On my Facebook Feed the Zionist Union Won – The Israeli Elections and Reality of Winning and Losing

Mina Tzemach the iconic Israeli pollster who has been covering the sport of national elections in this country for over thirty years woke up this morning as surprised as every other Israeli. The Likud and Benjamin Netanyahu who had been trailing in the polls and tied by the time we went to bed had declared victory by 6am Israel time with 31 seats. The Zionist Union tied at 27 according to the polls was counted in at 24.

Polls like our Facebook feeds are a playground of virtual reality. We aren’t really seeing the whole picture, just a slice of what our friends, colleagues or even algorithms in tune with our tweets think we want to be seeing. And let’s admit it – we want to show the best of ourselves, the rosy nice side, not our fears, not what’s making life hard, not the other side of reality.  And that is where the polls and our expectations failed.

Where elections and politics are as avidly watched as soccer, and voting a place of pride - taking part in the exit polls or the “Midgam” as its known is almost as exciting as voting itself. Camil Fuchs the statistician for popular Channel 10 news said that nearly 30% of those asked refused to answer and that when he woke up in the morning to the actual results “I nearly died.”  Analysis of the failed polls indicates that a higher number of voters didn’t want to reveal whose ballot they placed in the envelope. The question is why? Israelis are the least private people I know – they love to talk and tell you how things are –how much they make and how much they’re in debt. So why mum now when polling?

When doing a post mortem on the actual results and compare these elections to 2013 some the conflicted Israeli national conscience doesn’t give us much either:

·      In 2013 the combination of the Right wing parties of Netanyahu’s Likud, Bennett’s Jewish Home and Lieberman’s Yisrael Beitenu gave us 43 seats.  In 2015 they have 44

·      Centrist parties in the last election were Yair Lapid’s Yesh Atid, Hatnua under Livni and Kadima with27 seats. This time the two centrist tickets of Yesh Atid and new flavor of the month Kulanu with Likud defectors under Kahalon gave us 20 seats to swing around the coalition merry go round.

·      The Left, which in the last elections held 21 seats with Labor and Meretz, now has 28 and the Arab parties that ran under a joint ticket this time were up 4 seats.

So the right made no great gains with one seat, the centre lost seats along with the ultra orthodox parties and the Arab parties are up 3 and the left up 7.  Huh?

There really isn’t a winner here. In part because each of the leading sides made their message one that was virtual and didn’t address the reality of the country they wish to lead.  For Netanyahu it was ramped up fears of security – distanced from the certainty that each time the country goes to war there is and will never be a decisive winner – only a continued conflict. He went as far to appeal to the masses of Israeli voters to come out as the “Arabs are being driven to the polls by left wing NGO’s”. In what democracy would denigrating a particular group its of citizens exercising their right to vote be presented as a threat and be tolerated? He went further to try and seal the deal by declaring that there will be no Palestinian state. Offering voters more of the same torpor of being stuck in a heightened state of waiting for the next axe or in this case missile attack to fall. All of this to be one seat ahead from the last round?

The Zionist Union made significant gains but without much in content reality. While Netanyahu avoided the economy and domestic issues, the joint slate of Livni and Herzog left that messaging to its fellow parties of the Left (Meretz) and party members on the (Stav Shaffir) rather them offering it up themselves. Their own stance became beyond being the “alternative” to Bibi with “ of us or him”, which turned into “them or me”. Not enough to move Israelis tired for change but also used to living with more “have not’s” than haves in a land of gross disparities. Israelis have notoriously lived beyond the “minus” for years because the idea of being in the black with fair pay and an affordable standard of living is almost as elusive as a peace process. New York Times Paul Krugman sadly offered,  “At this point Israel may be the most unequal society in the advanced world”.

So who won? While some called it a "win" for the Arab parties, it remains to be seen if they are even willing to join a left of centre coalition. With 71% turnout the winners should have been the electorate in getting the vote out in spite of its cynicism towards its politicians (up 66% from 2013). However even increased by their numbers the electoral threshold of 3.25% and the system that allows 26 parties to run meant that there is no defining voice of the people in what is not laden with fear rather than leadership that offers change. No wonder no one wanted to answer a poll - it was easier to just post "I voted" on your Facebook feed. Albert Einstein once said, “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” Maybe how we vote, and not just who we vote for needs to change.

“Promoting Fear and the Cost of Doing Nothing” Will it put Netanyahu and Harper in the same camp come Election Day?

Like March itself Benjamin Netanyahu blew into Washington last week with everyone roaring about the fear of fallout. The outrage and the impact was just that – fear. He and the speech he gave went out like a lamb, with a nonplussed President, and US-Israel relations while somewhat bruised at the moment – still intact. For now. 

Netanyahu’s platform operates on two parts both at home and abroad – fear mongering scenarios and maintaining an unmoving status quo on security and the economy rather than initiating change. But there may just be a cost to that.

Many are still scratching their heads as to the point of that visit. It was clear Netanyahu diverges from the US approach to negotiations with Iran. However it’s also pretty clear that the security service in Israel disagrees with Netanyahu. Upon his return he was welcomed to tens of thousands protesting in Tel Aviv last Saturday evening.  Former Mossad head Meir Dagan and others in Israel’s security establishment demanded a return to normalcy and responsible leadership. Each speaker criticized Netanyahu’s tenure of non-action on domestic issues and intractability on pressing security concerns. The “Commanders for Israel’s Security” called for a refocusing on the country’s domestic priorities from the failing economy for the middle class earners, affordable housing shortages and stabilizing relations with the Palestinians.

