Feb. 17, 2009
Danny Ayalon, former Israeli ambassador to the US and a member of the Israeli parliament on the “Israel our Home” ticket, said he did not agree with the harsh policies against Christian volunteers living in the Holy Land.
“We should be ore open to our Christian brothers,” Ayalon told me in an interview. “Yisrael Beitenu (Israel our Home) will push for making relations between Christians and Jews and ISraelis much closer, much stronger.”
Many Christian volunteers are now subject to tighter visa rules which have required many to leave the country with just two-weeks notice. The sudden enforcement of an old rule on the books has slashed the staffs at Christian outreaches in Israel by one quarter to one half at various institutions in the past six months.
Ayalon said Israel should recognize Christian Zionists as some of the best friends of the Jewish state.
The right-wing party picked up momentum during the campaign with the addition of well known politicians like Ayalon and conservative Uzi Landau who defected from Likud.
“I want to zero in on what distinguishes us from the other parties and why we are becoming so popular,” Ayalon said at a debate with members of the four top parties prior to the election. “We believe Israel should be a normal country. (We want to) resume normalcy... and become a country like every other country.”
“Normalcy” would require a loyalty test to the State of Israel as a Jewish State. Ever since party leader Avigdor Lieberman proposed a “loyalty test” to determine the identity of citizens, presuming many Israeli Arabs and Arabs who don’t have citizenship in Israel would not side with the Jewish state, the party was labeled racist. Ayalon, however, compared the situation in Israel to Spain when the high court there ruled that parties opposed to Spain itself could not run in national elections
“We want the same yardstick here,” Ayalon said referring to the Arab parties who are represented in the Knesset yet oppose Israel and work with the Palestinian government.
Feb 17, 2009
Israel's Protest Vote: Kidnapped Soldier Shalit for PM
Feb. 16, 2009
Article originally published here.
Hundreds of Israeli soldiers and citizens chose to cast a ballot on election day for their kidnapped colleague Gilad Shalit, now nearing 1,000 days in Hamas captivity. Some said it was their way of protesting a dismal selection of politicians, while others wanted to send a message.
“In the upcoming elections ... let us show the government that we care more about Gilad Shalit than the prime minister does,” one of the petitioners wrote on an internet group that began the Shalit campaign. Supporters taped a white paper that read “Israel wants Gilad Shalit” over their ballot.
Suddenly though, the issue is leading Israel’s cabinet agenda. Shalit's fate could be resolved this week as outgoing Prime Minister Ehud Olmert seeks to leave office with a positive legacy rather than the cloud of corruption allegations that forced him to call for new elections in the first place.
“The security of residents of the South and the release of Gilad Shalit are currently at the top Israel’s priorities,” Olmert said, speaking at the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations on Sunday. “There are those who might say it is a point of weakness, others will call it a point of great strength that the life of one is so important to us.”
Olmert has a “strong need (for) some kind of an achievement, such as the release of the Israeli soldier,” said Ismail Radwan, a Hamas official in Gaza.
Hamas has presented Egyptian negotiators with its demands: the return of about 1,000 prisoners - perpetrators of some of the worst attacks in the second intifada - and the opening of border crossings. The last time Israel exchanged prisoners, in July, two soldiers’ bodies were returned to the Jewish state in exchange for five Lebanese prisoners including Samir Kuntar, who killed a four year old, her father and a policeman in cold blood in 1979.
Volunteers, who have been holding vigil for Shalit outside the prime minister’s official residence for months now, say Israel must show it cares about its soldier’s lives.
“(The Palestinians) don’t care about their people like we do. They send them to die like it’s nothing,” said Varda Schmerler. “We care about each kid.”
Hamas, meanwhile, is rebuilding its arms smuggling tunnels destroyed in the Israeli offensive in Gaza, Public Security Minister Avi Dichter told the cabinet Sunday.
“When Hamas speaks about the reconstruction of Gaza, they are talking about reconstruction of their supply of rockets, which will be fired into Israel,” he said.
Article originally published here.
Hundreds of Israeli soldiers and citizens chose to cast a ballot on election day for their kidnapped colleague Gilad Shalit, now nearing 1,000 days in Hamas captivity. Some said it was their way of protesting a dismal selection of politicians, while others wanted to send a message.
