Introduction or parade of historical uniqueness
The most expensive government coalition in the history of Israel. It formed the largest government in Israeli history in terms of the number of ministries.
This came after the longest, 17-month election marathon in Israeli history. As a result, incumbent Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu became the longest-serving prime minister in Israeli history. He surpassed even the founding father of Israel, David Ben-Gurion, in terms of length of tenure.
The city of Glupov as a symbol
There is another historical record. Maximum number of ministers under investigation or who have already served time for certain crimes.
All of these records became a reality thanks to the re-shoeing of Beni Ganz. Even by Israeli political standards, unprecedented political equivocation. When Netanyahu’s main adversary became his ally. He was an opponent for three Knesset elections in one year. This, too, is a unique historical achievement of Israel’s political system.
Another unique thing to note is the active destruction of the judicial system. Successful attempts to bring it completely under the two-headed monster of representative-executive power, in the person of the perpetual Netanyahu.
This government was also unique in the level of trade in ministerial positions. An interesting quarrel arose between Kahol Lavan Beni Gantz and the Likud. Kahol Lavan refused to cede the Ministry of Communications to Netanyahu. They offered two minor ministerial portfolios in exchange for the Ministry of Health. The Likud accused Gantz’s party of hypocrisy and pretense. They said: “Let them not pretend that they want the Ministry of Health, since they are not willing to concede the Ministry of Communications.
The heroes of Israeli politics are very reminiscent of the classic characters from Saltykov-Shchedrin’s works about the town of Glupov.
Another uniqueness is the level of hatred between different social groups. In election campaigns, hatred was used as a tool of electoral mobilization. The political system constructed by Benjamin Netanyahu is based on the principles of the American political strategist Arthur Finkelstein. He led Netanyahu to victory in 1996 on the slogan “Peres will divide Jerusalem. It was he who created the basic principles of the electoral process in Israel. He has replaced a rational party program with a swinging hatred and pouring PR crap on the opponent. The election has turned into a hate show. And the 17-month marathon became a kind of monument to the Finkelshein-Netanyahu hate technology.
This collection of uniqueness revealed the crisis of Israeli statehood that has been brewing for the last decades of Netanyahu’s rule.
Russian-speaking creators of the political crisis.
Incidentally, Finkelstein also consulted Avigdor Lieberman. It is not for nothing that Bibi’s former associate actively uses the precepts of the American guru. Not for nothing does he actively participate in the hate fest called the Israeli elections to the Knesset. The Israeli Knesset is supposed to equally represent the interests of the various linguistic and religious communities. However, of the nearly 15% of the Russian-speaking population group, the Russian-speaking deputies in the Knesset are about 7%. But let’s leave these figures for the “deniers” of the glass ceiling for Russian speakers in Israel.
The role of “Russian-speakers” in creating the aforementioned uniquenesses should be noted. The permanent elections led to another uniqueness: the almost total defeat of the Hebrew-speaking left-wing camp. Lieberman, the irreplaceable leader of the “party for Russian-speakers,” Our Home Israel. It was he who secured three Knesset elections in 17 months. He is the architect of the political crisis that made the United List the only opposition to Netanyahu’s ruling coalition. The unification of Arab parties of different orientations.
The role of Yuri Edelstein, the Russian-speaking chairman of the Knesset and Likud member, in fighting Bibi’s opponents should be taken into account. In general, it is difficult to overestimate the role of Russian-speakers in ensuring the current political tensions.
I don’t know how long Lieberman’s party, Our Home Israel, will remain in opposition. So far, most of the Russian-speaking deputies of the Knesset have ended up in the opposition camp. The Russian-speakers who voted for Ganz and his Kahol Lavan bloc found themselves at a broken political trough.
Russian-speakers as a social group lost a lot as a result of the election marathon. The post of Minister of Absorption was taken by a representative of the Ethiopian community. She, together with Gantz, went from being an opponent of Netanyahu to an ardent supporter. And the Absorption Ministry was the main fiefdom of the IB. An inexhaustible source of his financial and political victories in the Russian street. The 150,000-strong Ethiopian community has come to dominate the legislative-executive field over the 1.5 million-strong Russian-speaking community. And the Knesset Aliyah and Absorption Committee will be merged with the Citizens’ Appeals Committee. It will be headed by a deputy from the Yahadut ha-Torah party. A party whose members actively promote the thesis of Russian-speakers as “goyim and communists. It will be a representative of this political direction who will deal with the problems of repatriates.
Peculiarities of national Russian-speaking
This election showed well that Russian-speaking Israelis can be divided into four conditional groups:
Radicals. This group consists of right-wing Russian-speakers who are radical nationalists and religious fanatics. Advocate eschatological values and a quick solution to all national-religious issues. It’s the same with the goyim as it is with the Arabs.
Guardians. Russian-speakers who vote for the Likud. More often than not, they know Hebrew well and consider themselves ardent patriots of Israel for Jews only. Unlike radicals, they do not always understand the term Jew in a narrowly religious sense, like Jew.
Secular. This part of the Russian-speaking population votes for the CL, Meretz, and other secular parties. Yet many consider themselves secular Zionists. In the last election cycle the IB tried to represent the interests of this category. Lieberman is taking Russian-speaking votes away from Kahol Lavan and other leftist parties.
“Goys and Communists” This group was defined by the negative pre-election mobilization of religious social groups. “Goyim and Communists” was created by Interior Minister Deri, and other religious members of Netanyahu’s government. It was they who shaped the main characteristics of this group in the public consciousness.
Common characteristics of goyim and communists
Characteristics of this group can be given:
– low socio-economic level, often even worse than that of the Arabic-speaking minority. Representatives of this group, most often without their own housing. Unlike the Ethiopian community, the Russian-speakers did not have 90% of the funding to buy housing.
