[Bennett: Leaving Gaza Cost 1,000 Times More than Staying[
Bennett treading carefully on religious reform
Times of Israel
In the eight months since he took over three Israeli ministries — religious services, economy, and Diaspora and Jerusalem affairs — Bennett has pushed through legislation to give Israeli couples more freedom in choosing which rabbi officiates at their wedding, worked with coalition partner Yair Lapid to lop $11 billion off Israel’s budget and fast-tracked a resolution to the showdown over women’s prayer at the Western Wall.
On this last achievement, Bennett managed an end run around the debate over a controversial compromise proposal by Jewish Agency Chairman Natan Sharansky by ordering the construction of a platform for egalitarian services adjacent to Robinson’s Arch, an archaeological site at the southern edge of the wall.
“The guy came and said, ‘Well, let’s bring it to government for approval.’ I said, ‘No, just go build the thing,’” Bennett recalled. “Within six days it was up and now we have an egalitarian pluralistic plaza. Everyone can go, no questions asked.”
But on some of the other issues considered crucial to American Jewish advocates of religious pluralism in Israel — establishing civil marriage, granting state salaries to non-Orthodox rabbis, and recognizing Reform and Conservative conversions — don’t expect Bennett to rush into things, if at all.
“When you talk about marriage, when you talk about conversion, it’s much more sensitive,” Bennett told JTA. “I do want to set expectations: I won’t go all the way. It’s going to be a fine line of balancing everyone’s positions. These are very, very delicate issues. It’s going to be a very slow process.”
In a wide-ranging interview last Friday at JTA’s offices in New York, Bennett, who leads the Jewish Home party, talked about his plans for religious reforms, what sort of Iran deal Israel might be willing to accept and how Israel’s “startup nation” ethos could be extended into good works projects overseas.
He also described how his approach to religious pluralism was influenced by his personal experience. The Israel-born son of American immigrants from San Francisco, Bennett, who is Modern Orthodox, moved to New York in 2000 shortly after marrying his “totally secular” Israeli wife, Gilat. It was in Manhattan that Gilat first began attending synagogue — a beginner’s service at Kehilath Jeshurun on the Upper East Side.
“We had to fly to New York from Israel for my wife to get closer to Judaism,” Bennett said.
“Here’s an area that I think Israel can learn a lot from American Jews. This no-questions-asked approach — I loved it,” he said. “I want to import it, albeit cautiously.”
Bennett says his approach to religious reforms is governed by three considerations: The changes must be good for Israel, done in discussion with the relevant constituencies and cannot contravene Jewish law, or halachah. Some Orthodox rabbis say merely enabling egalitarian prayer, as Bennett did by building the Kotel platform, violates halachah. Bennett said he’s still figuring out where his red lines are.
“Any move by any Jew that gets him closer to Judaism, to our heritage, is a good thing,” Bennett said. “At the same time, there is a value — notwithstanding the disagreements — there is a value of having, on an official level, let’s say, lines that we don’t cross.”
It’s not clear how much wiggle room that leaves Bennett on such issues as non-Orthodox conversions or Conservative and Reform weddings that do not conform to halachah. He has made clear he opposes civil marriage legislation, though he says he wants to find some kind of solution for couples who have no ability to marry under Israeli law, such as interfaith couples.
“This is perhaps one of the most sensitive issues that we’re only starting to learn and map out what we can do,” he said. “What we don’t want to do certainly is encourage couples that can get married according to halachah and encourage them to get married in a different way.”
Bennett said he met for the first time two weeks ago with coalition partners Lapid, Tzipi Livni of the Hatnua party and Avigdor Liberman of Likud-Yisrael Beiteinu to discuss areas in which they can push religious reforms. Bennett already is promoting a bill that as with marriage, would make it easier for Israeli non-Jews to convert to Judaism by enabling them to choose any rabbinical court in the country for their conversion.
Though he leads Israel’s fourth-largest political party, Bennett is a relative newcomer to the Israeli political scene. Following his army service in the elite Israeli Defense Forces unit Sayeret Matkal and law school, Bennett became a successful software entrepreneur. The technology company he founded in his 20s, Cyota, was sold for $145 million when Bennett was 33.
