productive, economic and security echelons, without which Israel cannot exist. The protest’s entrepreneurship, innovation, and creativity are expressed in a variety of measures and actions that succeed in arousing public opinion, thus undermining the coalition and its governance capacity while even rousing astonishment around the world.

This is the driving force of the liberal democratic camp. It is not a passing electoral phenomenon, but a movement based on grass roots activists rooted deeply within their communities, and they work within them with endless dedication. This camp has the support of the Biden administration, which refused to invite Netanyahu to Washington as long as he continues his attempts to transform Israel into Hungary. The position of the White House is a decisive and beneficial factor in the protest movement’s success.

Yet stopping the coup d’état is not a one-time act. To truly win, the liberal democratic camp must establish a regime that guarantees the rules of the democratic political game for many years to come. It can only do this by establishing a constitution or sustainable basic laws. The latter need to guarantee separation of powers on the one hand, and equality of all citizens irrespective of religion, race, gender, or sexual orientation, while abolishing the nation state law that enshrines Jewish supremacy.

To establish democracy, the protest movement must reach precisely the same public that the Israeli neoliberal economy has rendered impoverished, marginalized, and resentful. The assumption that the Israeli economy can prosper with a locomotor of 300,000 high-tech workers, while the fundamentalist right establishes its rule and influence on those who have been pushed to the margins and annexes the West Bank, is wrong. The “deal” that allowed economic prosperity for those with privileges, in exchange for their tacit consent to a dark and undemocratic regime, collapsed in the November 2022 elections.

A liberal democracy cannot exist without economic equality. This is also the lesson learned by the American Democratic Party, which since the 2020 election of Biden has led a radical deep social and economic transformation, from a market economy to a welfare economy oriented towards work and production. This is how the Democratic Party managed to beat Trump in both the presidential and midterm elections. The value of equality in Israel must also include civil equality for Arab citizens, who make up 20% of the country’s population. The problem facing the liberal democratic camp is how to “balance” its appeal to right-wing supporters of the government, who have been delegated to the margins, and the appeal to Arab citizens.

Israeli flags, the national anthem and Zionist rhetoric clearly do not welcome the Arab population, which suffers from neglect and institutionalized racism to join the fight for democracy. But that’s not the entire story since the Arab population its institutions and representatives also do not advocate for democratic and liberal values. This is clearly seen in many aspects: the strength of the Islamic movement; the structure of local governments elected according to clan calculations rather than programs; the Arab parties’ narrow nationalism and their support for dictators like Putin and Assad as well as society as a whole that refuses to condemn homophobia.

The values of liberal democracy and equality cannot exist in the long term if they are not accompanied by the value of peace. The right-wing fascist position is clear: peace with the Palestinians is impossible, so they must be defeated time and again, and an apartheid regime must be established in the occupied territories. Conversely, the democratic camp strongly opposes pogroms and the burning of Palestinian villages carried out by hilltop settler youth yet it refuses to touch the issue of peace. Liberal democrats are horrified at the thought of fascists imposing a binational state on them, vow not to send their grandchildren to guard “middle of nowhere holes” like the settlements of Kiryat Arba or Yitzhar, yet ultimately accept the thesis that currently there are no Palestinians with whom they can negotiate.

Even in this claim, admittedly, there is a hint of truth. The Palestinian society controlled by Hamas and the Palestinian Authority is very far from liberal democratic principles. The advantage of fascists is that they offer a simple, decisive idea in the form of apartheid. In contrast, the liberal democratic camp knows what it does not want but is unable to define what it does want.

When it comes to the 2 million Arab citizens of Israel the liberal democratic camp advocates full civil equality, even while Arab society and its institutions remain outside the protest. So it should when referring to the Palestinians living under occupation.  The sole answer to apartheid is democracy for all between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. It can be said this is currently unrealistic, but there are also those who will say that the drafting of a constitution and enactment of basic laws ensuring Israel’s democratic and egalitarian nature are also unrealistic at the moment.

That is why the liberal camp, which rightly presents a future vision of democracy and equality, must also add to it a vision of peace. Not a peace based on separation according to nationality and race, but one of sharing and inclusion. A peace based on a constitution ensuring the rights of all citizens, Israelis and Palestinians. A peace grounded in an egalitarian economy, which works for the well-being of all citizens between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. This is the only way to inscribe democracy.