“In the upcoming elections ... let us show the government that we care more about Gilad Shalit than the prime minister does,” one of the petitioners wrote on an internet group that began the Shalit campaign. Supporters taped a white paper that read “Israel wants Gilad Shalit” over their ballot.
Suddenly though, the issue is leading Israel’s cabinet agenda. Shalit's fate could be resolved this week as outgoing Prime Minister Ehud Olmert seeks to leave office with a positive legacy rather than the cloud of corruption allegations that forced him to call for new elections in the first place.
“The security of residents of the South and the release of Gilad Shalit are currently at the top Israel’s priorities,” Olmert said, speaking at the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations on Sunday. “There are those who might say it is a point of weakness, others will call it a point of great strength that the life of one is so important to us.”
Olmert has a “strong need (for) some kind of an achievement, such as the release of the Israeli soldier,” said Ismail Radwan, a Hamas official in Gaza.
Hamas has presented Egyptian negotiators with its demands: the return of about 1,000 prisoners - perpetrators of some of the worst attacks in the second intifada - and the opening of border crossings. The last time Israel exchanged prisoners, in July, two soldiers’ bodies were returned to the Jewish state in exchange for five Lebanese prisoners including Samir Kuntar, who killed a four year old, her father and a policeman in cold blood in 1979.
Volunteers, who have been holding vigil for Shalit outside the prime minister’s official residence for months now, say Israel must show it cares about its soldier’s lives.
“(The Palestinians) don’t care about their people like we do. They send them to die like it’s nothing,” said Varda Schmerler. “We care about each kid.”
Hamas, meanwhile, is rebuilding its arms smuggling tunnels destroyed in the Israeli offensive in Gaza, Public Security Minister Avi Dichter told the cabinet Sunday.
“When Hamas speaks about the reconstruction of Gaza, they are talking about reconstruction of their supply of rockets, which will be fired into Israel,” he said.
Feb 13, 2009
Israeli Right's Rise Means Borders Could Shift Again
As theories abound as to what type of govt will be best for Israel, here's one thought
Feb. 13, 2009
(Article originally posted here.)
While Palestinian, American and European leaders worry how Israel’s shift to the right will negatively impact the peace process, perhaps the only ones who need to fear an Israeli right-wing government is the Israeli right wing, which is generally opposed to giving away land for peace.
History shows that the major land-for-peace giveaways in Israel have been undertaken by right-wing Israeli governments and politicians who have campaigned against dividing the land. The left has traditionally advocated “land-for-peace” policies, but has hesitated to follow through.
The election of 65 right-wing parliamentarians to the Israeli parliament on Tuesday versus 55 centrists and left-wingers should enable Likud leader Benjamin Netanyahu to build a coalition government, presumably of hawkish parties. This drew predictable reactions from Palestinians and foreign peace-process negotiators.
But they need not worry -- yet. Israeli voters have a mercifully short memory that politicians appreciate.
“There’s a famous phrase of Israeli politicians, ‘I never promised to keep my promise,’” said Jonathan Rynhold, senior research fellow at the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies.
Netanyahu ran a hard-line campaign against dividing Jerusalem and giving away land and is an outspoken critic of the 2005 Gaza withdrawal. But it was Netanyahu who, during his previous tenure as prime minister from 1996 to 1999, ceded Hebron, one of Judaism’s holiest cities, to the Palestinians as part of the Oslo Accords.
“The decision to honor the terms of the Oslo agreement and withdraw from Hebron marks an important turning point for the right wing in Israel,” Joel Peters wrote for Middle East Review of International Affairs in 1997. “Netanyahu and the Likud have traveled a long way over the past year.”
Despite initial opposition to Oslo, Likud and Netanyahu began the process that locked Israel into negotiations with the PLO and further territorial concessions in the West Bank.
“Perhaps Netanyahu has matured as a leader but, the old adage, ‘Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me,’ implies Likud might have recruited a fresh face,” Daniel Pipes, author and director of the Middle East Forum, writes on his website. Pipes reported in 1999 that Netanyahu was in secret talks to give away the strategic Golan Heights, another sticking point of the Right.