Bennett said his combat experience during the Second Lebanon War of 2006 changed his career trajectory, propelling him into politics. He worked as Benjamin Netanyahu’s chief of staff for a couple of years, returned to the world of technology to run another company (Soluto, which was sold two weeks ago for approximately $100 million), led the Yesha Council of Israeli settlers and decided to run for the Knesset.
Stunning the Israeli political establishment with his meteoric rise, Bennett transformed what had been a moribund political party with three Knesset seats and a constituency that was mostly Orthodox — a legacy of Jewish Home’s origins as the National Religious Party — into a broader-based nationalist party that captured 12 seats in last January’s elections.
Bennett quickly formed an alliance with Lapid, the other rising star in Israeli politics, whose newly founded Yesh Atid party captured 19 Knesset seats. Together the two forced their way into Netanyahu’s coalition government, sidelining the haredi Orthodox parties, which were left in the opposition for the first time in years.
“This was a tactical alliance, but it grew into something that today is more profound,” Bennett said of his relationship with Lapid, who is now finance minister. On their work together cutting Israel’s budget, Bennett said he and Lapid jumped off the proverbial cliff together, like “Thelma and Louise.”
Bennett says economic issues occupy 60 percent of his time, with the balance divided between his other two ministerial portfolios, being a member of the inner security Cabinet, politics and life. Bennett, 41, has four children under the age of 10.
One of his main economic projects is getting haredi Orthodox Israelis to work. Bennett is promoting a bill that would grant a four-year reprieve from the military draft to 50,000 haredi Israelis if they enter the workforce. He wants to complement this with a $142 million program to train the haredim for the labor market, incentivize them to work and employers to hire them.
Bennett wants to do something similar for Israeli-Arab women, who have relatively low participation rates in the labor force.
Though Bennett maintains a hard line on Palestinian issues — he opposes Palestinian statehood — he says it hasn’t really come up much. Few in the current Israeli government seem to believe the US-brokered peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians will bear significant fruit.
The primary regional issue that preoccupies Bennett is Iran. He spent part of last week in Washington lobbying US lawmakers against easing sanctions pressure on Tehran during the current negotiations, arguing that only economic pressure will prompt the mullahs to agree to a deal.
“We need to create an either-or situation,” Bennett said. “Either you have an economy or you have a nuclear program.”
He also praised the Obama administration for being a “very good friend of Israel” and hailed what he called a “quality leap in defense ties” between the two countries.
But what Bennett seems most excited about is what he views as a historic opportunity for the current Israeli government to tackle domestic issues.
“I call it the 70-70 rule: Seventy percent of Israelis agree on 70 percent of the issues, but we spend most of our time on the 30 percent,” he said. “So this time no, we’ll do the 70 thing.”
CuriousAmerican Said:
What you do not admit is tthat the pals cannot advance until they change their ways. Gaza would suit them fine, it would be now orse than where they are now and it would be their problem and a result of their choices. In gaza they can grow into covereignty if they behave.
as gaza has a govt and army: do they have passports, how do they travel? It is obvious that west bank pals can be deemed gazan(pal) citizens. They are in a quandary and that is why they do not declare independence in gaza because they do not want to be stuck only with gaza and have their west bank pals declared gazans. Govts in the past have always declared independence on a smidgen of the country’s land but in their case it would put them in a box because they know they cannot gain control by force of any more: only what Israel allow to them. gaza is the easiest destination and citizenry of the west bank pals, now that israel has abandoned gaza.
CuriousAmerican Said:
so does gaza, all they need to do is stop rocketing israel.
