T. Belman. Bennett would rather compete with Saar for the center than Bibi for the right. He believes that there are slim picking on the right but losts of votes up for grabs in the center. The probably government will be Saar, Bennett, Liberman and Yesh Atid. Bennett will be the kingmaker.. He could even join Likud and the religious parties to form a government if they together have 61 seats.
If Bennett won’t stand on principle for West Bank annexation, who will?
By TOVAH LAZAROFF ,JPOST..DECEMBER 27, 2020
Gideon Sa’ar, Benjamin Netanyahu and Naftali Bennett: Potential candidates for prime minister in 2021. (photo credit: YONATAN SINDEL/FLASH 90 AND MARC ISRAEL SELLEM)
In his drive to oust Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, it turns out that Yamina Party chairman Naftali Bennett is willing to forgo one of the central philosophical pillars of his party – West Bank annexation.
It is a startling statement for the self-proclaimed “father” of annexation to make in an election race, which until Friday was branded as the battle for the Israeli Right.
In so doing, Bennett underscored the point that the coming election was about political personalities and not about ideology. Voters will be pressed to ask themselves a primary question: Do they or don’t they want Netanyahu?
After that, Bennett took an election that was supposed to be solely about a battle for the soul of the Israeli Right and threw himself into the stomping ground where most of the votes are – in the center.
To be clear, just as the country was going to elections at the end of December 2018, Bennett called on voters to favor his party because it alone reliably supported annexation.
“One of the key core elements of our platform is to apply Israeli sovereignty to Israel [Area C of the West Bank],” Bennett told reporters.
Sovereignty, he explained, was one of the defining policy differences between the Likud and the party that truly represented the Right, his own.
What a difference two years have made.
In a Channel 12 interview aired on Friday night, when the secular audience was watching and the religious one was celebrating Shabbat, an animated Bennett stated: “I, ‘the father of sovereignty,’ will put it aside. Right, Left, this will happen.”
Bennett did not mean to imply that he no longer supported annexation, but rather that he had put this axiom aside temporarily in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and the economic crisis.
“When a person is starving and goes into debt of NIS 430,000, ideology is meaningless to him,” he said.
But one has to ask if Bennett won’t stand on principle for West Bank annexation, who will?
Bennett is not just an ancillary politician when it comes to this topic. True, he did not invent the idea of West Bank sovereignty, nor was he the first politician to speak about it. But he was the most high-level politician to take it from the very fringe of the far Right and make it part of acceptable, if not standard, Israeli political discourse.
Already in 2013, as education minister, Bennett spoke publicly of the need to apply sovereignty over all of the West Bank’s Area C. It was a stance that until then had seemed almost like one of the third rails of Israeli politics; one couldn’t speak of it and expect to lead the country.
Once Bennett started, support for annexation became the litmus test of the political Right – so much so that it was a critical element in all three of the last elections.
This time around, three of the top four candidates to come in first and second in polls – Netanyahu, Bennett and New Hope Party head Gideon Sa’ar – have all pledged support for the annexation of West Bank settlements. Centrist politician Yair Lapid, head of the Yesh Atid Party, is also a candidate for the second slot. Only the first two vote-getters have a possibility of forming a government.
But when it comes to the most central issue on the Right’s agenda, annexation, voters will have to rely solely on pledges, with no way to know whether Netanyahu, Sa’ar and Bennett will truly apply sovereignty.
Sa’ar has been a strong advocate for annexation, but that was as member of Knesset, not as a party head and certainly not as prime minister. One need only recall that former prime minister Ariel Sharon promised to protect the Gaza settlements on the campaign trail and then evacuated them after the election. He famously stated: “What you see from here [in the prime minister’s seat] is not what you see from there.”
Netanyahu was the last among the Likud and Yamina politicians to speak of annexation, referencing it only at the end of the first election cycle. In the second election and again in the third, he promised to annex the settlements as soon as a government was formed. Then once it was formed in May, he said he would do so in July. Then in August, he announced he had suspended that pledge in exchange for normalized ties with the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain.
Netanyahu could repeat that same pledge again, but it would be difficult to explain why voters should believe him. This is particularly true given that in so doing he would undermine one of his most significant diplomatic achievements.
In addition, US President-elect Joe Biden is opposed to Israeli annexation of the West Bank, so any steps in that direction would increase tensions between Israel and Washington at a time when they are already likely to be at odds over Iran.
Until Friday, Bennett was presumed to be the kind of politician who was so ideologically directed that US objections would be irrelevant to him. When he first entered the opposition in May, it was presumed that he would hammer Netanyahu mercilessly on the issue of failed annexation. Members of his party did indeed do so, but Bennett made one statement and then surprisingly backtracked, almost as though he’d had his own Ariel Sharon epiphany moment.
Since then he has focused almost exclusively on national issues that have nothing to do with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, about which his views are extremely well known, particularly given that he was once the Yesha Council’s director-general.
Instead, he has spoken of COVID-19 and the economy, arguing that he is best suited to shepherd Israel out of the crisis.
So it is that three of the top four prime ministerial contenders are on the Right, where more than 10 mandates are likely in contention. But they cannot do more than make pledges of annexation to sway voters.