“The prime minister, in contrast to both his hardline image and his promises to supporters, was ready to make big concessions to (Syrian President Hafez al-) Assad for a peace agreement from which Israel would get diplomatic recognition, trade, and other attributes of peace,” Pipes reported in The New Republic that same year.
Menachem Begin, one of the nation’s most highly regarded leaders and founder of the Likud party, made the first sweeping Jewish withdrawal as a result of the Camp David Accords.
In the spring of 1982, despite widespread protest in Israel, Begin withdrew from the Sinai and evacuated the Jewish settlements there. Most of the 5,000 settlers had voluntarily moved, but some resisted. Ironically, it was then-Defense Minister Ariel Sharon who was sent to forcibly remove them.
Sharon is the most recent example of right-wing territorial compromise. A fierce military general, who claims in his autobiography to have promoted Israel’s settlement movement, Sharon ran against Amram Mitzna who called for Israel’s withdrawal from Jewish settlements in Gaza.
Likud pounded Mitzna’s Labor party - winning 38 seats to Labor’s 19 - in the 2003 elections precisely because of its opposition to the disengagement. But within two years, Sharon spearheaded the Gaza withdrawal, causing, among other things, a split within the Likud. Sharon went on to form the Kadima (Forward) party and paved the way for Netanyahu’s return to head of Likud.
But this hasn’t stopped the world from worrying. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas called on the international community to impose upon a right-wing government headed by Netanyahu the same diplomatic conditions it imposes on Hamas, a terrorist organization.
European leaders expressed fear over the rise of a Netanyahu-led, right-wing Knesset.
“That seems the most realistic outcome, sadly, although I would like to see a progressive government committed to the peace process,” said Andrew Gwynne, a Labor Party legislator in Britain.
A right-wing coalition also seems to worry the United States: “There would be great unease,” a Capitol Hill source told The Jerusalem Post.
Article originally posted here.
Feb. 13, 2009
(Article originally posted here.)
While Palestinian, American and European leaders worry how Israel’s shift to the right will negatively impact the peace process, perhaps the only ones who need to fear an Israeli right-wing government is the Israeli right wing, which is generally opposed to giving away land for peace.
History shows that the major land-for-peace giveaways in Israel have been undertaken by right-wing Israeli governments and politicians who have campaigned against dividing the land. The left has traditionally advocated “land-for-peace” policies, but has hesitated to follow through.
The election of 65 right-wing parliamentarians to the Israeli parliament on Tuesday versus 55 centrists and left-wingers should enable Likud leader Benjamin Netanyahu to build a coalition government, presumably of hawkish parties. This drew predictable reactions from Palestinians and foreign peace-process negotiators.
But they need not worry -- yet. Israeli voters have a mercifully short memory that politicians appreciate.
“There’s a famous phrase of Israeli politicians, ‘I never promised to keep my promise,’” said Jonathan Rynhold, senior research fellow at the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies.
Netanyahu ran a hard-line campaign against dividing Jerusalem and giving away land and is an outspoken critic of the 2005 Gaza withdrawal. But it was Netanyahu who, during his previous tenure as prime minister from 1996 to 1999, ceded Hebron, one of Judaism’s holiest cities, to the Palestinians as part of the Oslo Accords.
“The decision to honor the terms of the Oslo agreement and withdraw from Hebron marks an important turning point for the right wing in Israel,” Joel Peters wrote for Middle East Review of International Affairs in 1997. “Netanyahu and the Likud have traveled a long way over the past year.”
Despite initial opposition to Oslo, Likud and Netanyahu began the process that locked Israel into negotiations with the PLO and further territorial concessions in the West Bank.
“Perhaps Netanyahu has matured as a leader but, the old adage, ‘Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me,’ implies Likud might have recruited a fresh face,” Daniel Pipes, author and director of the Middle East Forum, writes on his website. Pipes reported in 1999 that Netanyahu was in secret talks to give away the strategic Golan Heights, another sticking point of the Right.
“The prime minister, in contrast to both his hardline image and his promises to supporters, was ready to make big concessions to (Syrian President Hafez al-) Assad for a peace agreement from which Israel would get diplomatic recognition, trade, and other attributes of peace,” Pipes reported in The New Republic that same year.