CuriousAmerican Said:
It is not Israels obligation to turn a bunch of losers into winners. wherever they are is shit. They could not grow a tomato in the elysian fields. the choice would be theirs as to whether they want a Monaco or a ramallah. gaza has the same potential as monaco and hong King, they can move their casino, introduce bankin, have great tourism, etc. if the pals are so useless that they only know how to turn silk purses into sows ears then it is best that they are confined and supervised. why give them more land to screw up? Gaza is sufficient but they are insufficient to any task other than destructive tasks: so let them destroy themselves. On the bright side they would have a med sea outlet where you can organize flotillas to south america and get the euros and arabs to pay. There is no arab nation that does not sit on energy that is worth a farthing. Gaza in the hands of the jews would be a monaco or a hong Kong. It is not where they are it is who they are. I have proven that the densities are fine.
@ Ted Belman:
Jews owned the northern amount of the strip since before the state was started.
The Philadelphia corridor retreat was a massive security blow.
The homes of Jews where destroyed. Many of these people are still in the processing of adjusting and bitter.
The army retreated to positions outside the strip. We have had two wars and counting. Even if the IDF had stayed we would have been in a better security position.
The retreat gave the Pals hope of winning against Israel.
The paper balance sheet shows less Arabs under Israels control what is that getting us?
The problem of those Arabs in Gaza was not solved by the retreat it only changed in shape.
The reason that the Gaza withdrawal has failed so badly is because of the nature of the Palestinian Arab movement. This is a movement created by Hajj Amin el Husseini in Alliance with the British Imperialists, later with the Nazis, then taken over by US Imperialism.
It is a movement which is based on Antisemtiism, and on wiping out the Jewish people.
Do all Arabs subscribe to this Nazism? I think yes!
Those few who do not have broken consciously from Arabism.
I had this understanding from a very long time ago, about 30 plus years, and this made me oppose handing over the Gaza right down the line when the issue arose and the debates on Israpundit were electric.
This is a very bitter enemy that Israel faces. You cannot and must not give your enemy a single thing. You must use every opportunity to take from your enemy everything they have and never offer them the opportunity or hope of gaining it either.
THAT is the only “peace” possible.
I care Little in life about numbers. I think I am at one on this with Yamit. In 1917 there was a working class of about 3 millions, out of 200 millions, but it controlled the cities, and it controled the electric grid, and the sailors as workers controlled the coasts.
Those workers also had a brain. (Those Jews who disparage the Bolsheviks cut their own throats…they are not Smart)
It is that brain that is lacking in Israel. Netanyahu cares about Obama, about Cameron, about Putin etc.
There needs to be a leadership that cares only about Israeli Jews, and about any Arab who stops being an Arab and becomes pro-Jewish, and that by the very nature of what I am saying here needs to be rigorously tested.
This philosophy is the direct opposite of Bennett. In this regard I see Bennet as being a danger because he promises so much. Many Jews have illusions in Bennett.
Indeed Bennett does the opposite to what I think. Bennett talks about making the enemy stronger, about giving them Jobs. Efraim Karsh demolished this forever ages ago.
Much has been written about Karsh mostly false, but there is one truth as I remember in his analysis….if you make your enemy stronger then you will make yourself weaker.
I do not think that THAT false ideology is a product of the common sense (speaking as a materialist) in Judaism and in the Old Testament, but is a product of the Christian mythic rewriting, which insists that we are obliged to help the poor, not at all, if your enemy is poor then the aim must be to increase his or her poverty.
The aim must be to let your ENEMY know in every fibre of his or her body, that you are the master over him or her.
This is a law of behaviour that is so correct because it is based in eternal truths.
I challenged Ted in 2005 over this issue of Gaza withdrawal. Moreover it was a time for action and not talk. I would have banned a number of people from Israpundit there and then. There needed to be one straight voice.
As time has went on I have seen things even more clearly. I have a very low opinión of those who talk about birth rates, and numbers etc.
I repeat numbers do not matter a fig. The whole point about 1917 is that the whole system was caving in on itself because of its own contradictions.
It is not a matter for revolutionaries to cause chaos, but it is encumbent on revolutionaries to recognise chaos.
And to know that in order to move it is necessary to end chaos by decisive action.
