SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home Netanyahu's New Headache: Avigdor Lieberman Is Dragging Him...

PLANK DECEMBER 31, 2012

Netanyahu's New Headache: Avigdor Lieberman Is Dragging Him Down

JERUSALEM--Benjamin Netanyahu sounded a confident note at the official launch of his re-election campaign last week, but to anybody who’s been watching Israeli political developments, it’s clear that with three weeks until Election Day, the prime minister suddenly has reasons to be fearful. Not for his job, of course—Netanyahu’s hold on the premiership remains unchallenged—but of the headaches he is suddenly likely to face as he assembles his next governing coalition.

Netanyahu’s re-election was supposed to be a pain-free affair. In late October, Netanyahu shocked the political world when he and hardline Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman announced that their parties, Likud and Yisrael Beiteinu (“Israel Our Home”), would be running on a joint list in the elections. By adding Lieberman's party, Netanyahu hoped to create a large unified rightist bloc that would minimize the concessions small parties usually extort from election victors looking to build a coalition. (Currently, Likud controls only 27 of the 66 Knesset members in the government.)

Initially, the gambit appeared to be paying off. Even after the Likud’s Tea Party-esque primary results last month, "Likud Beiteinu" looked set to duplicate or surpass the 38 seats former Likud prime minister Ariel Sharon won in 2003, at the height of the Second Intifada. But in recent weeks, the alliance has steadily hemorrhaged support, and it’s not clear that the bleeding has stopped. Three polls published last week had the list at 34 seats, and another had it down to 33—still nearly double that of the nearest competitor (the center-left Labor Party), but nowhere near the 42 seats the parties currently hold or the 45 forecast by the merger’s mastermind, American political consultant Arthur Finkelstein. (It wouldn't be Finkelstein’s first failed prophecy. Netanyahu was reportedly shocked by the U.S. election results after Finkelstein predicted a four-point Romney victory).

Why the sudden drop in support? Two primary factors seem to be at work.

The first is the surprise fall of Lieberman, who resigned as foreign minister on December 14 after being indicted for working to promote a diplomat who had passed him information about a Belarussian inquiry into his business dealings. The indictment, which followed twelve years of investigations into much more serious offenses (including bribery and money laundering), looked at first like a temporary setback for the Moldovan-born politico (“Indictment is nothing but a small bump in Lieberman’s career,” Haaretz declared on the night of the indictment). Most initially expected Lieberman to reach a plea bargain that would allow him to quickly resume his post with a legal slap on the wrist. But new leads and fresh testimony led the attorney general to strengthen the indictment on Sunday, and the current betting is that it will be several months—if not years—before Lieberman again serves in any ministerial role (if convicted of a crime bearing “moral turpitude,” he will have to resign his Knesset seat as well; if sentenced to a prison term of at least three months, he will be barred from holding office for seven years).

Lieberman has for several years enjoyed a loyal support base, mostly of fellow immigrants from former Soviet countries, but the indictment is clearly hurting his popularity (and Likud Beiteinu’s poll numbers). When asked in a recent Haaretz poll which politician they trusted most, only 5 percent of respondents picked Lieberman, who came in seventh on the question (7 percent wanted to have a beer with Lieberman most and 2 percent said they’d buy a used car from him). One analysis from the Panels polling firm found that, of the 34 seats Likud Beiteinu is projected to win, only five will come from those who voted Yisrael Beiteinu in the last election. Considering how those 34 seats would be apportioned under the union agreement—13 for Yisrael Beiteinu (a loss of just two from its current Knesset strength), 21 for Likud (a loss of six)—it’s clear who’s getting the better deal. Had Likud and Yisrael Beiteinu run separately, Netanyahu could have used Lieberman’s legal troubles against him and probably gobbled up a good chunk of his voting base; now, he has no choice but to defend his running mate.

