February 10, 2020: Israel’s election and Trump’s peace plan

By Michael Regenstreif

It’s been three months since I last wrote about the political situation in Israel. In my November 11 column, I noted that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the Likud leader, had failed to form a governing coalition in the weeks after the September 17 election – Israel’s second inconclusive election of 2019. The mandate to attempt to form a government had passed to Blue and White Party leader Benny Gantz.

“It is unlikely that Gantz will be any more successful than Netanyahu in putting together a coalition that commands at least 61 of the Knesset’s 120 seats,” I predicted, noting two possibilities: a unity government alternating the premiership or a third Israeli election in less than a year.

Attempts to form a unity government failed. Blue and White insisted that it would not form a unity government with Likud under Netanyahu as long as Netanyahu faced the possibility of criminal charges in several corruption cases. They would have been open to an agreement with Likud if the prime minister stepped aside, at least until he was cleared of criminal wrongdoing. Netanyahu, for his part, refused to accommodate the demand.

So Israelis will go to the polls on March 2 for the third time in less than a year – and the country remains under a Netanyahu caretaker government with a limited mandate to act in many areas.

Polls taken in late January once again suggest a stalemate similar to the previous two elections (assuming that Yisrael Beiteinu leader Avigdor Liberman once again refuses to support anything but a unity government).

The situation with Netanyahu’s indictments came to a head last month. The prime minister had been trying to engineer a vote in the Knesset that would have given him immunity from prosecution while still in office. On January 28, with it obvious that a majority of the Knesset would not support him, Netanyahu withdrew the immunity request and Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit immediately filed charges of fraud, breach of trust and bribery against Netanyahu.

The charges were filed as Netanyahu was in Washington for U.S. President Donald Trump’s unveiling of what he’d promoted for three years as the “Deal of the Century” for peace between Israel and the Palestinians.

Although embraced enthusiastically by Netanyahu, the Palestinians, who did not participate in its drafting, have rejected the plan.

Here in Canada, Foreign Affairs Minister François-Philippe Champagne released a statement that Canada “will carefully examine the details of the U.S. initiative for the Middle East peace process,” but reiterated, “Canada has long maintained that peace can only be achieved through direct negotiations between the parties. We urge the parties to create the conditions for such negotiations to take place.”

However, it is very interesting to note that ambassadors from three small Arab countries – Bahrain, United Arab Emirates and Oman – attended the White House event unveiling that plan. I would agree with analysts who suggest their attendance signals that the Palestinian issue has become less important to them than threats from Iran. Opposition to Iranian hegemony in the Middle East has opened the door to improved relations between Israel and parts of the Arab world.

The timing of the plan’s release was telling. It came on a day when Trump was on trial in the U.S. Senate for impeachment from office for abuse of power, and Netanyahu, due to face voters five weeks later, was charged with criminal offences that, if he is convicted, could lead to a prison term. It’s hard not to see the timing as an attempt to change the conversations in both the United States and Israel – and, to some extent, it did, at least briefly.

I don’t expect anything to change very soon based on the Trump plan. First, there needs to be an Israeli government with a real mandate to govern. And while it’s a foregone conclusion that Trump won’t be removed from office after his Senate trial, he may or may not be in office a year from now following the U.S. election in November.

October 7, 2019: Is it Netanyahu’s time to go?

By Michael Regenstreif

“Who will form Israel’s next government?” was the headline of my column in the September 23 edition of the Ottawa Jewish Bulletin. That question is still on the table.

That column was written on September 13, four days before Israelis went to the polls on September 17 for their second election in five months; an election that was called after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu could not put together a coalition of 61 Knesset seats needed to govern.

The stumbling block to a coalition after the April 9 election was former defence and foreign minister Avigdor Liberman and his Yisrael Beiteinu party, which controlled five Knesset seats, but opted not to serve in a Netanyahu-led coalition that included the haredi Orthodox parties.

That gambit only served to strengthen Liberman’s hand. His Yisrael Beiteinu party won eight seats this time and, as I write, Liberman is still refusing to put Netanyahu over top for the same reason.

Recognizing that neither Netanyahu, whose Likud party won 32 seats, or rival Benny Gantz, whose Blue and White party was slightly ahead with 33 seats, had a particularly viable path to forming a governing coalition, Israeli President Reuven Rivlin attempted to broker a unity government between the two major parties.

As I write, on September 27, that initial effort to broker a unity government has failed and Rivlin has given Netanyahu the first crack at forming a governing coalition. Unless there is some totally unexpected development, it is unlikely that Netanyahu will succeed in putting together a coalition.

If Netanyahu fails, it is likely Gantz will be given an opportunity to form a coalition, but Gantz’s odds of success appear to be no better than Netanyahu’s.

That would leave two options: forming a unity government or a third election in less than a year. At this point, few observers believe that the results of a third election would be substantially different than the first two.

But the effort to form a unity government if both leaders fail to put together a coalition might have a better chance at success than the first attempt.

