RISHON LEZION, Israel — Shmuel Rosner has an interesting take on the rise of the (allegedly) far-right Israel Beiteinu party in Israeli election polls:
Still, while Lieberman’s rise is testimony to Israel’s leadership shortage, it is also the best possible proof that the traditional Israeli right wing has been dismantled. Those people and parties who still believe in “greater Israel” and in “safeguarding the settlements” and in opposing the future Palestinian state are almost gone. There’s still the National Union—which mostly represents settlers, classic right-wing voters, and religious Zionists—and some members of Likud and Shas still believe in the old slogans. But generally speaking, Lieberman is killing them politically. They are the past; he is the future.
That’s because Lieberman realized that sentiments have changed. Israelis are still hawkish, skeptical, and suspicious of “the Arabs.” But they are also realistic. They know that Israel will not be able to keep up the occupation forever; in fact, they long ago gave up on most of the settlements, and they couldn’t care less if and when Palestinians have their own state, just as long as it is peaceful and minds its own business. Understanding all this, Lieberman founded the right-wing party for the post-occupation debate.
His message isn’t about keeping the land—because most Israelis understand that game is over. Lieberman focuses on keeping a Jewish majority and a cohesive society after the land is gone. He wants Arabs (and radical ultra-Orthodox Jews) to demonstrate their loyalty or lose their citizenship. He wants Arab towns to be part of the Palestinian territory, and he hopes to exchange their territory for land with no people or for land mostly occupied by Jews.
This may surprise some of my readers, but I am wavering between voting for Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud party or Israel Beiteinu in my first Israeli election on Tuesday.
As Rosner notes, the latter party is not as “fascist” as its critics maintain. The traditional right-wing, led by Likud, has always been at the mercy of its junior, ultra-Orthodox coalition partners, and this has always led to an insistence that Israel keep all of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. As most rational observers realize, this is increasingly untenable.
The number of Arabs in the total area encompassing Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza will soon outnumber Jews as a result of their higher birth-rates. If Israel does not give some or all of the disputed land to the Palestinians, then Israel will indeed become an anti-democratic, apartheid state within a few years. (The only other option would be for Egypt and Jordan to take control of Gaza and the West Bank, respectively, but this is very unrealistic.)
Lieberman knows this. If it were not for his stances on other, related issues, he would be seen as a moderate – or even a leftist – because of his secularism and his desire to give away land. But the controversial part of his platform is his desire for all Palestinians and Israeli Arabs to leave Israel and move to the hypothetical Palestinian state.
To people in the West, this would seem like “ethnic cleansing” or racism of the worst kind. But these critics forget several points. Lieberman would not force Arabs out of Israel at the point of a gun; he wants to provide incentives and monetary grants to help them move. Moreover, many Arabs in Israel would want to live in a Palestinian state — as long as it would be economically and politically viable. (I have argued that the West, moderate Arab countries, and even Israel itself should assist a future Palestinian state as much as possible.) Moreover, people have a subconscious desire to live among their own.
Still, the most important point to remember is that the Middle East operates by a different set of rules than the West. Many Westerners, particularly those on the left, have a desire to see a multicultural world full of peace, love, and harmony in which everyone forgets their differences and sings “Kumbaya” around campfires. Whether this will ever be possible in Europe and the United States remains to be seen (see here, here, and here), but it is certainly a pipe dream in the Middle East. Lieberman, like most Israelis, is a realist.
However, I am still considering a vote for Likud because it has traditionally been the party most in favor of moving Israel from its socialist roots to a capitalist, globalized economy. Most people do not realize that Israel Beiteinu, a party orginially founded by Russian immigrants, is fairly left-wing on economic matters. So my personal vote may come down to a choice between resolving this Israeli-Palestinian dispute or continuing to reform the economy. I am not sure what to do.