The second factor behind Likud Beiteinu’s slippage is the rise of Naftali Bennett, the charismatic 40-year-old leader of HaBayit HaYehudi (“The Jewish Home”), the political home of Israel’s national-religious camp. The party, which enjoys strong backing from Jewish settlers in the West Bank and their supporters, is running on a joint list with National Union, the other major pro-settler party. It has only three seats in the outgoing Knesset, but gained much support last month due to right-wing dissatisfaction over Netanyahu’s quick ceasefire with Hamas (Bennett had called for a ground invasion to topple the Hamas government). Likud Beiteinu’s towering lead over its rivals, as well as Bennett’s promise to join a Netanyahu-led government, also seems to have given many right-wing voters the luxury of supporting their first choice (in the same Haaretz "Who do you trust?" question, Bennett scored 14 percent--just six points behind Netanyahu).

Many pundits thought Bennett had pushed his luck when he said in an interview that as a soldier he would refuse orders to evacuate West Bank settlements. Bennett later retracted the remark, but it turned out to be Netanyahu, who subsequently threatened to leave Bennett out of his government, who overplayed his hand. Likud-Beiteinu’s losses have accrued almost exclusively to Bennett, whose party is now polling as high as 15 seats (just one seat behind Labor in one survey). Netanyahu’s recent settlement announcements are widely seen here as an effort to win back some of those voters.

Bennett, who served briefly as Netanyahu’s bureau chief during his last stint as opposition leader, is said to be loathed in the prime minister’s household, particularly by his wife Sara, whose interference in political affairs Bennett apparently tried to stop. In an ideal world, Netanyahu would probably love to construct a coalition without him. But a cursory glance at Israel’s political map reveals why that won’t even be an option.

Assuming no major political earthquakes over the next three weeks, Netanyahu will have two basic routes to a government. Netanyahu’s path of least resistance would be to construct a rightist coalition like his current one. After all, every poll shows Likud Beiteinu, Bennett, and the ultra-Orthodox parties together getting more than the 61 needed for a majority. But if he chooses this route, Netanyahu will almost certainly look to his left to pad that majority, both to claim the mantle of national unity and—more importantly for him—to deny any single party the power of toppling the coalition.

With the departure of Defense Minister Ehud Barak and his tiny Independence Party, the most likely candidate to fill that void is journalist-cum-politician Yair Lapid, whose centrist Yesh Atid (“There is a Future”) party is polling at around 10 seats. While Lapid has periodically blasted Netanyahu for the diplomatic standstill with the Palestinians, their positions on core issues are fairly similar. Lapid is opposed to any division of Jerusalem and has talked up the importance of Israel’s major settlement blocs (he unveiled his diplomatic platform in Ariel, the most contentious of Israel’s major settlements). Lapid, however, has been the most outspoken proponent of ending the military-conscription exemption for the ultra-Orthodox, so Netanyahu would have a difficult time reconciling his demands with those of Shas and United Torah Judaism.

Netanyahu’s second option is to create a coalition excluding the ultra-Orthodox parties with the aim of ending the exemption and all other freebies they have won over the decades by joining governments of right and left. This would be a high-reward proposition, as the vast majority of Israelis resent the various privileges given to the ultra-Orthodox. But to make the coalition math work without the 17 seats Shas and United Torah Judaism are expected to get, Netanyahu would have to include not just Lapid but another center-left party (either Labor or the new party of former foreign minister Tzipi Livni). There are indications that Netanyahu is exploring this option (one report said that he had sent emissaries to Livni to discuss her joining his next coalition, though Netanyahu—facing a backlash within his ranks—quashed the rumor).

Such an arrangement would be highly unstable, as either Livni or Bennett would have the power to bring it down. How Netanyahu could manage to please both, with their diametrically opposed views on the peace process, is unclear, though stranger bedfellows have coexisted in previous Israeli coalitions. The odds for such a coalition will increase if Netanyahu can add a few seats from Rabbi Haim Amsalem, a renegade Shas MK who was expelled from the party for calling on his fellow ultra-Orthodox to work and join the army, but most current polls show his party Am Shalem (“Whole Nation”) falling just short of the 2.5-percent threshold needed to enter the Knesset.

