HUNDYSPOT.COM

Introduction

            Israel is often billed as one of the few democratic places in the Middle East. In fact, according to several scholars and experts Israel is perhaps the lone spots of democratic hope in sea of authoritarian rule.[1] While it is true that Israel is modeled in large part on Western parliamentary systems, given its exclusive nature and the lack of basic rights and fundamental freedoms many of its (Palestinian) inhabitants are denied one would be hard pressed to qualify Israel as truly democratic region especially under the contemporary understanding of democracy within the field of comparative politics. For example, while Israel institutions encompass executive, legislative, and judicial branches, and its parliamentary figures are subject to electoral selection, many people within its borders are deliberately excluded in taking part in elections.[2] In addition to limited voting rights, given the expanded scope of democracy to include civil liberties and the work of various comparative politics scholars in the field of hybrid regimes such as Steven Levitsky and Lucan Way with their piece entitled Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes after the Cold War[3] as well as Gilbert and Mohseni with their piece entitled Beyond Authoritarianism: The Conceptualization of Hybrid Regimes,[4] it would appear that functionally Israel is not as close to being a democracy under any sort of rational contemporary definition as it would perhaps like to be given the limited rights afford to many of the people residing within its borders, including Arab Palestinians, Christian Palestinians, and other non-Jewish denominations. For example, in their work entitled, Measuring Effective Democracy: The Human Empowerment Approach,[5] authors Christian Welzel and Amy C. Alexander utilize a popular rights and rule of law based approach to gauge what they call “effective democracy” for 150 states (including Israel).[6] After analyzing the results they found that when combining political rights, personal rights, procedural regularity, and tamed corruption to formulate an effective democracy gauge,  Israel significantly trails the exclusive group of democratic leaders, nations like Canada, the United Kingdom, and Switzerland, who are near the top in the effective democracy rankings while also trailing other prominent democratic nations like Germany, the United States, Belgium, France, and Japan.[7]

However, although Israel might not currently fit well under a contemporary definition of democracy in the political sense, there are numerous political parties, interest groups, and activists currently pushing for change towards a more inclusive and just society where (Jewish) Israelis and Palestinians can co-exist in a more equitable state. In fact, many of these voices come from the Israelis themselves and can be normally found formally within  numerous liberal and left-of-centre political parties within the State of Israel such as the Zionist Union, Kulanu, and Meretz parties. In addition to certain political parties and other formal structures, although Israel is often demonized for its approach to the Palestinians and Palestinians routinely vilified as violent intolerant persons who desire nothing more than to terrorize Israelis, this could not be further from the truth as the majority of both people’s in actuality desire a peaceful coexistence with the other and this fact has been confirmed by several political scholars and comprehensive studies.[8][9][10][11][12]Unfortunately, the voice of the people has not been translated into results as Israel’s leadership under prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the right wing Likud party has been criticized around the world for hindering the peace process with both inflammatory rhetoric and divisive against the Palestinian people which denies basic human rights to many, distances Israel from true democratic status (especially in the contemporary political sense, alienates them from the international community, and hinders the long term prospects for a sustained peace agreement between Israelis and Palestinians. As such, the recent 2015 Israeli national election presented itself as an excellent opportunity for change where initial polling indicated that the conservative grip on Israeli politics would soon loosen.

Electoral Model and Party System

            Prior to commencing a detailed analysis into the stakes, expectations, and results of Israel’s 2015 election, it is perhaps prudent to first examine the Israeli electoral system and party system. Israel currently implements a parliamentary system wherein members are selected to a 120 seat parliament, the Knesset.[13] The prime minister is normally the leader of the party that claims the largest number of seats in the Knesset and members of parliament are elected via a (closed) party-list proportional representation for four year terms. As stated by Pippa Norris in her 1997 work entitled Choosing Electoral Systems: Proportional, Majoritarian, and Mixed  Systems,  “the principle of proportional representation is that the seats in the constituency are divided according to the number of votes casts for party lists,” however she cautions that, “there are considerable variations in how this is implemented in different systems (countries).”[14] More specifically party lists may be open, and in which case voters can select amongst candidates or they may be closed list where voters only select parties and rank them according to preference.