What is that decisive action today…It is necessary to lay down the borders of Israel and to remind the world that Israel started off with Transjordan (San Remo Treaty)
And that Israel takes not only Gaza, Golan and Judea and Samaria but goes back also to San Remo on the issue of Transjordan now Jordan.
I would créate a party which would oust Lapid and Bennett. I would expose Labour as being a Blairist party. I would depose Netanyahu at once. I would place under arrest a good section of the IDF Generals.
And so on.
But first a party.
I take that as a threat, which I am sure is how you meant it.
Monaco also has an open border with France from which it can draw food and supplies.
And an open sea route.
Look I understand why Gaza has to be policed by Israel (and now Egypt); but Gaza is not Monaco.
But Gaza has a closed sea route, and heavily policed borders, with limited trade.
I admit if the Japanese had Gaza, it would be vacation paradise.
But Gaza is NOT Monaco, or Hong Kong. The comparison is silly.
Monaco It has an area of 2.02 km2 (0.78 sq mi), and a population of 36,371, making Monaco the second smallest, and the most densely populated, country in the world. Monaco has a land border of only 4.4 km (2.7 mi), a coastline of 4.1 km (2.5 mi), and a width that varies between 1,700 and 349 m (5,600 and 1,145 ft). Density – 18000 per sq km
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monaco
CuriousAmerican Said:
you mean like the jail they are in now? Any 10 year old child could do more with gaza than the pals have done; but then the pals interest is non constructive. Face it, the pal arab problem is cultural and possibly even genetic.
CuriousAmerican Said:
You really know how to make the most absurd comments. If the pals were capable of creating a hong kong or manaco Israel would give them all the freedom in the world and everyone would make money . Anyone capable of creating a hong kong is obviously disinterested in intifadas. Try to make more common sense. There is a reason why the pals are where they are and that has nothing to do with Israel as every muslim country not sitting on oil is similarly well disposed.
CuriousAmerican Said:
Mongkok is 130,000 per square kilometre; gaza is 365 sq km. which would allow for over 47 million. Add 1.5 mill more and the density is 6300 per sq km the entire isllan of hong kong is about the same overall desntity and 2/3 of the island is country side
http://hongwrong.com/hong-kong-population-density/
CuriousAmerican Said:
No Monaco and HK prospered because they are not Arabs. Arabs have no work ethic, never have. They are born brigands who take what others have have built then turn it into shit.
CuriousAmerican Said:
A- I don’t accept the validity of Ettinger’s numbers. Read his sources and how they arrived at the numbers. At best they are educated guesses.
B- Your comments; not only do I read,I sometimes reread them before commenting. I really enjoy your comments, dwellers as well.
CuriousAmerican Said:
your opinion is irrelevant ,what are facts,what is the density of Hong Kong? it is not Israels problems if everything they touch turns to shit; they would turn heaven into a cesspool. qatar can build them tall cities for gas. They can leave there by boat for europe in reverse flotillas.
I suppose Gaza is not crowded enough for you. Of course, density would be a problem.
Here is the problem.
1.5 (Ettinger’s #) or 2.3 (PA’s #) Million more people in Gaza would get very radicalized.
Israel would have to patrol it worse that they do now.
It would be seen as a problem. Maybe not to you; but certainly to the world.
Monaco and Hong Kong prospered because of a Freedom that Israel could never give the Palestinians (for security reasons). They had open ports which Israel could never give the Gazans. So Gaza could never prosper.
So Israel would be responsible for running an effective jail.
Jails of that size were made by the British during the Boer War of 1898. The British called them concentraton camps.
That may be no problem to you; but other people would see it as a problem.
Ted Belman Said:
Why not support the defacto palestine(gaza) as being the limit of their boundaries and transferring the west bank pals there. Gaza was part of the mandate and certainly the west bankers can be considered legally Palestinians. The fact that gaza refuses to decalre itself as palestine shows that it would create a problem for them. It would have the appearnce of making the west bankers citizens of gaza as Palestine. Just refuse to give them more land than gaza. Gaza could be a HOng Kong or a Monaco, density is not a problem. they would be on one part of the mandate rather than another. If Gaza developed then many pals might leave a poverty stricken west bank for a developing palestine with jobs. they were drawn to israel in the first place by jobs.