The common variable in these two coalition arrangements is Bennett, a man whom most Israelis couldn't pick out of a prison lineup just two months ago. A son of immigrants from San Francisco, Bennett has been doing the rounds on American television lately, making appearances each on CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News (he can been seen here on Huckabee, holding a Fox News microphone and reporting from the Israel-Gaza border during the latest hostilities). Haaretz ran an in-depth interview with him over the weekend. Bennett is, among other things, a vehement opponent of Palestinian statehood and a supporter of an Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities: In another Huckabee appearance, he asked President Obama to “please let Israel do the job.”

Middle East watchers should become acquainted with Bennett. On January 22, he may become the second most powerful man in Israeli politics.

Ben Birnbaum is a writer living in Jerusalem.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 12 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

12 comments

good lord what a mess. The future does not look all that bright there. It is a shame that the center left no longer has the votes to govern.

- blackton

December 31, 2012 at 12:44pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Every time I think we'd be better off with a Parliamentary system I think of the Israeli far right. Eeeeekkkkkkkkkkk. It's a shame that Bibi and Kadima weren't able to form a coalition. This opened the door to the nuts.

- Sophia

December 31, 2012 at 12:53pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

" This opened the door to the nuts." I would be curious to know how Sophia defines the "nuts" in Israeli politics.

- Noga

December 31, 2012 at 5:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

happy new year all. when i read this I was struck by how much it seemed like a short college assignment, where the professor recommended Haaretz as a key source to gain real insight into Israeli political parties and coalitions; with a caution to not delve too much into non-defense domestic issues; to never mention Ayalon or Danon, but just zero in on Bennett. I did mean to comment that Israel's Knesset has 120 seats and current PM Netenyahu's governing coalition has 66 seats. But did not think anyone would bother to comment. It is difficult to understand why Israelis who want to live east of the 1949 armistice line are automatically seen as "far right" and "nuts" by anyone paying the slightest attention to the meltdowns occurring in Israel's neighbors. Then I read this analysis, which is a real analysis, actually mentions Labor's strategy :) http://pjmedia.com/blog/netanyahu-faces-divided-opposition-in-israeli-elections/?singlepage=true

- K2K

December 31, 2012 at 6:33pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"It is difficult to understand why Israelis who want to live east of the 1949 armistice line are automatically seen as "far right" and "nuts" by anyone paying the slightest attention to the meltdowns occurring in Israel's neighbors. " The city of Ariel is swarming with nuts, K2K. To say nothing of the Jerusalem neighborhoods of Gilo, Ramot Eshkol, Givat Shapira, etc etc . When I was a student way back I lived in the student dorms near the Hebrew U campus of Mount Scopus, east of the Green Line. I distinctly remember that everyone who lived there was a nutcase. Without exception. Wishing you a Happy and healthy 2013 and beyond, K2K. I'm so glad you are still on these boards. Noli sinere te ab improbis opprimi.

- Noga

December 31, 2012 at 6:51pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

noga: same wishes to you. I am only still here because I am still logged in. shhhhh :) http://lenisebrothers.com/2009/02/17/noli-sinere-te-ab-improbis-opprimi/ nails it. (I had to translate your Latin, and found that.) It's not the online bullies that get me down so much any more. I am so mired in real estate Hades that I have lost all hope, which may just be G-d's message that I should have made aliyah in 1978, or four years ago when I researched the process, having realized the resurgent anti-semitism in America. In 2008, I was so heat intolerant that I researched where I could possibly live in Israel, and it turned out that Ariel and the Golan Heights were the coldest spots. When the Ramat Shlomo plans caused such outrage in 2010, I knew that something had really changed in America because it seemed to me that Ariel would always be the truly contentious "settlement", not a rocky hillside in North Jerusalem, or, circa 2012, E1. well, time to sign off. I think 2012 is about to jump off all sorts of cliffs.