Given the number of political parties that contest in elections and the country’s propensity for coalition governments (perhaps augmented by its PR system), Israel can be considered a competitive multiparty system that favors minority governments that must form coalitions to sustain rule and pass legislation. As previously stated, currently Benjamin Netanyahu of the conservative Likud party serves as prime minister. In addition to the office of prime minister, Israel also has a largely ceremonial president that is elected by the members of the Knesset for a seven-year term.[15] Since 2014 Reuven Rivlin of the Likud party was elected by Knesset members and serves as President. Regarding parliamentary affairs it is also important to note that in 2014 a notable change transpired in parliament wherein the Knesset raised the threshold to attain a seat from 2 percent to 3.25.[16] Given the low electoral threshold to attain representation has normally favored niche parties and led to unstable coalitions the reason for this change could be interpreted as stabilizing government, however many parties, and Arab political parties in particular, found that this change has the defacto result of limiting their opportunities to participate in national level politics.[17] As a result, several opposition parties boycotted the vote which authorized this and other parliamentary changes. With respect to these other amendments they, “limited the number of cabinet ministers to 19, including the prime minister; eliminated minister-without-portfolio positions; changed the no-confidence procedure so that opponents of a sitting government must simultaneously vote in a new one; and altered campaign-funding rules to deter party switching or splintering after elections.”[18]

Although Israel is considered a democracy with fair and free elections there are a number of prohibitions that severely undermine this proposition. For example, the Knesset has a number of caveats, which if violated, prevent political parties from the opportunity to serve in office and they include; negating the State of Israel as the state of the Jewish people, negating the democratic nature of the State, incitement to racism, and the support of armed struggle against the State of Israel. Although on the surface these appear to be fairly harmonious and perhaps just provisions there is an incredible amount of subjectivity with these provisions that have historically been overlooked when it pertains to (radical) conservative rhetoric and actions  against Arab and Christian Palestinians. For example, the construction and maintenance of the Israeli West Bank Barrier, the policy of unilateral settlement construction in the West Bank, the denial of citizenship and residency status to Palestinian residents of the West Bank or Gaza who are married to Israeli citizens, and the denial of voting rights to Palestinians in East Jerusalem and the occupied territories from voting at the national level (despite the fact that the Oslo Accords state that the occupied territories of Gaza and the West Bank were to be considered one territorial unit and as such their separation by Ariel Sharon’s unilateral decree in 2005 should not have automatically precluded them from voting in national elections)[19][20] which has the practical effect of denying one in every three who live under Israeli control the right to vote.[21] In a country whose population is currently almost evenly split between Israelis and Palestinians and where Palestinians are projected to become the firm majority in the next 20 years[22] this voting restriction is a very serious indictment against Israeli’s democratic status and again has been highlighted by several scholars and political scientists as undermine the contemporary understanding democracy.[23]

Stakes and Expectations

            Although conservative and divisive forces have ruled Israel for much of the twenty-first century, this in no way indicates that the liberal and inclusive voices that desire equality and peace have been silenced. In addition, to the aforementioned study which continues to highlight the majority of both Israelis and Palestinians desire a harmonious existence with one another, a number of leftist and centre-left political parties, both past and present, have sought the same end. In general these parties have sought to not only extend rights and adopt a more humanitarian approach to Palestinians, but to enter into peace negotiations with the ultimate goal of forging a lasting peace agreement with a two-state solution. It should be noted however that peace and peace-talks with Palestinians are not the only interests of most people within Israel seek, as the economy and a desire to close the gap between the rich and poor has been of great importance. As such,  the current leadership’s focus on potential threats that are often hypothetical, distant, and external were seen as alienating to a large amount of the voting population.[24]

EXPECTATIONS

            Although Benjamin Netanyahu and the Likud party were initially poised for another conservative victory prior to the March 17th election in early 2015, in the days prior to the election a change in the political landscape began to emerge. With only days before the election a significant drop in support for Netanyahu had Israel poised for its first left-of centre prime minister in 14 years with the Zionist Union poised to claim the largest share of parliament across all political parties. According to the Israeli based i24 news:

Daily Haaretz’s last poll, published Thursday, found that if the election were held today  the  Zionist             Union, headed by Isaac Herzog and ZipiLivni, would win 24 Knesset seats,   while the Likud has lost             two seats since the last survey and is predicted to win only 21  seats. The  Joint (Arab) List gets 13          seats,  which would make it the Knesset’s third-largest party.[25]

