Guns and butter

By no stretch of the imagination can Rothschild Boulevard be compared to Tahrir Square.

The Egyptian protests that brought down the Mubarek regime are still in limbo

with no discernible leadership. There are fears that this is an opportune time for the Muslim Brotherhood to fill the vacancy. They are well organised and possess a well defined hierarchy.

In Tel Aviv the first people to put up tents in the Boulevard made no claims to leadership and shied from being identified with any political organisation.

However, it soon became clear that if the protesters intended to formulate their demands and effect a change they needed organisation and leadership.

In the span of a few weeks a young dynamic leadership emerged, people capable of pitting their wits against seasoned politicians. Notable among them is Itzhik Shmueli, chairman of the National Student Union.

Now after demonstrations in both the main population centres and the "provinces" the protests have reached a crucial stage. Admittedly, they have sufficient momentum to organise a few more Saturday night mass gatherings replete with speeches and musical performances, but where are they heading?

Author and journalist Yakir Alkariv says the protest's leaders should pull down their tents and move their struggle to the political arena. Alkariv claims that so far the protest's main achievement has been the setting up of the Rothschild Committee headed by Professor Trachtenberg, but half the government sits on the committee, "In other words: A big zilch."

"As long as the struggle remains stuck in place at this stage, it does not threaten Netanyahu and mostly disturbs the neighbours on Rothschild Boulevard."

"In order to change the system you have to be a part of it. You can't do it in tents, the protest has to move from the Boulevard to parliament."

Just two weeks ago another journalist described the Rothschild Boulevard phenomenon in the following words,

"An Israeli public that seemed apathetic and self absorbed— numbed by the intractable conflict with the Palestinians and disillusioned with its political leadership — has filled the streets, fueled by the energy of young activists who have shunned established political parties."

The protest leadership knows that throwing in its lot with any of the political parties will cause dissension. At present the protest is a popular movement and any attempt to politicise it will most likely splinter it into several factions.

Its critics have already claimed it is the product of left-wing intrigues.

"Beware of the 20^th of September and all that will come in its wake," warn the people who think the protest has a limited time slot. Once the Palestinians start protesting you can forget your housing crisis.

Reluctant to be coerced by an event that might not happen the protest leaders advocate a more measured strategy. They say let’s not rush into anything ill-considered. There will be time,"And time yet for a hundred indecisions, And for a hundred visions and revisions."

To help the protesters formulate their demands and their strategy a voluntary committee headed by Professors Yossi Yonah and Avia Spivak has formed.

Professor Yonah said his team's goal was to devise a new socioeconomic policy centred upon citizens' welfare. No timetable has been set for work undertaken by the committee's nine sub-groups, which are comprised of some 60 academics and experts in fields of economics and social welfare, many of them are known to hold social democrat views. Professor Avia Spivak, a former senior official at the Bank of Israel, outlined three initial demands - the establishment of a two-year state budget, an increase in taxes, and the expansion of government expenditure.

Yossi Yonah stressed that his committee of experts was an independent initiative, and that its purpose was to assist those who were conducting the protests.

Referring to the Rothschild Committee headed by Professor Trachtenberg he said, "We have no desire to negotiate with an ad hoc committee established by the government; that's not our purpose. Like the protesters, we have no intention of discussing matters with committees whose goal is to mislead the public and to squander this opportunity to repair distortions in Israeli society." Heads of the tent protest movement, along with representatives of student organisations and youth movements evinced support for the formation of this independent committee of experts and expressed scepticism about the prime minister's intentions and the Trachtenberg committee's ability to bring about real change.

Two weeks ago singer-song writer Shlomo Artzi appeared on stage with other performers at the central demonstration in Tel Aviv. In the repertoire of songs he sang the vintage favourite “How much will it cost us,” took on a new significance.

NIS 36.6 billion ($10.4 billion) is the off-the-cuff estimate submitted by the protesters. The Ministry of Finance countered with a much larger estimate – NIS 60 billion ($17 billion).

It has been argued that some of the money can be obtained by rearranging our priorities and tax reform. Three possibilities have been mentioned: The West Bank settlements, preferential budgeting for Haredi (ultra-Orthodox) communities and the defence budget. All three are well represented in the coalition government so it's unlikely that the prime minister will be eager to "take from Peter to pay to Paul."

Hagai Segal, a right-wing journalist who distinguished himself in the 80’s as a member of the "Jewish Underground" and as a result spent some time in a “correctional facility,” attempted to defend the investment in settlements over the “Green Line.” In an article published in Yediot Ahronot last week he asserted, “There is no doubt about it, Israeli governments over the years invested huge sums of money in the settlements enterprise. However, they always sought the voter’s approval first.”

Well it seems we got our deserts. "The people wanted settlements." Concludes Segal, "As opposed to all the social-demagogue chatter we are hearing, this was not a waste of money. After all, the 330,000 settlers have to live somewhere - If not in Beit El then in Carmiel.