- K2K

December 31, 2012 at 9:43pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Referring to Israel's Rightist government as "nuts" has become a staple of the so-called Left that fancies itself "pro-Israel" with only this little caveat, of being anti-Netanyahu. It is a required clearing of throat, before expounding on the pro-Israel stand. It's like there are these two friends who share a great deal of affection and interests except one is popular and the other is not, for reasons that are not always clear. The less popular dude comes under some sort of an unfair attack, and his friend feels bound to come to his defense. But being popular and averse to risking that stand by speaking too clearly and vigorously, he does not start and finish by explaining why the attack was unfair and uncalled for. Instead he starts by reassuring the crowds that he very much understand their animus before making this little point in favour. What the crowd hears is the long introduction in which every prejudice and error it suffers from is actually reaffirmed and validated, so who cares even to note what come after the "but"? People read what they want to read and what they want most is to be reassured and not to have anything interfere with their level comfort. So if you want to say something in defense of this small fashionably pariah country, Israel, calling its government a collection of nuts is absolutely essential to making sure you do not stick out too far from the received wisdom of the crowd. It's the instinct for conformity that is responsible for this sort of milly-mouthed advocacy, which does very little, or nothing, by way of advocacy, actually. But it does make the author feel good about themselves. They get the feeling that they have done their duty and if they are lucky, nobody will really take much notice of the""but". Anyway, on the first day of the year, this article is required reading: http://www.algemeiner.com/2012/12/31/carnage-in-schedule-two/ It's written by a woman who makes no attempt to camouflage her pro-Israel advocacy by catering to the whims and dogmas of the majority.

- Noga

January 1, 2013 at 10:04am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

According to this poll, most Israelis are nuts: http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=3136 "According to the December Mina Tzemach (Dahaf Polling Institute) poll, most Israelis assume that Palestinians are concerned about the existence — and not the size — of Israel, and therefore are very skeptical about the land-for-peace formula. Most Israelis do not trust Palestinian compliance with agreements, and therefore are dubious about the two-state solution, which they increasingly consider a two-state delusion. For instance, 76% (83% among Israeli Jews) believe that an Israeli retreat to the pre-1967 sliver along the Mediterranean would not satisfy the Palestinians or other Arabs. Only 22% (15% among Israeli Jews) assume that such a concession would produce an end to the conflict. About 74% of Israelis are convinced that strategic depth — a code word for Judea and Samaria — is pertinent to Israel’s national security. Only 21% discount the importance of strategic depth. Fully 66% disapprove (and 29% approve) a withdrawal to the pre-1967 lines in return for a peace accord with the Palestinians and all Arab countries. About 63% are against a withdrawal to the pre-1967 lines with minor modifications." According to the dictionary: A nutcase is: [count] informal : a crazy or very strange person

- Noga

January 1, 2013 at 10:33am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

yes, reading: http://www.algemeiner.com/2012/12/31/carnage-in-schedule-two/ is a must for the first day of 2013. Whenever anyone calls anyone a nut, I think of how acorns grow into mighty oak trees, and how walnuts and almonds are so critical for the trace minerals that sustain human life. I doubt Homo Sapiens would ever have evolved if not for a diet of nuts and fruits. This post just appeared at RealClearWorld. I still think the analysis at PJMedia is superior. The author: "Jonathan Spyer is a Senior Research Fellow at the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and a columnist at the Jerusalem Post. He is the author of The Transforming Fire: the Rise of the Israel-Islamist Conflict (2010)." http://pjmedia.com/blog/netanyahu-faces-divided-opposition-in-israeli-elections/?singlepage=true

- K2K

January 1, 2013 at 6:01pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2013/01/01/democracy-at-work-in-israel/ from Mr. Mead, one of the most interesting intellectual bloggers today, and who really tries to see Israel without the prelude to the 'but'.

- K2K

January 1, 2013 at 6:42pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Its a collection of right-wing nuts, dominated by religious apocalyptic nuts. Fuck 'em all. They should all grow into oak trees. Of course, K2K isn't really here. He assured us that, as of December 27, he was finished with TNR. Not renewing his subscription. Couldn't abide it anymore. We quivered in fear, despite the fact that he has been making these threats for years now.

- roidubouloi

January 3, 2013 at 11:40pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The hard work of pariahhood continues in the New Year. The right is up to the job, however.

- roidubouloi

January 3, 2013 at 11:42pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close