Menachem Begin, one of the nation’s most highly regarded leaders and founder of the Likud party, made the first sweeping Jewish withdrawal as a result of the Camp David Accords.
In the spring of 1982, despite widespread protest in Israel, Begin withdrew from the Sinai and evacuated the Jewish settlements there. Most of the 5,000 settlers had voluntarily moved, but some resisted. Ironically, it was then-Defense Minister Ariel Sharon who was sent to forcibly remove them.
Sharon is the most recent example of right-wing territorial compromise. A fierce military general, who claims in his autobiography to have promoted Israel’s settlement movement, Sharon ran against Amram Mitzna who called for Israel’s withdrawal from Jewish settlements in Gaza.
Likud pounded Mitzna’s Labor party - winning 38 seats to Labor’s 19 - in the 2003 elections precisely because of its opposition to the disengagement. But within two years, Sharon spearheaded the Gaza withdrawal, causing, among other things, a split within the Likud. Sharon went on to form the Kadima (Forward) party and paved the way for Netanyahu’s return to head of Likud.
But this hasn’t stopped the world from worrying. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas called on the international community to impose upon a right-wing government headed by Netanyahu the same diplomatic conditions it imposes on Hamas, a terrorist organization.
European leaders expressed fear over the rise of a Netanyahu-led, right-wing Knesset.
“That seems the most realistic outcome, sadly, although I would like to see a progressive government committed to the peace process,” said Andrew Gwynne, a Labor Party legislator in Britain.
A right-wing coalition also seems to worry the United States: “There would be great unease,” a Capitol Hill source told The Jerusalem Post.
Article originally posted here.
Feb 12, 2009
U.S. professors call for boycott of Israel
Feb. 12, 2009
A group of American university professors is calling for an academic and cultural boycott of Israel, marking the first time that a national academic boycott movement has come out of the United States.
Anti-Israel groups in Great Britain have attempted academic boycotts against Israel several times, but the American movement took Israeli professors by surprise. The campaign was founded by 15 academics, mostly from California.
David Lloyd, a professor at the University of Southern California, told Israel’s Ha’aretz that the initiative was “impelled by Israel’s latest brutal assault on Gaza and by our determination to say enough is enough.”
Lloyd also said pro-Israel lobbying groups exert too much control over US politics and the media and have instigated a “campaign of intimidation” against academics who criticize Israel’s policies. Officially called the US Campaign for the Academic & Cultural Boycott of Israel, the group released a statement saying that it opposed the “censorship and silencing of the Palestine question in US universities, as well as US society at large” and called for “non-violent punitive measures” against Israel.
Lloyd also stated, albeit incorrectly, that “Hamas has sought direct negotiations with Israel, a pursuit that constitutes de facto recognition of Israel, and has openly discussed abandoning its call for the destruction of the State of Israel conditional on reciprocal guarantees from Israel.”
Israeli academics downplayed the boycott, but Jonathan Rynhold, a professor at Bar Ilan, said the ultimate goal of the boycott is to blur “the distinction between criticism of Israeli policies and criticism of Israel’s existence. Their game is to move the liberals, who accept Israel’s right to exist ... and turn them into radical left-wing critics [who believe] Israel is racist in its core and everything it does is wrong.”
A group of American university professors is calling for an academic and cultural boycott of Israel, marking the first time that a national academic boycott movement has come out of the United States.
Anti-Israel groups in Great Britain have attempted academic boycotts against Israel several times, but the American movement took Israeli professors by surprise. The campaign was founded by 15 academics, mostly from California.
David Lloyd, a professor at the University of Southern California, told Israel’s Ha’aretz that the initiative was “impelled by Israel’s latest brutal assault on Gaza and by our determination to say enough is enough.”
Lloyd also said pro-Israel lobbying groups exert too much control over US politics and the media and have instigated a “campaign of intimidation” against academics who criticize Israel’s policies. Officially called the US Campaign for the Academic & Cultural Boycott of Israel, the group released a statement saying that it opposed the “censorship and silencing of the Palestine question in US universities, as well as US society at large” and called for “non-violent punitive measures” against Israel.
