Elections (Article# 106) 2/12/2009

By the time this edition of the paper hits the street, Goldie and I will have voted in our first national elections in Israel, and you will probably be reading the results elsewhere in this paper. We will have a fair idea of which direction our country is headed in. However, since I coordinated my recent trip to the U.S. to allow me to arrive home for Election Day (no absentee ballots for Israel), I was not able to write a post-election column before deadline and will instead share some of our thoughts going into the elections.

First, I will freely admit that I do not have even a basic understanding of the way our system works, nor do I comprehend all the various issues and platforms that Israelis use in order to form their voting decisions. I don’t understand how the different parties view things like health care, the economy, education, or even taxes (which are incredibly high here)—many of the major issues I would take into account when deciding how to vote when I lived in America. So I will concede that a candidate I support may indeed be in favor of an 80 percent income tax which he uses to line his pockets and minimally prop up what may be a fading infrastructure.

The issue that I relate to most closely is security. As you may well imagine, at this time this is a major concern of most of the country, as well. We are concerned about rockets, bombs, terrorists—you name it. There are those who want to make any deal they can in the hopes that it will appease the enemy; there are those who oppose any deal because they understand that the enemy will never honor its side; and there are those who espouse various positions in the middle.

Additionally, there are religious parties with their agendas, Arab parties with their agendas—all vying for a place at the table. Mix in the various splinters of each group (three chareidi parties, two Religious Zionist parties, etc.), and it makes for a confusing mess.

There are also many ways in which to twist the truth to make it appear more appealing to one view or another. For instance: We are all aware of the facts regarding the Gaza rockets, are we not? They have been falling on S’derot and the Negev for 8 years—a fact predicted by current Likud candidate Bibi Netanyahu at the time of the Gush Katif withdrawal. (He also predicted at that time that Hamas would take over the entire Gaza, creating “Hamasastine.”) Seemingly, a direct cause-and-effect relationship—right? Obviously, the Gush Katif pullout led to the rockets falling for eight years.

Not so fast. The Gush Katif pullout happened less than eight years ago. The truth is that there had been rockets for some time before the pullout, although the pullout led to a dramatic increase in the frequency of the rockets and the fact that we had to “invade” part of our own country in order to confront the terrorists.

While it is definitely clear that the Gush Katif pullout resulted in increased violence and an eventual war, the cause-and-effect relationship is not nearly so clear as the media and politicians would have us believe. I personally believe that the pullout was a disastrous move, and I further credit Bibi’s “Hamasastine” prediction as being 100 percent accurate, but some of the spin involved is misleading and deceitful.

Interestingly, the candidates themselves seem to be campaigning not only in support of their own platforms, but in their portrayals of their opponents they are also preying on the fears of the voters. Livni calls Barak and Netanyahu failed has-beens. Barak and Netanyahu call Livni totally unprepared and inexperienced (and I agree with them). Livni and Barak assert that Netanyahu’s eventual refusal to make a deal with the Arabs will weaken Israel’s relationship with the USA (and the world). Netantyahu makes the case that Barak has no vision, failing to see the Hamas and terrorist dangers and failing to finish the job in our most recent war. And so on and so forth.

In fact, many of these characterizations are both right and wrong for various reasons. Ideas and issues that were failures the first time around may be just the right solution to our current crisis. Sometimes new ideas are just the right thing needed to get things started. So it is hard for us to establish criteria for what it is we want to get done and apply those standards to choosing who should lead us in getting there (especially since many candidates here are elected saying one thing and end up supporting the exact opposite of their original election platforms).

So how do we decide whom to vote for to make our votes count?

My brother-in-law is furious at me for it, but I am not voting for one of the Religious Zionist parties. Quite frankly, I do not see that the Religious Zionist movement has much sway. We are not organized enough, we fight too much amongst ourselves and—nationally—we are overlooked as a group. Yes, the combined National Religious Zionist parties will get several seats, but for some reason they never get their agenda addressed the same way that Shas or Agudah seem to get.

I am also concerned about the possibility of (what is definitely going to be) a Likud-led government having to join into a coalition with Kadima because their mandate is not strong enough. By splitting off the vote to a dozen splinter parties, the Likud will either have to make separate (and very costly) special-interest deals with the minor parties in order to pull together a shaky coalition, or it will have to partner with the other major parties to form an ineffective unity government. Neither choice seems particularly attractive to me.

I am therefore going to cast my vote for Likud. No, I am not thrilled with their platform. No, I am not excited about the fact that I am voting for a non-religious party. No, I am not excited about the fact that Netanyahu has pledged to destroy existing “settlements” where Jews are simply trying to live their lives in Israel. No, I do not think that Netanyahu is more honorable than the rest of the crooks here—they will all sell us out to make a “historic” deal if the Americans pressure them strongly enough, no matter which party is in power.

I am voting for Likud because, at least for right now, they seem to be most closely aligned with “no giving away land” (notice how I did not say “no dismantling so-called settlements”). Other politicians have felt the same way in the past and changed their minds when in office or as part of the ruling party (see Arik Sharon and Ehud Olmert). There is no guarantee that Likud will not be turncoats and give away land. Yet, at least for the current time, I believe that Likud and Netanyahu have the best chance of delivering security and prosperity to Israel and Israelis, without giving away land to the Arabs.

I was talking about this with my sister, the one whose son is in the army. She and my brother-in-law have never been fans of Bibi Netanyahu and have historically chosen the parties looking to pursue peace at any cost. However, she has lately seen that this stance and outlook has not worked, and she seems to have lost faith in the entire process. She wants to support Bibi, but mentioned that her personal dislike for him prevented her from doing so (she equated him to a snake).

I told her that I too found fault with the major candidates and was concerned. However, I said, here is the thing that makes me feel a bit more comfortable with my choice. They are all snakes—so wouldn’t you rather have the snake that is on your side?

Many of you reading this will say that I am out of my mind and supporting people who will betray the nationalist movement, or perhaps that my vote will go to support past failures or even future failures. You may be right. But I am the one with the vote, which means that in this discussion - my opinion counts most.