The post Demonstration and its Sting first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

Joe Biden said an unequivocal “no.” Bibi Netanyahu is not invited to the White House until further notice. In other words, until his constitutional coup d’état disappears. Netanyahu’s answer, “don’t interfere in Israel’s internal affairs,” was not long in coming. In response, media commentators tried to interpret this American “no”. Haaretz’s lead editorial defended Biden, explaining that his motives are pure and he speaks “as a supporter and lover of Israel.” Some explain the “no” due to the president’s Irish temperament or his advanced age, and some even attributed it to an unfortunate slip of the tongue. On the other hand, Bibi’s son Yair had accused the CIA of being behind the protests, a statement that must have angered the president. Everyone anticipated a quick fix from the White House that would lower the flames. A statement was indeed made, but the flames did not subside.

Right wing commentators mentioned the long-standing friendship between the two old friends. It was claimed that Biden is a Zionist, that even in the days of Clinton and Obama there were crises, but that strategic relations are stronger than any dispute because Israel is a strategic asset that the US cannot give up. In short, the US needs us more than we need it. So, we can raze the Palestinian village of Hawara, establish a private militia for Minister of National Security Ben Gvir, annul the disengagement law and fire the defense minister without breaking the bank, because Bibi knows the Americans better than they know themselves. As you may recall, on March 3, 2015, Netanyahu addressed Congress in a defiant speech aimed at thwarting Obama’s attempt to reach an agreement with Iran. It was Netanyahu back then who crudely interfered in internal American politics and contributed his part to Trump’s electoral victory. Since then, Bibi and Trump became identical twins, with Trump starring in Likud’s election posters and Bibi starring in countless White House ceremonies.

Precisely here lies the explanation for Biden’s resounding “no”. The American president may love Israel, but he loves America more. Biden is leading a historic crusade to save the soul of America from the clutches of American fascism as represented by Trump. Something momentous occurred on January 6, 2021, the day Trump’s supporters broke into the Capitol, and Biden’s struggle is primarily aimed at saving American democracy which, it turned out, is not a given. The Israeli right-wing did not take the event seriously and continues to admire Trump, seeing him as Israel’s best friend ever.

Not only Israel underestimated Biden. Also, Russia did when it invaded Ukraine without any hesitation. And where did Israel stand? On the side of democracy or on the side of autocracy? A Putin victory in Ukraine, as well as a victory of Bibi’s constitutional coup, will affect American politics itself as Trumpism continues to threaten America’s democratic regime. This is why US policy has changed. In Israel, they refuse to understand that today’s America is not the America of Clinton, Bush and even Obama. While Biden is moving at a dizzying pace for radical social change based on the Build Back Better program, Israel is moving in the opposite direction, towards neo-liberal conservatism and extreme theocracy. Biden’s “no” accurately reflects the chasm that has opened between the two countries.

The American political language underwent a radical change: the language of the conservatives, who censor movies and books, prohibit abortions, hate the LGBTQ community and are hostile to blacks, compared to the liberal language, which calls for ethnic inclusion and a social safety net for all. It is not difficult to guess which language is spoken by the Israeli government of Smotrich, Ben Gvir, Levin, and Bibi himself.

In a brilliant article published by the New York Times on March 27, Aron Heller compared the American right to the Israeli right. The equivalent of Republican red is Netanyahu’s coalition, which defines itself along identity lines and includes the ultra-orthodox, religious Zionism and low-income Mizrachis . In contrast, the democratic blue is represented in Israel by the upper middle class, educated Ashkenazim living in the big cities and in the center of the country. Heller shows how the American right-wing platform took over Israeli society through extremist emissaries with American citizenship, starting with Rabbi Meir Kahane in the 1980s and ending with founder of the Kohelet Forum and its chairman Moshe Kopel in the last decade. These representatives live in the settlements and take advantage of the growing rift in Israeli society to impose their libertarian views straight from the Federalist Society, which through Trump forced the most conservative Supreme Court to overturn the right to abortion. It’s no secret that Kohelet has been managing the entire ideological array of the Knesset right for years through position papers and laws it writes for Knesset members. Now they want to jump to the next level and take over the Supreme Court as well.

Like Trump and the conservatives in America, Netanyahu adopted piggish capitalist policies, creating one of the biggest social gaps in the Western world. “The Second Israel” was built within the 40 years of Likud rule. The false claim of Likud spokespersons is that even when in power Likud does not actually rule because the centers of control are in fact in the hands of the elites. This matches the perception of Trump who sees the army, police, prosecutor’s office and the media as part of the “deep state” and fights against all signs of the democratic regime. As in the US, the lower class in Israel also flocks to the charismatic leader, despite his belonging to the same “elites.”