In many ways, Netanyahu is the most centrist of the three, and most of what he can promise on issues important to the Right, Bennett and Sa’ar could also offer. So it is in the center, where there are at least nine if not eventually 15 mandates up for grabs, that the dialogue in this election to oust Netanyahu is more likely to focus, because here there is more room to make a distinguishing mark.
So much so that even Bennett, the most far Right among them, knows that he must appear willing to compromise and to continue the rebranding toward the center that began already last spring.
In this national election, the health crisis is more acute than the Israeli-Palestinian crisis, and therefore ideology is out.
The politician who remains or becomes prime minister must be able to sway the Center-Left, the Center and the Right to vote for him.
Annexation might be popular on the Right, but in this election, it is unlikely to be the stepping stone to victory.
Saar and Bennett are more right wing than Bibi. Settlers are telling Bibi if he wants their votes he needs to regulate all the outposts into authorized settlements and not just the 3 out of 70 or so he authorized.
@ Olufesen:
Yes, that much is obvious.
Perhaps if The so called Abraham Accords lasts and is expanded, there just might be possible movement on issues of sovereignty in Judea and Samaria. For example;
1: Abbas either steps aside or with all due respect, croaks.
2. If the Abraham Accords works and builds on it’s momentum to the extent that more countries are wishing to jump on the oxcart, Israel could find itself financially independent of The United States. Enhanced by good luck with it’s natural gas projects off it’s coast.
3. The “Palestinians” (they really should re-brand themselves with a new name) could coalesce around an entirely different leadership after the old guard terrorists go the way of Erekat. With such developments as described, “The Palestinians”, who certainly know their actual history could sober up and accept an offer which would give them good lives, good futures, self rule and good relations with all of the nation’s in the region, Israel being just one of those nations.
As part of those negotiations, Israel will define what it can accept without being dictated by any interference. It all has to be predicated upon an end to the hostilities and all of it’s manifestation, for good. No hudnas. The End or no deal and they will get nothing.
Once this theoretical new leadership understands that it is in their best interest to have close relations with Israel, permanently there is the possibility those issues of sovereignty may be resolved.
It may have nothing much to do with who happens to be The US President.
I would imagine that Netanyahu would wish to leave office with Israel in such a strong position and future.
It could be said then that what Trump did for Israel was, in fact monumental. Trump probably realizes this now. (Even Biden’s advisors
admit that going back to The JCPOA would require changing the agreement to address outstanding issues, this validates Trump)
What is the use of even talking about annexation? Israel can’t do any annexation without getting a permission from the US. Annexation came on the agenda when it seemed Trump was going to allow Israel to do it, and went off the agenda when it became clear that Trump withdrew his permission. With Biden in the White House, annexation is off the agenda for the next four years at least, In 2024, after knowing who won, there might or might not be a reason to discuss annexation. Until November 2024 at least you can forget about it, and if Biden wins a second term (or Kamala Harris wins a first one) then you have to forget about it until November 2028, or possibly November 2032…
@ Woolly Mammoth:
Hi Wooly,
Your analysis is spot-on. I couldn’t agree with you more. Unfortunately it does seem that this is again an election over no other issue other than to remove Netanyahu. I hope he has one more rabbit in the Hat to successfully play before the Israeli public, because, if Biden does take power in the US, Israel and the world will need his hand on the Wheel to steer a steady course as he did so masterfully against Obama and his world wide comrades in villainy.
Additionally I would note that I’m greatly surprised by Bennett’s political flexibility, something I really did not expect from him.
Under the present set of circumstances, this pachyderm would urge his fellow midget mastodons to support Netanyahu to form a new government.
Only Netanyahu has what it takes to capitalize on The Abraham Accords and reason with the incoming Biden Administration as to Israel’s logical rationale for opposing a re-entry to JCPOA absent a new agreement within the old, such that all of The region’s concerns as well as Israel’s concerns are addressed in full, in an air tight language with teeth allowing snap back sanctions if there are any violations, whatsoever, by Iran.
If such an agreement or negotiations leading to such, fails to result in solid verifiable progress, all signatories including The EU, China and Russia need to re-assess their commitment to The JCPOA.
Only Netanyahu has the clout with The Gulf state signatories to normalization, including Egypt and Morocco, as well as S.A.; to build the kind of coalition necessary to prevent the Progressive Regressives from empowering Iran at the cost of blowing up the Abraham Accords and regressing back to the old Indick formula for a terrorist state with Jerusalem as it’s capital. All the others, Sa’ar and probably Bennet too if he insists upon going off on a tangent, do not have the strength or intelligence to play 4 dimensional chess without the experience and insight of Netanyahu. They will fuck up.
Let Netayahu form a right wing government, NO Gantz, No Yesh Atid, No Lieberman and certainly no Olmert or Livni permitted 1000 yards from the PM residence.
If he sobers up, Bennet has been offered the Defense Ministry. I suggest he reconsider the offer, otherwise he is both a fool and an ingrate. He can be PM when Netanyahu retires.
Sa’ar can compete with Bennet if wishes within The new Netanyahu government. Both can learn from Netanyahu while being loyal to the longest serving PM. Overtime he will learn to trust them more.