I used Yoram Ettinger’s numbers not the Arab numbers.
Do you read my posts or just attack?
@ CuriousAmerican:
Arabs are liars and never report deaths so they can collect the UNWRA allocations. There are absolutely no reliable demographic numbers in Gaza.
How come you so readily believe all the bullshit they claim? 🙂
@ Ted Belman:
Ted is intellectually honest.
In Support of Disengagement by Ted Belman
What Will “Disengagement” Accomplish?
I was against disengagement in the main and changed my mind in the end. Though I was very much against giving up every inch and thought we should have kept the northern 5 miles where the Jews lived. I also was very much against giving up the Philidelphi Corridor.
But I did like the idea of getting rid of 1.5 million Arabs.
He is right on the economic point; but there was a secondary consideration: Demographics.
The Arabs in Gaza + PA + Israel were very close to the Jewish population in Israel at that time. Given higher Arab birth rates; and earlier marriages, this was a problem.
This was becoming apparent in 2005.
Gaza Strip 1,760,000
Israel 1,610,000 (Includes East Jerusalem Arabs)
J&S 1,500,000 (or more. I used Yoram Ettinger’s numbers)
=====================
4,800,000 (maybe another half million more. Yorman Ettinger’s number may be a bit low)
Sharon was taking this into consideration.
Remember that in 2000, the Jewish population was smaller. I saw statistics at that time that if one excluded Israeli Arabs, and Christians, Jews were only 47% of the population under direct IDF control.
Around 2005, the Arabs were starting to be a demographic nightmare. Sharon figured that ditching Gaza would get rid of 40% of the Arabs.
The Arab birth rate has dropped a bit … BUT ONLY RECENTLY!
This was not apparent in 2005.
This should be official GOI policy and answer to the international cabal of delegitimizers. Bennett outshines everyone with this ground breaking one liner to the internationals. This is the way you answer the delgitimizatin of Israel by successive GOI’s who cannot bring themselves to utter the words in public company. Bennett is single handedly RE-LEGITIMIZING jewish settlement in YS. BB is a shadow of a man compared with this one statement. BB’s whole policy is to avoid upsetting the delegitimizers. Once this policy is established everything else will fall into place. Perhaps that is what the delegitimizers and leftists are REALLY afraid of: Jews waking up and seizing their rights unilaterally. The biggest criminals are those Jews who have aided the libelers and delegitimizers of the rights of jews to YS.
I like that he unequivocally stated on CNN Amanpur interview: Jews cannot be occupiers in their own homeland. this is the first GOI official stating clearly the right of Jews to live in YS. Also, I liked the way he phrased the recognition of the Jewish homeland by the arabs issue as : “Pals cannot expect peace unless……” He phrased it as something they seek rather than Israel seeks. In other words if THEY want peace then THEY must do…… I believe the current situation should be solved with the annexation of C and the postponing of negotiating the status of A & B until the Pals demonstrate that they can live peacefully next to the Jews. Until then: occupation. AFTER they demonstrate THEIR capabilities THEN negotiations over the disputed remainder of YS can begin, until then A & B should remain a military occupied status. Policy should be based on what is good for Israel and there should be no rush to change the current situation except to annex for settlement the vacant lands of C. There is no basis for rushing action and current events suggest the opposite approach. If not annexing C then having a massive affirmative action program to settle Jews.
“Though Bennett maintains a hard line on Palestinian issues”
On which issues exactly?
Bennett as Lieberman are wrongly referred to as “hard-line”, since they are more likely true dreamers with respect to Palestinians. They both believe that improving Palestinian economy will render them peaceful people.
As an example, during the vote to increase work permits to PA, he supported the vote to increase the number of workers entering in Israel, saying that “it was an example of a real step toward peace.”
The following is another of his “hard-line statements”: “I know there are those who just want to ‘get rid of’ the Palestinians. I am not in their camp… But I believe in peace between people”
With hard-line proponents like this who needs soft-line ones?