Moreover, the settlement enterprise constitutes a peripheral area to a no lesser extent than the Galilee and Negev regions."

Leaders of the Judea and Samaria (West Bank) Authority were probably surprised by remarks made by the prospective Labour Party leader Shelly Yachimovich in an interview she gave to Haaretz. The full interview will be published in Haaretz Friday Magazine. Yachimovich defended her party's role in the establishment of the settlements

"I certainly do not see the settlement project as a sin and a crime. In its time, it was a completely consensual move. And it was the Labour Party that founded the settlement enterprise in the territories. That is a fact, a historical fact."

When asked by her interviewer if the billions that were invested in the settlements had been invested inside the Green Line, maybe we wouldn't need the tents. Ms. Yachimovich replied, "I am familiar with that well-known equation: that if there were no settlements there would be a welfare state within Israel's borders. I am familiar with the worldview that maintains that if we cut the defence budget in half there will be money for education. It's a worldview with no connection to reality."

When it was pointed out that it is part of current public discourse to suggest that less funding for West Bank settlements and defence would mean more money for social service needs, Yachimovich said: "I reject it; it is simply not factually correct, even though it is now perceived as axiomatic. A school that is located in a settlement and has X number of students would be located inside the Green Line and have the same number of children at the same cost. I don't say that the settlements themselves did not cost more money. But even if the defence budget were cut in half, and even if the settlement costs were cut in half, the economic ideology that led us to them would not seek to divert the newly available funds to the service of the state.”

The Christian Science Monitor proffered another opinion taking the Boulevard tent community to task pointing out that, "Israelis protest costly housing – but not cost of settlements. Why?

Israel’s government invested four times more per capita in public building in the West Bank than the national average in 2009, and twice as much per capita in West Bank municipal governments, according to data from Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics."

The Monitor quotes Gidi Grinstein, director of the Reut Institute in Tel Aviv, "Settlers are a well-organised minority interest group that has traditionally had far more influence on Israeli policy than the middle class. The settlement issue is part of a broader topic that is indeed very relevant to these protests: the middle class has never been a sector that drives politics in a sectarian manner – and this is where it is vulnerable and short-changed compared to groups who have a much narrower view and loyalty, and frontload their sectarian interests before national considerations." …..

"A portrait of the settlement economy published in July by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development found that it is a drag on Israel’s per capita economic production. Relative to the rest of Israel, economic activity in the settlements is more focused on public administration, construction, and house ownership. At the same time, the settler economy has less manufacturing and business services and higher unemployment than the Israeli average.

In 2007, on the 40th anniversary of the 1967 war, the centrist Israeli media outlet Ynet news reported that the total economic cost of the occupation to date had reached $50 billion – or about a quarter of Israel's annual gross domestic product. However, estimates vary widely – in part because not all costs associated with the occupation are discretely identified in government reports."

News media economic correspondent Nehemia Shtrasler attacked another "holy cow," in an article entitled “It’s time to slash Israel's military budget," published in Haaretz

"The defence budget has increased greatly in recent years. It jumped from NIS 46 billion in 2006 to NIS 54 billion this year, and will go up to NIS 55.5 billion in 2012. This is the result of the Brodet Commission to examine the defence budget, which was formed after the Second Lebanon War." The army blamed defence budget cuts for its "under par performance in that war. However, the Winograd Committee, which investigated the war, ruled that the failure was totally unrelated to the size of the defence budget, but was instead the result of unprofessional leadership and an untrained army."

Shtrasler a strong advocate of a free market economy and once a supporter of Bibi Netanyahu's economic weltanschauung has backpedalled recently trying to adjust to the current national mood. He advises us not to trust the generals even Shaul Mofaz ‏(Kadima‏), chairman of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defence Committee was once IDF chief of staff and later minister of defence. Now he is pressing for cuts in the defence budget. Mofaz is a contender for the Kadima party leadership so it's not surprising that Shtrasler sees the proposed budgetary cut as an opportunistic move.

"All of Barak’s talk about social sensitivity is only deception." Claims Shtrasler, "He is demanding an addition to his budget knowing very well that without a deep cut in defence it will be impossible to respond to even a small part of the tent protest."

This week too I intended writing about butter and not guns, but our enemies hadn’t forgotten us. I’m sure you know about the terrorist attack that took place today near Eilat.

As I conclude this letter the latest news update lists seven Israelis killed and over thirty wounded in the four pronged attack on two buses and two cars travelling close to the Egyptian border. The terrorist group was intercepted later, seven terrorists were killed. It seems that the terrorists crossed from Gaza into Sinai and attacked the vehicles further south near the Netafim border crossing.

Hamas denies responsibility for the attack and warned Israel of dire consequences if the IDF carries out any kind of retaliation. The immediate response disregarding the Hamas warning was a targeted assassination in

Rafah, Gaza of the operative group responsible for the attack near Eilat. Six members of the Popular Resistance Committees including two senior operatives .were killed in the retaliatory attack. There will be more to come.

Beni 18^th of August, 2011.