– fill the niche of cheap labor. At the same time, they have weak protection of social and labor rights. Neither Israeli trade unions nor the Ministry of Absorption are interested in the labor rights of Russian-speaking repatriates. This indifference was also observed during the time of the Ministry of Absorption under the NDI.
– Lack of normal pensions for a large part of the elderly. Pension reform, obliged the employer to make contributions to the funded pension only in 2008. Add to this a poor knowledge of Hebrew and an obvious tendency to ignore elections. It is clear that none of the Israeli political parties, especially the left-wing ones, are focused on this target group.
Attempts to mimic the Sabres and individual successes do not raise the low social status of the Russian-speaking community. This is also supported by three facts:
- A small number of Russian-speakers made their way into high political, military, and judicial positions.
- The Russian language has no status, although about 20% of the population speaks Russian.
- Russian-speakers may die for Israel, but will be buried behind the fence of the military cemetery.
From a “tower-wall” state to a halakhic state
But back to the problems of Israeli statehood and the role of Russian speakers in exacerbating the crisis. Several major problems can be formulated:
- “The Desacralization of Israel;
- Changing the model of the state;
- Populism and radicalization.
“The Desacralization of Israel.”
An interesting trend that can be observed in the Russian-speaking community is the active process of “desacralization of Israel. This process takes place through social media, through the participation of Russian speakers in anti-clerical leftist parties. This includes Hadash, whose deputies were elected to the Knesset as part of the Joint List.
The process is the destruction of Israel’s basic state-forming myths. The repatriation process and the incorporation of newcomers into the repatriate pyramid was based on these myths. The main theses that are promoted in blogs, videos, articles, and various groups in social networks, are as follows:
- Special Service Nativ and Yaakov Kedmi, deceived repatriates from the USSR to Israel in the 90s;
- Israel, it is a repatriate pyramid that has deceived the Russian-speaking Aliyah;
- The false and degrading propaganda of the Sokhnut, which deceives people into coming to Israel;
- The infringement of the rights of the secular population and the Russian-speaking population;
- The secular ones work for the religious ones, who only get money from the budget;
- Israel is turning into a nationalist and religious dictatorship;
- Changing the model of the state from a socially-oriented to a nationalist right-wing religious model;
- The destruction of social institutions (education, health care, social protection);
- Degradation of state institutions, due to underlying cronyism and corruption;
- Civil confrontation (hybrid civil war) and the transformation of Russian speakers into an object of consolidating hatred.
I will not analyze how true these theses are. We can only state that they work and are a tool for mobilizing Russian-speaking Israelis
Changing the Model of the State of Israel
The change of model coincided with the destruction of the “left-right paradigm” traditional in Israeli politics. The 17-month political crisis finally shattered the traditional division between left and right camps.
In Israel’s political system, the main criterion for the “left”-“right” division is the attitude to the Palestinian question. Socio-economic aspects are not even in second place. In determining the left-right question, the Palestinian question is followed by the religious question. Religious and ultra-religious parties consider themselves to be right-wing. The defeat of the left-wing camp put an end to this stable opposition. Especially in view of the move of some of the leaders of the center-left opposition to the Netanyahu government,
The right-left paradigm has much to do with the “Wall and Tower” model of the state. This also explains the concentration on the Arab question. Under this model there is a creeping takeover of territory. The state has a permanent state of emergency. There is no constitution and there is an object of consolidating hatred in the form of an internal and external enemy. Now this model will cease to function for a variety of reasons, domestic and international.
Friendship with the Sunni states, Israeli control of the Palestinian agenda, and Trump’s plan. These factors have virtually eliminated the issue of the Arab-speaking minority as an object of consolidating hatred. And the role of the object for the consolidation of correct Likud Israelis is actively taken up by Russian-speaking “goyim and communists. Interestingly, a recent poll conducted by the Institute for Israeli Democracy at Tel Aviv University confirms this thesis. The study showed: the coronavirus improved relations between Jews and Arabs, but worsened relations with the ultra-religious community.
In my opinion, the main political dispute is not about the annexation of the Palestinian territories. The main political dispute is over the model of the state of Israel. Around issues of social policy (health care, education, social guarantees) and the judicial system.
A social state for all, or a halakhic state for the chosen few. Here is the main watershed in the political agenda.
Populism and radicalization
Only the ultra-religious parties understand what kind of state they are building. All of their programs are related to the building of the State of the Halakhah and are aimed at achieving this goal.
No other political force in Israel puts forward alternative programs. Programs aimed at solving the new problems facing Israeli society. The opposition has no understanding of how to ensure the development of a new model of state. This leads to an intensification of populist influences and demagogic practices of color revolutions. Which leads to problems that affect the socio-economic development of the country:
- The struggle of ideas and social models is replaced by a media show. This requires an increasingly strong emotional impact on the voter-viewer;
- in the impossibility of solving social problems, the electorate is mobilized by the consolidating hatred of social groups;
- The shortening of electoral cycles leads to the radicalization of the political agenda.
- radicalization on the right, leads to radicalization on the left;
- The destruction of democratic institutions and the principle of the separation of powers in order to preserve personal power.
Epilogue or “where the peasant should go”
The above trends could create a rumbling, revolutionary mix of Russian-speaking Israelis. For this group, the most pressing problem is the lack of tools to influence political decision-making and implementation.
It should be noted that Russian-speaking Israelis have no ethnic or religious solidarity. They carry the imperial matrix of “common citizenship,” a political nation. This puts them in a knowingly lose-lose situation in Israel, a country of ethnic-family clans and religious groups.
We are now witnessing a new solidarization of secular, socially-minded Russian-speaking Israelis. For which new approaches to political struggle must be developed. The struggle to build a new model of the state of Israel.
Igor Kaminnik for iines.org