Lloyd also stated, albeit incorrectly, that “Hamas has sought direct negotiations with Israel, a pursuit that constitutes de facto recognition of Israel, and has openly discussed abandoning its call for the destruction of the State of Israel conditional on reciprocal guarantees from Israel.”
Israeli academics downplayed the boycott, but Jonathan Rynhold, a professor at Bar Ilan, said the ultimate goal of the boycott is to blur “the distinction between criticism of Israeli policies and criticism of Israel’s existence. Their game is to move the liberals, who accept Israel’s right to exist ... and turn them into radical left-wing critics [who believe] Israel is racist in its core and everything it does is wrong.”
Anti-Semitic Incidents Up Worldwide during Israel’s War with Gaza
Feb. 12, 2009
The number and severity of anti-Semitic acts skyrocketed during Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza this year. The Jewish Agency for Israel’s Annual Report on Anti-Semitism said 250 incidents were reported in December to January compared with 80 during the same period in the previous year.
While many European governments uncharacteristically sided with Israel this time, most of the recent attacks took place in Western Europe and were perpetrated by local Moslems, the report said. There were approximately 100 incidents in both France and in Great Britain, including violent assault on Jews and Israelis.
“We shall continue our endeavors to curb this unpleasant phenomenon by addressing our observations and proposals to leaders of the world and demanding that they implement effective measures to counter anti-Semitism, as well as promoting our own educational programs through our emissaries worldwide,” said Hagai Meirom, Jewish Agency Treasurer.
Isaac Herzog, Israel Minister for Welfare and Social Services, expressed his concern at the rise in extremist Moslem groups.
“We are witnessing the growth of Islamic and extreme left-wing groups who are taking center stage in the arena of anti-Semitism in general, and anti-Semitic acts against Jews, in particular,” he said.
The overall number of anti-Semitic incidents fell by 15 to 20 percent in 2008 compared to 2007.
The number and severity of anti-Semitic acts skyrocketed during Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza this year. The Jewish Agency for Israel’s Annual Report on Anti-Semitism said 250 incidents were reported in December to January compared with 80 during the same period in the previous year.
While many European governments uncharacteristically sided with Israel this time, most of the recent attacks took place in Western Europe and were perpetrated by local Moslems, the report said. There were approximately 100 incidents in both France and in Great Britain, including violent assault on Jews and Israelis.
“We shall continue our endeavors to curb this unpleasant phenomenon by addressing our observations and proposals to leaders of the world and demanding that they implement effective measures to counter anti-Semitism, as well as promoting our own educational programs through our emissaries worldwide,” said Hagai Meirom, Jewish Agency Treasurer.
Isaac Herzog, Israel Minister for Welfare and Social Services, expressed his concern at the rise in extremist Moslem groups.
“We are witnessing the growth of Islamic and extreme left-wing groups who are taking center stage in the arena of anti-Semitism in general, and anti-Semitic acts against Jews, in particular,” he said.
The overall number of anti-Semitic incidents fell by 15 to 20 percent in 2008 compared to 2007.
Israeli Economy Slowing Down, but Banks Not in Crisis
Long-term prospects more positive in Israel than other western nations
Feb. 12, 2009
The global financial crisis took awhile to cross the continents, but its tentacles have at last reached the Israeli economy forcing the Bank of Israel to revise its 2009 forecast to reflect a .2-percent decline rather than 1.5-percent increase.
The Israeli economy has more easily adapted to hostility than to these external factors. In 2006, the 40-day war with Hizbollah only briefly interrupted an economic boom. But this growth spurt came to a halt in the third quarter of 2008 as the global recession entered the scene.
“The effects of the global financial crisis on real economic activity in Israel are evident,” the Bank of Israel said in a report. “World trade, which exerts a major influence on domestic activity, has dropped, and is expected to fall further.”
The Bank of Israel is forecasting a 6.9 percent drop in exports and a 6.4 percent fall in imports in 2009. Foreign exports make up 45 percent of Israel’s GDP.
According to government figures, the Israeli economy expanded by 4.1 percent in 2008 to a record $190 billion capping off four years of higher than 5 percent annual growth. The slowdown hit Israel when demand for exports plummeted. Foreign companies downscaled their investment projects and consumers reduced spending.