Biden is confronting fascism through a social program designed to correct history and win back the workers who supported Trump through a social budget that is one of the largest in history, reminiscent of Roosevelt’s New Deal. Hundreds of billions of dollars are invested in infrastructure, factories and social programs to build “from the bottom up,” instead of the “trickle down” theory folly that allows the rich to get richer while the poor wait for some of this wealth to trickle down to them. We paradoxically witness how “Bibi-ism”, which is rooted in poverty and social gaps, continues to foster elitist capitalism while insulting the outstanding “hi-tech nation” against whose perpetrators it conducts a campaign of violent incitement from every possible megaphone.

Yet Israeli fascism is not fed by social gaps alone. It is deeply rooted in racism and hatred of Arabs, who serve as ideological fuel that drives the deep right. The Kohelet Policy Forum, which represents pure capitalism, also represents a messianic ideology that views annexation of the occupied territories as realization of their desires. They long to see Israel in the form of a Jewish kingdom whose constitution is Jewish religious law, and which represents the supremacy of the Jews over other nations. Unlike the US, in Israel the right-wing ideology has infiltrated the public discourse. Liberals stopped talking about the occupation, put up with ignoring the voice of the Arabs in the Knesset (see our former article “only the Jewish vote counts”), normalized apartheid, gave up on solving the Palestinian problem, and contented themselves with managing the conflict and “economic peace” until they reached the current abyss and said “enough is enough”.

Like American liberalism, Israeli liberalism is also facing a historical test today. Biden’s “no” is decisive, and includes all types of racism, misogyny, and violation of human rights. One might say that Biden issued a red card not only to Bibi Netanyahu and his Messianic ultra-orthodox coalition, but also lit a warning light to the protest movement.

The future of Israeli democracy will not be guaranteed until it ceases to be a privilege granted only to Jews. It must also include the Palestinians, meaning all people living between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River, regardless of religion, nationality, race or gender. It is true that democracy needs to be anchored in a constitution, but it must be comprehensive and not incomplete. Democracy cannot ignore five million Palestinians living in its backyard. It will have to be inclusive, uniting the Israeli and Palestinian peoples, within the framework of one egalitarian and democratic state.

The post When Biden Says No, He Means It first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

“We declare the establishment of a Jewish state in Eretz Israel, to be known as the State of Israel,” declared the People’s Council that convened in May 1948, and then written in the Declaration of Independence. The nature of the State of Israel, its principles, and the nature of its regime was supposed to be determined by the “Constituent Assembly” through adoption of a constitution no later than October 1, 1948. This promise to the United Nations, however, was never fulfilled, and instead the Constituent Assembly which was elected in January 1949, enacted the “Transition Law,” which stated that it had become a “Knesset” (The Israeli parliament). The Constituent Assembly failed its duty.

In the absence of a constitution defining their rights, citizens had to settle for the same brief line that became the constitutional basis of Israel. It promised to maintain “complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture.” The word democracy, today proclaimed by everyone, was not even mentioned in the declaration of independence.

Today, 75 years since that historic announcement, the word constitution is on everyone’s lips. The constitutional crisis that split Israeli society in two has given rise to a new recognition among those, whose freedom and way of life this constitutional coup threatens, that their democracy is extremely fragile and must be safeguarded through a constitution that will guarantee the foundations of Israel’s democratic regime. So far, the place of the constitution has been filled by a series of basic laws enacted in the late 1990s, headed by the Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty. Relying on this law, Judge Aharon Barak drafted numerous constitutional rulings in what is dubbed the “constitutional revolution,” which angered the ultra-orthodox parties, religious Zionism and the right in Israel due to their liberal approach.

The Declaration of Independence did not clearly establish the relationship between religion and state in Israel. The multitude of Shabbat laws that directly impinge on individual freedom and express religious coercion exerted on the secular public, are based on the status quo letter written by David Ben-Gurion to the ultra-orthodox “Agudat Israel” political party, which establishes Shabbat as the official day of rest. David Ben-Gurion announced the establishment of the state, but left a black constitutional hole that swallows up the entirety of Israeli society. As Aaron Barak’s constitutional revolution expanded, so did democracy at the expense of religion. It is not only about Basic Law Freedom of Occupation that anchors the opening of supermarkets and public transportation on Shabbat, equality in the burden of serving in the army for ultra-Orthodox youth, laws that allow combat service for women and recognize same-sex married couples. It is also about opening the doors of the Supreme Court to the Arab public in a series of issues concerning their status in the country.

