Netanyahu and Liberman must stop Israel’s third election in a year

Liberman has publicly and arrogantly laid out his demands for joining  the Right-Wing bloc headed by Netanyahu. It is his and the prime minister’s responsiblity to reach an agreement.

By David Singer, INN

Prime Minister Netanyahu and Yisrael Beyteinu leader Avigdor Liberman have finally met  – albeit for just one hour – to discuss the possibility of the 63  votes they control being converted into Israel’s next Government.

It is hard to believe that having made that long-awaited breakthrough – they would be so  foolish and obstinate to refuse to compromise their differences to prevent the Israeli electorate going through a third election within twelve months.

The direct cost to the Israeli government for new elections, including a budget for the central elections committee and state funding for parties running in the elections, is estimated at NIS 800 million ($220 million).

The greatest loss, however, arises due to the fact that election day is an official vacation day in Israel. The country’s daily GDP is approximately NIS 5 billion ($1.4 billion). According to conservative estimates, election day represents a loss to the Israeli economy of some NIS 1.5 billion ($410 million).

Liberman has publicly and arrogantly laid out his demands for joining  the Right-Wing bloc headed by Netanyahu:

  • Passage of the haredi military service law, as drafted by Liberman;
  • civil marriage; [permitting] conversions by local rabbis;
  • re-approving egalitarian prayer at the Western Wall;
  • requiring haredi schools to teach secular subjects
  • public transportation and the opening of mini-markets on the Sabbath.These two issues would be left up to local authorities in every municipality, based on who lives in any given town.

Liberman warned:

“We won’t accept anything less than this, even if it means sitting in the opposition.”

Crunch time has arrived.

Liberman has to adopt a more flexible approach and accept less than the  ”all or nothing “ stance he has adopted.

Netanyahu is now in a much stronger position politically  to accept Liberman’s major demand for passage of Liberman’s yeshiva student military service draft law – which was the deal-breaker in April. Liberman voters increased by 136684 in September whilst religious parties only increased their votes by 91188 and Likud’s vote decreased by 28835. – although religious parties are three times as many voters as Liberman’s party received.

Civil marriage and conversions by local rabbis is a curly problem that could be re-sent to a Committee to consider and come up with recommendations. There are many ramifications to that demand and it is far from a simple demand..

Re-approving the Western Wall arrangements is not really an issue, as the egalitarian area already provided is empty most of the time, including the selichot period, while the traditional area is packed pre-dawn to midnight.

Teaching  secular subjects in haredi schools which do not teach them already is a parental decision, but it could begin with pilot projects in specified schools in particular areas where the haredi community do not constitute the majority of the population – perhaps with majority parental approval.

Liberman’s proposals for transport and mini markets on Shabbat mean a change in the status quo that define Israel as a Jewish state, but happen in many areas now.

There should be a pathway to agreement on these issues that can be achieved with goodwill and a readiness to compromise in recognition of a greater objective – sparing the Israeli electorate another election and the possibility that another deadlock could result.

Israel is surrounded by enemies – especially Iran, Hezbollah in Lebanon and  Syria and Hamas in Gaza that could be tempted to exploit the fractured nature of Israel’s current political circumstances.

There are pressing political issues awaiting Israel’s next Government – most notably negotiations on  President Trump’s deal of the century and Netanyahu’s election promise to annex large parts of the “West Bank.”

Ending this state of suspended uncertainty has now been thrust on the shoulders of Netanyahu and Liberman – following the failure of Netanyahu and Blue and White leader Benny Gantz to achieve a deal they could both live with.

Netanyahu and Liberman would do well to heed the sage advice contained  in the Ethics of the Fathers:

“Do not seek greatness for yourself, and do not lust for honor”

Achieving greatness and honor together by compromising their political expectations will secure Netanyahu and Liberman a special place in the annals of Israel.

October 6, 2019 | 4 Comments »

Leave a Reply

4 Comments / 4 Comments

  1. Actually the article is NOT accurate Liberman says he will ONLY join a Unity Coalition of the Likud and Kahol/Lavon (B&W). This is also what B&W says they are ONLY interested in forming a coalition with the Likud, Liberman and Labor.

    Liberman has stated numerous times recently that he will NOT join a coalition with the UTJ/Shas. B&W say the identical thing.

    There will either be a unity government or new elections. The right-wing NO LONGER includes Liberman so it has a maximun of 55 seats.

  2. Although as to the military service demand, I think that although individuals should be allowed to chose non-combat roles they should still be required to spend the same time as regular military service in some form of duty beneficial to the IDF and the nation. As for the rest of his demands, I agree with them and I believe it would make it easier to build a better relationship with the diaspora.

  3. @ greenrobot:
    There is no question that liberman joining the Likud government is the most natural solution.

    I pointed out 6 months ago and now that Bibi should put the religious parties and liberman together to find a compromise. Also Liberman said that once Gatz fails to put together a government that he will enter the discussion.

    I think both sides will compromise to avoid another inconclusive election. It is better for the religious parties to cut a deal rather than to wait to see what kind of a deal is imposed on them in the next government.

    If Liberman gets anything of his demands he can justify not getting all of it, because a couple of things is itself a big victory.

  4. The author writes “Liberman has to adopt a more flexible approach and accept less than the ”all or nothing “ stance he has adopted.”
    What will make him do so. ?