What was clear from the rally and the voiced frustrations is that the message Netanyahu is bringing, be it in Washington or at home in Israel is one that isn’t necessarily working. It’s not resonating with the Israeli population and increasingly not with Jewish communities in the Diaspora as well.

But why? It worked before... Because eventually even with a clear position you have to initiate and engage to create change and not stand on the sidelines. Like children on a playground you can’t influence, much less control a situation from outside of the sandbox – you have to get in, move around and yes sometimes get dirty.  In other words you need to steer your boat out of the harbour sometimes.

For Israeli’s taking calculated risks is hardwired into our DNA. There are always threats, however Israelis move forward anyway – whether its to return to a synagogue after a terrorist shooting or dusting yourself off to go about business after each air raid siren.  Because the right to live equally and peacefully is exercised daily in spite of risk. To negotiate and have a backup plan is how the Israeli modus operandi has always survived and even thrived. Its part of the Israeli makeup – to be bold, take a chance whether you’re a high-tech start up, an Israeli Arab challenging the national question of equality, or a young politician trying to stop a bill from being passed that will drain the nation’s resources in favour of settlements in the West Bank. Because its worth the risk to get a better deal.

Strangely, Netanyahu has never operated that way. In fact he’d rather hold all the cards and step out of the ring altogether. The hardliner coalition he enjoyed in his previous term by creating the largest government in history meant that he had no opposition, no critics and no alternative. This also resulted in no peace initiative, no drive to improve the economy and no challenge to the growing influence of the religious right. His current term was cut short for exactly that reason – neither HaTnua under Tzipi Livni or Yesh Atid under Yair Lapid could tolerate such a push of power when it came to undermining the core values of equality of citizenship in a democracy – even if that democracy is the State of Israel.

And its that intolerance to such tactics of maintaining power, of fear mongering and inaction when change is so desperately needed that became the beginning of Netanyahu’s power base unraveling. His hold in next week’s elections is strongly being challenged for all of these reasons. As some have said a “six year itch” with Netanyahu may certainly be on the table with Israeli voters.

Over on this side of the world, Benjamin Netanyahu’s well-known affinity with Stephen Harper (one could even go so far to call it a “bromance”) is rooted in part because they hold the same ideals when it comes to power and how to hold on to it. I dare to say power and not leadership here because for each their vision is to be able to stay governing the public through messages that the ship in the harbour that is safe and secure for now is lost without them. 

However that’s not what a boat’s meant to do.

Be it the environment or the economy in Canada – keeping the boat docked means that it’s getting slammed into the pier and starting to crack. Our environmental policies are falling so far behind in the name of oil industry that its unlikely we will catch up unless we make drastic changes soon. Canadians hold the beauty and bounty of this country in high regard and so should our leadership.

Looking to the economy – staying the course hasn’t helped much. Falling oil prices have triggered growth rate cuts already in the first quarter of this year. Balancing the budget will not be enough to convince voters of who is holding the purse in 2015. New York Times columnist Paul Krugman argues that no one really understands debt and that we need more not less debt on the public books to get the economy moving or else it will stagnate i.e. nothing will change if we keep shifting the budget lines on what we owe ourselves and cutting back on what makes an economy and a society healthy. So is staying the course and fear of debt really what we need?  Can’t we trust ourselves to spend a little more to gain a lot? Does balancing the deficit now really matter that much in the bigger picture?

Then there is Bill C-51. Responding to the changing and threatening landscape of terrorism by increasing the surveillance rights of security institutions without question. At the same time its risking the privacy rights of individuals to be questioned under new legislation. The bill is testing not only the boundaries of freedom and civil liberties, but ratcheting up the fear mongering tactics at home. The threat – that has come under the banner of ISIS and Islamic fundamentalism is unleashing a new cultural vitriol on the political landscape.

Rising intolerance and ignorance is beginning to stain the rich fabric that makes Canada the modern multicultural society that it is.  Justin Trudeau’s speech this week highlights the fears that are being stirred and unexamined as a result of these new legislative directions. Most importantly he emphasized the need for liberties to be protected for all Canadians. He explored the fact that while we are striving for a truly diverse and free society here in Canada, we have had an evolution of that value develop over time into hard won policies and practices that we can be proud of, with an honest look at the past.  A national conversation on safety should not boil down to the wearing of the niqab. That being said, while the need to examine the efficacy of our security in Canada certainly must be done - is it through new legislation or refinancing the already existing backlog in our security services?

In short we are less safe when we prevent Canadian citizens from wearing their faith publicly than when we include it as part of an evolving Canadian society built on liberty and inclusion of the other. We are less safe when we cut back on the resources we need and increase legislation that limits our freedoms. Stephen Harper should call his friend Bibi for a check-in on cultural exclusionist practices – he should know. The Israeli government fell in a large part due to the attempt to pass a Jewish Nation State law that would in fact limit the rights of its Arab citizens. The result – the newly formed Arab party ticket may just form the official opposition in next week’s elections for the first time in the country's history.

We risk everything when we do nothing to initiate change for the better.

So if the cost of fear politics and stagnancy are pretty clear I must ask of these politicians - What is the advantage of steering a ship that doesn’t go anywhere? Next week’s elections in Israel will give us an indication of what happens to an electorate when you place power hand in hand with fear. Leadership means helming a ship that sails through change. Propping up fear eventually leaves you alone at the landing.

A ship is always safe at shore – but that’s not what it’s built for.

-Albert Einstein

Post Script: At the time of this posting Israeli polls showed 24 seats for the joint ticket of Livni-Herzog for Hamachaneh HaTziyoni, 21 for Netanyahu and the Likud and 13 seats for the Arab joint ticket making it the third largest party.