In addition, the International Business Times (IBT) citing the Israeli based Haaretz and its election report published two days before the election found that not only had Netanyahu fallen out of favour with the people of Israel, but that he would likely have to resign given the level of seat loss his party would surely experience.[26] Moreover the IBT predicted that a left-leaning coalition led by the Zionist Union would be poised to take control of the Knesset:

It is predicted that the Israel elections 2015 will have a coalition government run by the Zionist Union party, which is an alliance of Israel’s Labor party, led by Herzog, and Livni’s Hatnuah party that backs peace talks with Palestinians…. The mood among the Israeli voters in general is that of a “Bibi (Netanyahu)-fatigue” as he is being seen as a leader disconnected from the daily worries of his people, who are concerned about the economy and the gap between the rich and poor more than the intentions of distant Iran.[27]

In addition to the predictions made by the domestic media, the Huffington Post in the day prior to the election found that Netanyahu was likely to be ousted as prime minister with the left-leaning Zionist Union poised to take the largest share of Knesset seats.[28] As the basis for their prediction they highlighted several local polls taken in the lead up to the March 17^th election:

More than a dozen opinion polls conducted during the final week of the campaign have consistently favored the newly formed Zionist Union party, showing it winning 24 to 25 Knesset seats, with Netanyahu running behind with 21 to 22 seats.[29]

And while both of these seat totals fall short of the 61 needed to form government and a Likud coalition could produce approximately 57 conservative seats, the Huffington Post believed that  should the Zionist Union finish with the highest seat total, that its leader Isaac Herzog would likely get the first chance to assemble a ruling coalition (however they note that that advantage is more customary than automatic).[30]

Results

            Despite the fact that several media outlets, both domestic and international, had predicted a significant reduction in Likud seats and a Zionist Union led coalition taking power, these predictions did not come to pass. Although many assumed Netanyahu’s demise was a foregone conclusion, what these organizations did not account for was the power of demagoguery. More specifically, as Netanyahu perhaps sensing that his demise was imminent he made a last-minute (and desperate) play to hold power by promising that both he and his party would never honor any peace agreements or peace talks with Palestinians and that other political parties would sell out Israeli interests if given the chance.[31][32][33][34] Although many had already concluded that Netanyahu did not have any genuine interest in peacefully ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict[35] despite his previous rhetoric and 2009 election promises[36]given the numerous atrocities he and his party have presided over during his tenure, his desperate appeal to fear and incendiary declarations removed all doubt.

In the end the Likud party was able to secure an improbable 30 seats and scraped to power with a 61-59 right-wing coalition which was just enough to take the majority of seats in the Knesset.[37] As expected on the left, the Zionist Union managed to secure 24 seats and become the leading force in the 59 seat opposition. The final seat total for the ten leading political parties according to Haaertz media and the Times of Israel was as follows:

[38]

[39] Results of the 20th Knesset with 99 percent reporting

Conclusion

            Although the 2015 Israeli election afforded the population a real opportunity for change and one that would actually reflect their interests (including the potential for a long term peace with the Palestinian people and a focus on the economy), the opportunity was missed as a desperate appeal to fear and hatred helped eradicate both hope and the collective voice of the majority of people that reside within Israel’s borders. If the Israeli election taught the world anything, it is that demagoguery is still a powerful force and one that still has the ability to cross seemingly insurmountable odds and allow nefarious individuals to take hold of power.

While Benjamin Netanyahu has attempted to apologize for his heinous remarks just prior to the 2015 election,[40] not only have these overtures been summarily rejected by Palestinians and other Israelis[41], media organizations around the world have stated that Netanyahu has potentially caused irreparable harm to Israel’s standing in the international community[42] including jeopardizing relations with its long-term ally the United States as Haaertz reports that the United States had been forced to now reassess their alignment with Israel.[43] As such, if one was hoping for a peaceful resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, equality and substantive human rights for all people residing within Israel’s borders, a government focussed on the economy, and a return to progressive and/or liberal politics, they will have to wait. However, if there is a silver lining to the 2015 Israeli election it is that Benjamin Netanyahu and the Likud party have shown their hand. As such, whether the next election is in the next couple of months or a few years depending on how well the Likud party is able to hold together its slim majority coalition, for those seeking change there is enough time to process and see through Mr. Netanyahu’s inflammatory rhetoric and false promises, and hopefully this time around make a truly informed decision that reflects the true spirit of both the state of Israel and the majority of its peoples.