Perhaps the biggest factor that stopped the first effort at forming a unity government was the status of the possible indictment of Netanyahu on three criminal corruption charges. Gantz insisted that he would not share power with Netanyahu while he is under indictment or the cloud of indictment.

Before the April election, Netanyahu had succeeded in delaying his pre-indictment hearing on the three charges until October 2 and 3. Lo those many months ago, Netanyahu assumed he would be back in power and would have been able to pass a law protecting himself from indictment. Things did not work out that way and Israeli Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit indicated he would not change the hearing dates.

With Netanyahu’s opportunity to form a coalition lasting well into October, Mandelblit’s decision on whether or not to indict him could well be at hand during the negotiation period. Although Netanyahu has vowed to stay on even if he is indicted, there is much speculation that Likud will force him to step aside if he is under indictment.

So, if another Likud leader is in place, Gantz’s objection to forming a unity government would be removed. And should the attorney general decide not to indict Netanyahu, the objection would also be irrelevant.

In power since 2009, and having served a previous term from 1996 to 1999, Netanyahu is now Israel’s longest-serving prime minister and while he is still popular with many voters, the success of the Blue and White party – which was only founded about seven months ago – must be at least partially attributed to voter fatigue with Netanyahu. At some point, in every democracy, voters want – indeed need – to change leaders. Many Israeli political commentators are saying much of the country has reached that point.

The next weeks and months could well see huge changes in Israel’s political leadership.

Meanwhile, here in Canada, we’re well into the federal election campaign, and it’s hard to turn away from the daily bus crashes of American politics. Fascinating times for political junkies like me.

June 24, 2019: No predicting Israeli election outcomes

By Michael Regenstreif

Israelis went to the polls in an early election on April 9 – an election did not need to be held until seven months later. But Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, faced with increasing dissension within his right-wing coalition, a new and credible opposition party, and the possibility of looming criminal indictments in three corruption cases, sensed he would fare better sooner than later in his quest to remain head of Israel’s government.

When the votes were tallied, Netanyahu’s Likud Party had 35 seats, the party’s best showing since Ariel Sharon led Likud to 38 seats in 2003. And although the new Blue and White Party – led by Benny Gantz, a former chief of the Israel Defense Forces – also won 35 seats, Netanyahu was tasked by President Reuven Rivlin with forming a coalition government because the right-wing bloc of parties who indicated their likely support for him formed a majority of the 120 members elected to the Knesset.

Then came the wheeling and dealing necessary to form a government with majority support. Such negotiations typically involve promising control over certain ministries and policies to particular parties, many of which, like the religious parties, are narrowly focused and thus wield influence far greater than their percentage of the vote would indicate. For example, in the April election, Shas and United Torah Judaism, the two religious parties combined, took less than 12 per cent of the vote, but Netanyahu could not have formed a coalition without them – and their presence in the government would ensure continued haredi Orthodox control of religious matters in Israel.

But Netanyahu’s potential coalition also needed the five seats of former defence minister (and former foreign minister) Avigdor Liberman’s Yisrael Beiteinu Party – and that’s where the wrench got thrown into the coalition-building spokes. One of Liberman’s main planks is the end of exemptions allowing haredi men studying Torah to avoid military service – which the religious parties insist on maintaining. Many Israeli pundits expected Liberman would back down from his position in the coalition negotiations and become defence minister in the new government. But he called Netanyahu’s bluff and the prime minister’s time, and extended time, to form a government ran out. Israelis will vote again in a do-over election on September 17. Netanyahu’s early-election strategy didn’t work.

Opinion polls taken right after the new election date was announced indicated the possibility of similar results to the April election. Those polls also suggested Liberman’s party might increase its seat-count from five to eight, or even 10.

According to the cliché, a week is a long time in politics, which means there are about a dozen long times to go before the election. A lot can happen over the next three months and there might well be new alliances that come together and older alliances that fall apart (recall that in the 2013 election, Netanyahu’s Likud and Liberman’s Yisrael Beiteinu ran as a joint ticket). Some parties, like the once-mighty Labor, will have new leaders and it remains to be seen what will happen with the New Right Party of once powerful Netanyahu ministers Naftali Bennett and Ayelet Shaked, which fell just short of the electoral threshold for Knesset seats in April. Although they are firmly on the right, any loyalty they might have had to Netanyahu is in question after he dumped them from his provisional cabinet in the wake of the new election call.

So, the results of the September vote are not a foregone conclusion. Will Gantz’s Blue and White – which virtually tied Netanyahu’s Likud in the April vote – take more seats this time and have enough possible coalition support to be tasked to form a government?

There is no doubt that Netanyahu was weakened by his failure to form a government after the last election and should he win again in September it’s very possible that the same stalemate that led to the new election will still be there.

And complicating matters further are that Netanyahu’s pre-indictment hearings on the three corruption charges are scheduled for October 2 and 3, just when he’d be trying to put a coalition together if he is successful on voting day. Those hearings were originally set for July but were rescheduled after Netanyahu’s lawyers argued they needed more time after the April election. Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit has already rejected Netanyahu’s request for further delay.

As noted, there are 12 long times to go before the election.