“Israel’s economy is oriented toward export markets and other international activity,” the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange said in its annual report. “It is expected that the global crisis will adversely affect exporting firms as well as Israeli entrepreneurs abroad.”
Even so, Israel’s economy is expected to weather the situation better than many other developed nations.
“It’s going to be pretty gloomy, but it’s not like the United States or Germany,” said economist Jonathan Katz at HSBC. “It will be more of a slowdown than a recession.”
Also working in Israel’s favor is a conservative and stable banking system that is not in crisis.
“Happily for us, Israel’s economy hasn’t caught the three American diseases--consumer and private credit greater than 50 percent of GDP, a bursting real estate bubble, and a bankrupt financial system because of the first two diseases (and other causes)” wrote Ha’aretz financial reporter Guy Ronik. “Americans spent the last decade living well beyond their means. Israelis saved.”
Another factor in slowing the crisis’ arrival in Israel has been the Bank of Israel’s steady hacking of interest rates, down to 1 percent in January from 2.5 percent in November. In fact, investment bank UBS analyst Reinhard Cluse maintains his long-term forecast for 2010 of 2.7 percent growth. UBS said it expects a moderate recovery as early as the second half of the year.
“Following years of prudent fiscal policy, Israel is one of the few countries in (Europe Middle East Asia) where the government now has substantial scope for fiscal stimulus,” Cluse wrote. “After a balanced budget in 2007 and a deficit of 2.1 percent of GDP in 2008, we expect the deficit to rise to 4 percent of GDP or even higher in 2009, thus helping to prevent a more serious decline in growth.”
Feb. 12, 2009
The global financial crisis took awhile to cross the continents, but its tentacles have at last reached the Israeli economy forcing the Bank of Israel to revise its 2009 forecast to reflect a .2-percent decline rather than 1.5-percent increase.
The Israeli economy has more easily adapted to hostility than to these external factors. In 2006, the 40-day war with Hizbollah only briefly interrupted an economic boom. But this growth spurt came to a halt in the third quarter of 2008 as the global recession entered the scene.
“The effects of the global financial crisis on real economic activity in Israel are evident,” the Bank of Israel said in a report. “World trade, which exerts a major influence on domestic activity, has dropped, and is expected to fall further.”
The Bank of Israel is forecasting a 6.9 percent drop in exports and a 6.4 percent fall in imports in 2009. Foreign exports make up 45 percent of Israel’s GDP.
According to government figures, the Israeli economy expanded by 4.1 percent in 2008 to a record $190 billion capping off four years of higher than 5 percent annual growth. The slowdown hit Israel when demand for exports plummeted. Foreign companies downscaled their investment projects and consumers reduced spending.
“Israel’s economy is oriented toward export markets and other international activity,” the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange said in its annual report. “It is expected that the global crisis will adversely affect exporting firms as well as Israeli entrepreneurs abroad.”
Even so, Israel’s economy is expected to weather the situation better than many other developed nations.
“It’s going to be pretty gloomy, but it’s not like the United States or Germany,” said economist Jonathan Katz at HSBC. “It will be more of a slowdown than a recession.”
Also working in Israel’s favor is a conservative and stable banking system that is not in crisis.
“Happily for us, Israel’s economy hasn’t caught the three American diseases--consumer and private credit greater than 50 percent of GDP, a bursting real estate bubble, and a bankrupt financial system because of the first two diseases (and other causes)” wrote Ha’aretz financial reporter Guy Ronik. “Americans spent the last decade living well beyond their means. Israelis saved.”
Another factor in slowing the crisis’ arrival in Israel has been the Bank of Israel’s steady hacking of interest rates, down to 1 percent in January from 2.5 percent in November. In fact, investment bank UBS analyst Reinhard Cluse maintains his long-term forecast for 2010 of 2.7 percent growth. UBS said it expects a moderate recovery as early as the second half of the year.
“Following years of prudent fiscal policy, Israel is one of the few countries in (Europe Middle East Asia) where the government now has substantial scope for fiscal stimulus,” Cluse wrote. “After a balanced budget in 2007 and a deficit of 2.1 percent of GDP in 2008, we expect the deficit to rise to 4 percent of GDP or even higher in 2009, thus helping to prevent a more serious decline in growth.”