BOOKS

Bishara, Marwan. Palestine/Israel: Peace or Apartheid (London: Zed Books, 2001)

Carter, Jimmy. Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2006)

Chomsky, Noam & Ilan Pappe. Gaza in Crisis (Chicago: Haymarket Books, 2010)

Cohen, Rich. Israel is Real. (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2009)

Dershowitz, Alan. The Case for Israel (Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2003)

Levitsky & Way, Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes after the Cold War (Cambridge: CUP 2011): Chaps 1&2

Mearsheimer, John J. and Stephen M. Walk. The Israel Lobby (Toronto: Penguin, 2007)

Said, Edward W. The Question of Palestine (New York: Vintage Books Edition, 1979, 1992)

ARTICLES

“By 2035 By 2035, Jewish population in Israel/Palestine is projected at 46 percent ” Online: Mandoweiss, February 21, 2014, available at:

http://mondoweiss.net/2014/02/population-israelpalestine-projected/

“Canada’s Prime Minister: A Display of Rare Courage” Online: The Gatestone Institute, 2015, available at: http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/4140/canada-harper-israel

“Shattered Dreams of Peace” (2014), online: PBS-Frontline

< http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/oslo/negotiations >

“Israel Elections 2015: Exit Polls Predict Benjamin Netanyahu Ouster” Online: International Business Times, 2015, available at:

http://www.ibtimes.co.in/israel-elections-2015-exit-polls-predict-benjamin-netanyahu-ouster-626285

“Israel: 2015 scores” Online: Freedom House, 2015, available at:

https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2015/israel

“Israeli Election Poll Predicts Possible Changing of the Guard” Online: i24 News, 2015, available at: http://www.i24news.tv/en/news/israel/politics/64035-150312-israeli-election-poll-predicts-possible-changing-of-the-guard

“What the Polls Predict for Israel’s Election” Online: Huffington Post, 2015, available at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/16/israel-2015-election-poll_n_6877250.html

“Benjamin Netanyahu Celebrates Surprise Electoral Landslide in Israel” Online: Telegraph UK, 2015, available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/11479349/Benjamin-Netanyahu-celebrates-surprise-electoral-landslide-in-Israel.html

“If I am elected there will be no Palestinian State” Online: Haaretz, 2015, available at: http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/elections/1.647212

“Netanyahu Says No to Statehood for Palestinians” Online: New York Times, 2015, available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/17/world/middleeast/benjamin-netanyahu-campaign-settlement.html?_r=0

“On Election Day Netanyahu Warns of Arabs voting in Droves” Online: Washington  Post, 2015, available at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/03/17/on-israeli-election-day-netanyahu-warns-of-arabs-voting-in-droves/

“Obama to Netanyahu: US will reassess Israeli Peace Policy” Online: Haaretz, 2015, available at: http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/elections/1.647744

“Netanyahu Says No to Statehood for Palestinians” Online: New York Times, 2015, available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/17/world/middleeast/benjamin-netanyahu-campaign-settlement.html?_r=0

“If I am elected there will be no Palestinian State” Online: Haaretz, 2015, available at: http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/elections/1.647212

“The Big Winners and Losers of the Israeli Election’s Final Episode” Online: Haaretz, 2015, available at: http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.656592

“Netanyahu Scores Crushing Victory in Israeli Elections” Online: Times of Israel, 2015, http://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-claims-victory-as-vote-count-shows-likud-further-ahead/

“Netanyahu Apologies to Israeli Arabs for Election Day Comments” Online: Ynet News, 2015, available at: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4640212,00.html

“Binyamin Netanyahu Bids to Form Right-Wing Coalition after Decisive Win” Online: The Guardian, 2015, available at: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/18/israel-election-bibi-victory-binyamin-netanyahu

“Trilateral Statement on the Middle East Peace Summit at Camp David” (2003), online: U.S. Department of State-Archieve

