Sunset for Netanyahu?

This year will be a critical one for the political future of Israel.  The key event is a general election for the Knesset, the country's parliamentary body, which Benyamin Netanyahu's government called for April 9.

The future of Israel should be compelling for any (US) American for several reasons. One is the ongoing drama of the Middle East,  which has been a strategic foreign policy interest for decades, and in which Israel has a lead actor role. The top concern of the Israeli electorate, taken as a whole, is always going to be about the decisions governing the security of the nation. Elections are the only real opportunity Israelis have to express their will(s) in a non-crisis situation (and in crises, only through actions). So, it is an opportunity to raise those larger and longer-term questions of sovereignty and demographic change which are fundamental to Israel's future.

Mostly, though, it is about the political survival of long-time Prime Minister Netanyahu.  Netanyahu has been a master of domestic politics, holding together his Likud party, while all the other parties continue to fragment, and providing a degree of political stability to Israel by putting together coalition after coalition.   In 2019, Netanyahu seeks to produce Knesset magic once again, but the challenge is steeper than ever.

In a scenario that may be a preview of the US election next year, Israel's election will test the question of whether a national leader's support will hold up when there are active criminal cases against him.  Just this week, the Israeli attorney general (like the US' but with a little more real independence) released a statement that, after a lengthy corruption investigation,  he recommends indictment of Netanyahu.

The indictment has not yet officially happened, and it's still possible it may not; furthermore the Israeli justice system is different from the US', more like the continental European ones.  Nevertheless, Netanyahu will go to the polls with a cloud over his head.  He called the election, hoping to delay the indictment beyond it, but he was unsuccessful in his efforts to keep AG Mandelblit from making this announcement before the election; in fact, ethically, the announcement was made precisely so that voters would be properly informed what the nature of the likely charges are.  How similar, yet how different!

The similarity between the Israeli situation and the US one is clear in the character of the allegations against Netanyahu, and the ones that are emerging against Trump.  It's basically loose ethics, combined with garden-variety fraud+ and venality--In Benyamin's case, it's accepting gifts that were too large and trying to use his influence improperly to manipulate the media.  As we saw with the Cohen hearings, the plausibility of the accusations is not really in doubt; the question in Israel is whether they amount to offenses worthy of indictment (as in the US, where it will be whether they should rise to the level of impeachment).

The other novelty is that Netanyahu is being challenged in his strength area, that of national security.  The prospective challenger is Benny Gantz, a former chief of staff of the Israel Defense Force (IDF, i.e. the military).  Not only does he project Strong Defense, he has two other ex-IDF chiefs allied with him in his new party, which also allied with another moderately-strong centrist group, headed by Yair Lapid.  This new party's electoral list, called Yahol Lavan, could come out of the election with the highest number of seats  This would give their party first shot at building a parliamentary majority and a governing coalition with coalition partners.  It is that first-strike edge that Netanyahu has utilized in the past to craft government after government that just barely reached the majority level* .

That bare-majority level would then become the obsession of Gantz and his allies, through contacts that they would have with all of the many other parties.


Gantz' Dilemma
This opposition group has one unifying principle:  Netanyahu must go!  Objectively, when someone has been in power for so long, even if successfully, that person becomes annoying , both to supporters and the opposition (see Angela Merkel).  He is clearly an obstacle to any peace discussion, to any change in the slow suicide policy of expanding settlements into hostile territory, and he has shown no regard for any interest other than self.  To show the level of desperation, Netanyahu urged the Orthodox Jewish party group to take on the successors of Rabbi Kahane, a violent bigot, because a couple of percentage more for that group might make the difference in his coalition.   But, that is only true if Likud gets the highest percentage in this election, as Gantz' crew will be just as eager to expand, left or right, secular or religious, Ashkenazi, Sephardim, or Arab, to get its majority.    Gantz has openly invited Likud to join his government--just without Netanyahu.

But, I have to admit, the opposition program doesn't go far beyond getting rid of Bibi.  In fact, the group, seeking to deflect Netanyahu's attack on the group as being "leftist" or "pro-Arab, has criticized Netanyahu's government for being too soft, by allowing Hamas to receive humanitarian aid intended for Gaza. 

Meanwhile, the "two-state solution" becomes more and more a remote possibility.  We knew Netanyahu would never go there, but it seems that not much should be expected to change, even if he leaves.  Still, if he goes, there is at least a possibility; whereas, if he stays, the short-term future is certain:  Stalemate, and legal morass.   Sound familiar?


*(61 of 120 seats, based on a national proportional representation-based allocation, with a minimum of 3.25% for inclusion). 

+ a phrase I liked from the Cohen hearings:  it suggests banality and casual disregard for the line between right and wrong). .