Feb 11, 2009
Livni surprises with lead, but results remain inconclusive
Right-wing bloc could propel Netanyahu to PM
Feb. 11, 2009
(Article originally posted here.)
TEL AVIV - Tzipi Livni's Kadima party took a surprise lead in Israel’s parliamentary elections on Tuesday, but even if she edges out her rival Benjamin Netanyahu in a final vote count the foreign minister could fail to rally enough seats to build a coalition government.
Despite a one- or two-seat margin for the centrist Kadima party predicted in early exit polls, the left-wing bloc is outnumbered by a strong showing of right-wing, nationalistic and religious parties that casts doubt on Livni’s ability to establish a coalition and become prime minister.
“With all due respect to Tzipi Livni, she won’t be able to build a government. And that is very clear,” said Gilad Erdan, a parliament member on the Likud ticket. “Those in Israel who opposed the disengagement (withdrawal from Gaza in 2005), those who oppose giving up territories for nothing now have the clear majority.”
At Likud headquarters a victorious mood quickly deflated when initial exit polls announced Kadima as the front runner. But party members were quick to spin the results in party leader Netanyahu’s favor.
“Tzipi Livni only has 43 votes in order to create a government and we have 63 members of Knesset who support the idea that Benjamin Netanyahu will be the next prime minister of Israel,” said Likud Knesset Member Reuven Rivlin.
Both Livni and Netanyahu declared victory Wednesday morning and Livni left the door open for her rival to join her government.
“I proposed to you before the elections were set to join a unity government under my leadership. You refused,” she said. “Now all that is left is to do the right thing, to honor the decision of the citizens of Israel, to do what is right for Israel at this time…and to join a unity government led by us.”
Netanyahu hinted at the possibility of working with Livni, but with him as head of the government.
“From this day on, the right wing bloc rises to an absolute majority in the Knesset,” he said. “There is no doubt regarding our own movement’s meteoric rise. In the last Knesset we had only 12 seats, 10 percent of the Knesset. We have more than doubled our power and grown more than any other party.”
After all the votes are counted, President Shimon Peres has one week to decide which party leader will be first to attempt to build a government and the prime minister-designate then has six weeks to form a coalition. Peres may decide that even with fewer mandates Netanyahu has a better chance at establishing a stable government.
Israel Beiteinu (Israel our Home) became the third largest party, surpassing Labor, traditionally one of the top two parties. A polarizing figure who has been called a racist by the media and opponents, Israel Beiteinu leader Avigdor Lieberman appears to have galvanized the secular Zionist vote.
Lieberman’s campaign theme, “No loyalty, no citizenship” refers to his proposed loyalty test aimed at Israeli Arab members of parliament who speak out against the Jewish state and, in some cases, advise the Palestinian government. Lieberman’s views struck a cord among voters who are disillusioned with faltering peace talks and unabated terror attacks.
Leading up to the elections many factors indicated a shift to the right, including a desire to balance Barack Obama’s democratic administration with a more hawkish Israeli government in U.S.-led negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.
Likud jumped from 12 seats in the previous government to an estimated 27 or 28, while Israel Beiteinu surged to a likely 16 seats from 11. The right-wing bloc is bolstered by religious parties Shas, Jewish Home and United Torah Judaism.
“The conservative side of the political spectrum has gotten stronger,” observed Dore Gold, author and director of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.
The left-wing vote was split just three ways. Kadima led with 29 possible seats. Rounding out the leftist parties was Labor, which saw a dismal drop from 19 seats to an estimated 13, and Meretz, expected to earn four or five seats. In that context, Prof. Barry Rubin of the Interdisciplinary Center in Herziliya said Kadima’s apparent edge is not surprising despite Likud’s strong lead in the polls in recent weeks.
Rubin also disagrees with the assumption that Israelis voted more hawkishly this year and that the Likud party is right wing.
“The real move has been toward the center, which is represented not only by Kadima and Likud but also by Labor,” he wrote in Tuesday’s The Jerusalem Post. “A greater majority is about to vote for parties close to centrist positions than at any time in history.”
