Headlines, Human Rights, Middle East & North Africa | Analysis

ISRAEL: Many Candidates, No Leaders

Analysis by Jerrold Kessel and Pierre Klochendler

JERUSALEM, Feb 9 2009 (IPS) - Along the ironic lines of “Something Funny Happened on the Way to the Forum”, the old Broadway musical about democracy in ancient times, something “funny” happened to Israelis on their way to the polling stations.

They went to war.

As a result, something weird is happening to Israeli democracy as the country goes to the polls on Tuesday.

Israeli elections used to be known for their fiery nature, the explosive debates, the contrasting ideological credos of the competing parties, the ruckus of left-right rivalry, the no-holds-barred traditional confrontation between religious and secular.

And beyond it all, existential questions which have challenged Israeli democracy since its inception 60 years ago: how to live with the Palestinians and how to make peace while guaranteeing the security of the state.

Today, to all intents and purposes, there is no left. Among Jewish Israelis, the war on Hamas in Gaza won nigh-universal backing; the concept of promoting a ‘peace policy’ has been relegated to almost taboo status – even by avowedly pro-peace parties like Meretz.

Its election slogan is soul-numbing – ‘no compromise’, even if the Meretz intention was not directed towards possible peace plans, but was meant to signal a stand against the rampages of the hard nationalist sentiment which has dominated the brief election campaign.

Commented Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salman Fayyad, “Regrettably, none of the major candidates to lead Israel have presented anything remotely hopeful on which a peace process might be pursued.”

There has been no Obama effect, no Obama ripples on the Israeli electorate. Hope and anticipation are nowhere; instead, fear and the ‘need to stand firm’ are the watchwords on voters’ lips. And, are likely to be reflected in an anticipated further swing to the right that has characterised the three previous Israeli elections since the 2000 outbreak of the Palestinian Intifadah uprising.

That is ironic especially since, this time, Israelis aren’t facing the imminent threat of suicide bombers and constant terror attacks. On the contrary, though a majority of voters say they wished the war would have continued until the total elimination of the Hamas threat, most acknowledge that Israel’s deterrence has been boosted, and that with a soon-to-be Egyptian- mediated security arrangement, quiet will prevail in southern Israel for the foreseeable future.

Asked to characterise what the election is about, Labour party leader Ehud Barak said Monday morning, “In a word, leadership.” His problem, and that of the two leading candidates to become the next prime minister – Benjamin Netanyahu of the right-wing Likud and Tzipi Livni of the centre-right Kadima, is that all have been found wanting in inspiring voters that they are up to handling the challenges. There is deep-rooted resentment about what is widely perceived to be the remoteness of the political leaderships from the people.

It goes further than that, though. In the country’s biggest-selling paper, Yediot Achnorot, top-flight columnist Nahum Barnea quotes the constant Likud barb against Livni – ‘it’s simply too big for her’, but then goes on with this acerbic comment of his own: “We can quite as easily say the very same about Netanyahu and Barak. Their portraits may be big on the billboards, but in reality they’re dwarfed by the enormous problems facing Israel today – Iran, the economic crisis.”

With opinion polls stressing that, entering the final day of campaigning, almost 20 percent of voters were still undeclared about their intentions, speculation focused on whether two perceived trends would hold: on the right, a seepage away from the Likud to the far-right racism of Avigdor Liberman’s Israel Beiteinu party and, perhaps even more critically, a closing of the gap between Likud and Kadima – though, in final weekend polls the former still held a marginal edge.

Some political analysts are alarmed that the system is dangerously close to becoming dysfunctional. It could well happen that Israel will be led by a prime minister who will have garnered well under 25 percent of the popular total vote. Thus, even before results are known late Tuesday night, or early Wednesday, there’s already intense interest on who will be given the nod by President Shimon Peres to have the first crack at building a viable governing coalition from the 120-seat Knesset.

Even should Kadima best Likud, most pundits predict that Livni would have a major headache trying to cobble together a stable coalition; that’s because, in any constellation, the right-wing bloc (from the Likud rightwards and including the orthodox religious parties) seems to have an unassailable lead over the centre-left. Still, Livni is undaunted. She said on national radio Monday that “dividing the political map up into right-left blocs is old hat. These divisions are passé. If we beat the Likud, we will have won; we will get the right to form the new government; and we will do so.”

In truth, for all the late shifts in planned tactical voting (because of Israel’s absolute proportional representation system, in a sense every vote does count), Livni’s claim sounds like just so much brave talk. On the other hand, there’s also no mistaking late Likud nerves: there’s been a re-surfacing of the old unattractive Netanyahu bombast which turned so many traditional Likud voters against him three years ago when he slumped to a catastrophic result.

The odds are still that Netanyahu will be Israel’s next prime minister. But there was a cautionary word from Menachem Levi, who runs a panel beating shop in a Jerusalem industrial zone: “I’m a Likud man through and through, always have been. But last time I didn’t vote for Netanyahu – his naked capitalism proved he’s no friend of ordinary people: what we’re missing is a true leader: I honestly don’t see anyone on the horizon who answers that description.”