All of these were an attempt to adapt Israel to the twenty-first century, and to normalize it among the family of nations as a democratic state. However, the more the Supreme Court expanded the space of democracy, the more its position was criticized among a growing segment of citizens who were brainwashed by national and right-wing religious demagoguery. In their eyes, and through relentless propaganda, the judiciary came to be seen as the chief obstacle to governance. The more the status of the Supreme Court was undermined, so did the internal division within Israeli society, which today has reached the boiling point. It turns out that the attempt to expand and interpret the Declaration of Independence only deepened the gap between liberals and conservatives. The conservatives strove with all their might to turn Israel into a Jewish state, as stipulated in the Declaration of Independence, while minimizing its democratic character. According to the right-wing view, democracy is reduced to rights of the Jewish citizens only. Any decision of a constitutional or political nature that does not receive the support of a Jewish majority becomes illegitimate.

The assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was considered the opening shot for creating a new Israeli consensus. The Oslo Accords did not win a Jewish majority in the Knesset and since the majority was achieved with the support of Arab MKs, the accords were illegitimate in the eyes of the right and religious Zionists and the road to political assassination was extremely short. From that historical moment, the Israeli right pushed the liberal opposition into a corner. The demonization of the Knesset’s Arab factions rendered it illegitimate to rely on them to form a ruling coalition. The Naftali Bennett-led Government of Change, which was established in June 2021 with the Islamic movement and disintegrated a year later, was completely boycotted by Netanyahu and his partners. Three members of Bennett’s own right wing faction abandoned him, unable to justify their alliance with an Arab party. Their crossing over to Netanyahu, led to the government’s ultimate collapse.

This consensus is so entrenched that Yair Lapid, the candidate to replace Netanyahu should the latter’s government fall, promises he will not rely on votes of the Islamic movement to obtain a majority, and will allow it into a future coalition only after securing a majority from among the Jewish factions. The protest movement against the right-wing coup also operates by this same principle. The struggle is “inter-Jewish” and there is no place in the protest for Arab citizens, lest the protest be perceived as illegitimate and unpatriotic in the eyes of the general public.

To emphasize the Jewish nature of the country, over its democratic character, the right-wing had to reiterate 70 years after the declaration of independence that “the State of Israel is the nation state of the Jewish people.” In the Nation-State law approved by the Knesset on July 19, 2018, by a majority of 62, 55 against and 2 abstentions, there is no mention of Israel as a democratic state that grants equality to all its citizens. The Arab citizens were thus denied any part in determining the fate of the country. They are allowed to vote, but not to influence its course.

The coup d’état of Religious Zionism (party of Betzalel Smotrich) goes one step further, acting to disqualify the Arab lists from participating in Knesset elections at all. Its rage is lashed at the Supreme Court, which overturned the Central Election Commission’s decision to disqualify one of the three Arab parties” the National Democratic Assembly (Balad) faction. According to all polls, and despite an increase in support for the Yesh Atid party, Yair Lapid cannot obtain a majority to form a government without including the Arab parties. His promise not to rely on the Arabs to form the government is based on the hope that, after Netanyahu’s departure from the political arena, he will succeed in forming a centre-right government with the remnants of the Likud party. Without a change in the paradigm stated in the Nation-State law, the result will be: neither a constitution nor democracy for all, but the preservation of the oxymoron, defining Israel as a Jewish and democratic state. The relationship between religion and state and the relationship between the state and its Arab citizens will remain in limbo.

Therefore, it is quite possible that Yair Lapid’s hopes will be dashed. The liberal current of Israeli society is currently going through such a deep transformation that it might push its leaders to determine that the democratic foundations are the basis for the state’s existence and future.

Added to all this is the fateful question of what will be the place of the Palestinians under Israeli control. Religious Zionism and the entire right strive to impose the Israeli law to what has become in the eyes of the Israeli public “Judea and Samaria.” The first step in this direction was made with the transfer of the Military “Civil Administration’s” powers to Minister Bezalel Smotrich, thus forgoing the Israeli claim that the territories are held by Israel until a solution is found in the future.

As the two-state solution is no longer relevant, today all opponents to the occupation have come out with the slogan, “Democracy for all from the Jordan to the Sea.” This is indeed a correct and legitimate demand, but its realization is only possible in one state, where a liberal and democratic Israeli and Palestinian majority can realize it. This could be  based on the establishment of that forgotten Constituent Assembly which never convened, but this time not to establish a theocratic Jewish state but a democratic state that includes all the people living between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River. Relying  on religious and nationalists to ensure a Jewish majority brought us to today’s constitutional crisis, as well as the recognition of the fact that without democracy for the Palestinians, there will be no democracy for the Jews.

The post The Jewish majority alone matters first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.