By Mohammad El Sahily | Staff Writer
On December 29, Benjamin Netanyahu swore an oath for a record sixth term as prime minister of Israel. Facing mounting public criticism, Netanyahu stitched together a government that has some of the worst types of politicians in power, a band of convicted felons, racists, and homophobes, who ironically won a clear mandate in one of the most contested elections in Israeli history. No sooner had the government been sworn, did it begin actively implementing a despicable agenda aimed at further aggression and oppression against Palestinians, while actively dismantling the supposedly “democratic and modern justice system” inside Israel proper to international outcry.
Civil society in Israel hastened to express its shock and outrage at the actions of this government. Last week, a massive protest in Tel Aviv took place, with many NGOs and organizations participating and holding banners which called for “Arab-Israeli unity” against a “fascist government”. Arab members of Knesset attended, and Ayman Odeh was nearly physically assaulted by counterdemonstrators. Many of Netanyahu’s critics, such as Yair Lapid and Naftali Bennett, did not appear at this protest, despite supposedly being at the helm of the “fight for democracy”, as Lapid has repeatedly mentioned. They were, however, nowhere to be found there.
For the ordinary non-Arab, or unaware observer, the righteous anger of these actors appears warranted. They are supposedly promoting equality, fighting for democracy, combatting racism, and ensuring human rights for everyone are respected. These observers naively believe that the Israeli governments which signed the Oslo Accords and simply did not evict or bomb Palestinians are an “improvement” over the previous administrations’ hawkish behavior, Netanyahu’s conduct notwithstanding. Much work is carried out by the “hasbaristas” of the Israeli foreign ministry in order to push this narrative to a seemingly unaware global audience which persists in not looking at all the facts.
But to an Arab, especially to a Palestinian, this is hypocritical. Arabs do not expect Israel to actually “go easy” on the Palestinians and their leadership. Residents of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip are probably laughing at what they see as faux outrage at the West and at Israeli civil society over the Netanyahu government. However, this behavior fools no one among them, or among popular audiences in the Arab world. Another object of laughter has been the illusion that the Abraham Accords will close the gap between Arabs and Israel, which is gradually being popularly & regionally debunked.
Take the Labor Party in Israel, for example. Its leader, Merav Michaeli, has been quite outspoken regarding the dangers which Netanyahu’s government poses on the democracy of Israel and the status of “Israeli Arabs”. She has, however, repeatedly conducted herself otherwise. In a meeting with the Australian-Israeli Jewish Affairs Council, she said that BDS is nothing more than “antisemitism in new clothes”. Now, this is particularly interesting: when the head of the Israeli branch of Zara hosted Itamar Ben-Gvir for a fundraising event, Michaeli urged for a boycott of Zara. How can she reconcile two seemingly contradicting statements so obviously?
The Labor Party leadership is by no means not accustomed to this seemingly contradictory stance when it wanted to protest the Right. Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin have always been hailed as the “doves” of Israeli politics, notably for brokering the Oslo Accords. However, people seem to forget that Rabin was a hawk: he ordered the use of military force during the first Intifada and had served as chief of staff of the IDF during the Six Day war of 1967. Peres, on the other hand, spearheaded the development of Israel’s nuclear program, the first in the region even until today.
This is not only on the Labor spectrum. The outgoing prime minister, Yair Lapid, has continuously battled efforts for Palestinian self-determination, and his last assault on Gaza last summer is testament to his hawkish stances. Yet he has been issuing alarming statements regarding the future of Israel and its “democracy”. In addition, Naftali Bennett’s criticism against Netanyahu is more explained by their personal animosity than any principled difference. Bennett’s actions while he was in the Israeli army led to the Qana Massacre in South Lebanon, one which he has bragged about several times in interviews and articles—rather flimsy peace-loving.
Civil society in Israel, on the other hand, may appear to the unknowing observer to be performing a highly commendable moral duty by continuously protesting Netanyahu’s policies. However, as with many such efforts globally, these people live in a bubble which they have contributed to, intentionally or not. It’s hard to convince Palestinians that you care about them when you probably, if not definitely, served in the IDF (conscription is mandatory for all men and women except Arabs). A Palestinian whose house was demolished, whose friends or family or both were killed, can hardly be expected to sympathize with them.
The Abraham Accords, ironically, have grown to expose this illusion, at least as far as the recent Israeli government’s actions have caused. Itamar Ben-Gvir, against every recommendation, entered the courtyard of Al-Aqsa Mosque, also known as the Temple Mount, in a flagrant attempt at provocation. This caused a storm of condemnation, none more notable than that issued by the Emirati Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Foreign minister Abdallah Ben Zayed warned Netanyahu of forming a coalition with extremists. Jordan also issued a strongly worded condemnation as well. This is bound to increase as Zionist extremism goes unchecked as things move forward.
Israel is now caught in the middle: between trying to trick the international community with a liberal veneer of liberalism and tolerance (already a failing effort) and preserving a regional balance of power which it worked hard to achieve. There is no telling how future efforts to normalize or sign treaties with Arab countries might go now. In hindsight, many pundits have been eager to assure Western public opinion that Netanyahu is a victim of a conspiracy and emphasizing his long tenure as proof of competence. However, will such a fickle arrangement survive as extremist aggression gains a public mandate and platform?