The final voter turnout was 65.2 percent compared to 63.2 in 2006.
Feb. 11, 2009
(Article originally posted here.)
TEL AVIV - Tzipi Livni's Kadima party took a surprise lead in Israel’s parliamentary elections on Tuesday, but even if she edges out her rival Benjamin Netanyahu in a final vote count the foreign minister could fail to rally enough seats to build a coalition government.
Despite a one- or two-seat margin for the centrist Kadima party predicted in early exit polls, the left-wing bloc is outnumbered by a strong showing of right-wing, nationalistic and religious parties that casts doubt on Livni’s ability to establish a coalition and become prime minister.
“With all due respect to Tzipi Livni, she won’t be able to build a government. And that is very clear,” said Gilad Erdan, a parliament member on the Likud ticket. “Those in Israel who opposed the disengagement (withdrawal from Gaza in 2005), those who oppose giving up territories for nothing now have the clear majority.”
At Likud headquarters a victorious mood quickly deflated when initial exit polls announced Kadima as the front runner. But party members were quick to spin the results in party leader Netanyahu’s favor.
“Tzipi Livni only has 43 votes in order to create a government and we have 63 members of Knesset who support the idea that Benjamin Netanyahu will be the next prime minister of Israel,” said Likud Knesset Member Reuven Rivlin.
Both Livni and Netanyahu declared victory Wednesday morning and Livni left the door open for her rival to join her government.
“I proposed to you before the elections were set to join a unity government under my leadership. You refused,” she said. “Now all that is left is to do the right thing, to honor the decision of the citizens of Israel, to do what is right for Israel at this time…and to join a unity government led by us.”
Netanyahu hinted at the possibility of working with Livni, but with him as head of the government.
“From this day on, the right wing bloc rises to an absolute majority in the Knesset,” he said. “There is no doubt regarding our own movement’s meteoric rise. In the last Knesset we had only 12 seats, 10 percent of the Knesset. We have more than doubled our power and grown more than any other party.”
After all the votes are counted, President Shimon Peres has one week to decide which party leader will be first to attempt to build a government and the prime minister-designate then has six weeks to form a coalition. Peres may decide that even with fewer mandates Netanyahu has a better chance at establishing a stable government.
Israel Beiteinu (Israel our Home) became the third largest party, surpassing Labor, traditionally one of the top two parties. A polarizing figure who has been called a racist by the media and opponents, Israel Beiteinu leader Avigdor Lieberman appears to have galvanized the secular Zionist vote.
Lieberman’s campaign theme, “No loyalty, no citizenship” refers to his proposed loyalty test aimed at Israeli Arab members of parliament who speak out against the Jewish state and, in some cases, advise the Palestinian government. Lieberman’s views struck a cord among voters who are disillusioned with faltering peace talks and unabated terror attacks.
Leading up to the elections many factors indicated a shift to the right, including a desire to balance Barack Obama’s democratic administration with a more hawkish Israeli government in U.S.-led negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.
Likud jumped from 12 seats in the previous government to an estimated 27 or 28, while Israel Beiteinu surged to a likely 16 seats from 11. The right-wing bloc is bolstered by religious parties Shas, Jewish Home and United Torah Judaism.
“The conservative side of the political spectrum has gotten stronger,” observed Dore Gold, author and director of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.
The left-wing vote was split just three ways. Kadima led with 29 possible seats. Rounding out the leftist parties was Labor, which saw a dismal drop from 19 seats to an estimated 13, and Meretz, expected to earn four or five seats. In that context, Prof. Barry Rubin of the Interdisciplinary Center in Herziliya said Kadima’s apparent edge is not surprising despite Likud’s strong lead in the polls in recent weeks.
Rubin also disagrees with the assumption that Israelis voted more hawkishly this year and that the Likud party is right wing.
“The real move has been toward the center, which is represented not only by Kadima and Likud but also by Labor,” he wrote in Tuesday’s The Jerusalem Post. “A greater majority is about to vote for parties close to centrist positions than at any time in history.”
The final voter turnout was 65.2 percent compared to 63.2 in 2006.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