< http://2001-2009.state.gov/p/nea/rls/22698.htm >

“Survey: Most Israelis, Palestinians, Support Two States” (July 3, 2013), online: Times of Israel

< http://www.timesofisrael.com/survey-most-israelis-palestinians-support-2-states/ >

“Peace Building in Post-Conflict Societies: Processes and Strategies” (2004), online: George Mason University

< http://www.gmu.edu/programs/icar/hsp/hj.html >

“On International Day U.N. Spotlights Link Between Human Rights and Peace” (September 21, 2008), online: United Nations

< http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=28143#.U0QKDF_D-70 >

“Settlement plans threaten renewed hopes for Israeli-Palestinian peace, UN envoy warns” (November 13, 2014), online: United Nations

< http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=46485#.U_49b1_D9Cp>

“Two-thirds of Israelis support peace with Palestinians that ensures security, polls find” (December 31, 2012), online: The Times of Israel

< http://www.timesofisrael.com/two-thirds-of-israelis-support-peace-with-palestinians-that-ensures-security-polls-find/ >

Moaz, Zeev et. al. “The Liberal Peace: Interdependence, Democracy, and International Conflict, 1950-85” (2014), online: Journal of Peace Research

< http://jpr.sagepub.com/content/33/1/11.short >

Levitsky, Steven and Lucan A. Way, Competitive Authoritarianism: The Emergence and Dynamics of Hybrid Regimes in the Post-Cold War Era (2014), online: Stanford

< http://iis-db.stanford.edu/pubs/24290/Levitsky-Way-Stanford.pdf>

Sheziaf, Noam “Who Gets to Vote in Israel’s Democracy” (October 30, 2012), online: 972 Magazine

< http://972mag.com/who-gets-to-vote-in-israels-democracy/58756/ >

Aronson, Geoffrey, The Middle Eastern conflict after the Arab Spring: the case of Palestine European View, 2011 10: 215-220

Bell, Avi and Dov Shefi,  The mythical post-2005 Israeli occupation of the Gaza Strip Israel Affairs Vol. 16, No. 2, April 2010, 268-296

Chamberlin, Paul The Struggle Against Oppression Everywhere: The Global Politics of Palestinian Liberation Middle Eastern Studies, Vol. 47, No. 1, 25-41, January 2011

Emery, Alan and Donald Will, Liberation movements, universal citizenship and the resolution of the ethno-national conflict: ANC non-racialism and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict Third World Quarterly, 2014 Vol 35, No. 3 447-467

Gilbert, Leah and Payam Mohseni, Beyond Authoritarianism: The Conceptualization of Hybrid Regimes St. Comp Int Dev (2011) 46: 270-297

Isacoff, Jonathan B., Writing the Arab-Israeli Conflict Historical Bias and the Use of History in Political Science Vol 3/No. 1 March 2005, 71-88

Lee, Alexander, Who Becomes a Terrorist?: Poverty, Education, and the Origins of Political Violence World Politics/Volume 63/Issue 02/April 2011, 203-245

Lieberman, Evan S. and Prerna Singh, The Institutional Origins of Ethnic Violence Comparative Politics/October 201

Norris, Pippa, “Choosing Electoral Systems: Proportional, Majoritarian, and Mixed  Systems” International Political Science Review (1997), Vol. 18, No. 3, p. 297-312

Pape, Ilan, De-terrorising the Palestinian national struggle: the roadmap to peace Critical Studies on Terrorism Vol. 2, No. 2, August 2009, 127-146

Schein, Andrew, Growth in Per Capita GDP in the West Bank and Gaza 1950-2005 Middle Eastern Studies, 2013 Vol. 49, No. 6, 973-989

Sirriyeh, Hussein, Is there a Palestinian civil war? The concept and the impact Israel Affairs Vol. 17, No. 2, April 2011, 247-258

Sprinzak, Ehud, The Emergence of the Israeli Radical Right Comparative Politics, Vol. 21, No. 2 (Jan. 1989), 171-192

Valassopoulos, Anastasia The international Palestinian resistance: documentary and revolt Journal of Postcolonial Writing, 2014 Vol. 50, No. 2, 148-162

Welzel, Christian and Amy C. Alexander Measuring Effective Democracy: The Human Empowerment Approach World Values Research Volume 1/Number 1/2008