“How goodly are your tents, O Jacob, and your tabernacles, O Israel!”
A phrase from the Book of Numbers that forms the opening line of the prayer said by observant Jews when entering a synagogue. The biblical text tells how Balaam was sent by Balak the king of Moab to curse the Israelite camp but blessed it instead.
Tel Aviv Municipality wardens were neither cursing nor blessing Tel Aviv's Rothschild Boulevard tent dwellers when they arrived early this week to dismantle and remove the motley compound of twenty tents and awnings from the avenue's tree shaded strip. They were just doing their job.
The social justice protesters had already left the boulevard and only a few "camp followers" remained. A few longstanding homeless people and some nondescript hangers-on, best left undefined, were all that was left of the once bustling tent compound.
With winter approaching and impressive initial goals already gained the social justice protest leaders decided to break camp and find another way to further their demands.
Here's a brief synopsis of the protest movement.
Barely four months ago Daphne Leef, a hitherto unknown 25 year old video editor despaired of finding an affordable apartment in Tel Aviv. So she pitched a tent at the HaBima Square end of Rothschild Boulevard and opened up a Facebook protest page.
There was an immediate response and others joined her initiative.
The following day fifty tents were pegged down along the boulevard.
The national students union was quick to join the protests.
A week after Leef camped out tens of thousands of demonstrators participated in a mass march from Rothschild Boulevard to the Tel Aviv Museum of Art plaza where the protest movement’s first rally was held.
The following day a smaller, but nevertheless significant march took place in Jerusalem.
In an attempt to placate the demonstrators Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu announced new housing programmes aimed at addressing the housing shortage in Israel and at supporting the students.
Other underprivileged groups joined the protests. Thousands of Israeli parents took part in the first “strollers march” protesting the high cost of raising children.
An impromptu leadership committee was set up to maintain the momentum of the protests and determine further action.
On the 30th of July between 85,000 and 150,000 protesters (official estimates differ) took part in mass rallies held all over Israel.
A week later between 200,000 and 350,000 people participated in similar protest rallies.
Further protest marches and rallies occurred almost every weekend. They culminated in the “March of the Million” that took place on the 3rd of September.
In retrospect the one million protesters' goal was far too ambitious. Nevertheless, about 460,000 people took to the streets to protest the governments' economic policies.
Four days later Tel Aviv municipality wardens visited the tent sites and posted eviction notices. The following day demonstrations took place when they attempted to dismantle the tent encampments.
Mayor Huldai and many Tel Aviv Council members supported the protesters' demands, however they were forced to send the wardens in when Tel Aviv residents living alongside the tent compounds complained about the
“environmental damage" caused by the "campers."
Among the screeds of material written about the tent communities I found a reference comparing them with the early kibbutz communities.
The Hebrew poet Avraham Shlonsky lived at Ein Harod during the early twenties.
In his lyrical poem "Zemer" (song) Shlonsky likened the Gilboa foothills and Mt. Gilboa to camels kneeling by the Jezreel Valley witnessing the new encampment below by Gideon’s Spring.
He wrote, “They remember the white of our tents that descended on the valley like doves."
If the municipal wardens manage to clear away the hangers-on, we too will be left with only a memory of a brief but epic stage in the social justice struggle.
Initially the protest movement leaders concentrated their efforts on reducing the cost of housing in Israel. New to the political stage, they were loath to suggest how their problems could be solved. They insisted that the onus is on the government to provide solutions. Notwithstanding this they promised to work together with Knesset members and lobbyists to promote rent control legislation to better protect tenants from ruthless landlords.
By August the protesters’ demands had become more radical. They wanted a thorough overhaul of the Israeli economy and society.
The list of demands for broader changes in the Israeli society and governance, articulated by protesters and activists, reads as follows :
- A new taxation system based on lower indirect taxes and higher direct taxes.
- Free schooling beginning at day-care centre/kindergarten age.
- An end to privatisation of state-owned enterprises.
- Allocating more resources to further public housing and public transportation.
Prime Minister Netanyahu responded to these demands by appointing a special committee headed by Professor Manuel Trajtenberg. The committee was given a mandate to examine the protesters’ complaints and present recommendations within one month.
The committee was commissioned to investigate:
- Proposals to change priorities in order to improve the economic well-being of working and middle class Israelis.
- Formulating a new taxation system.
- Finding ways to make social services more accessible.
- Ways to increase competition in the Israeli economy .
- Measures required reducing housing prices.
Although the 14 member committee was given a free rein to investigate the complaints their mandate was manacled by budgetary constraints.
Any changes recommended would have to be paid for by internal budgetary cuts, namely “robbing Peter to pay Paul.”
The defence ministry budget appeared to be an easy target. Other ministries would willingly gang up to pare the fat off this relatively large budget.
Cutting back on defence expenditure could be accomplished quickly.
Even Minister of Defence Barak thought there was room to consider certain cuts in the defence budget. Barak is leading the Independence party, a splinter group left in the government after the split in the Labour party.
With Knesset elections two years away or maybe sooner, Barak is eager to score popularity points.
During 1950–66, Israel spent an average of 9% of its Gross Domestic Product on defence. Defence expenditure increased dramatically after both the 1967 and 1973 wars. It reached an all-time high of about 24% of Israel’s GDP in the 1980s.
Following the signing of peace agreements with Jordan and Egypt it was reduced to about 9% of Israel’s GDP, about $15 billion
In 2008, Israel spent $16.2 billion on its armed forces, making it the country with the biggest ratio of defence spending to GDP and as a percentage of the budget of all developed countries.($2,300 per person).
Israel finance ministers have always complained about the lack of transparency in the defence ministry’s budget reports. They say it’s money well spent but not well explained.
Obviously if the budget is itemised in detail it will be easier for the fat-trimmers to suggest where to cut.
Army spokespersons are extremely reluctant to have the army’s funding reduced.
They responded with a time-tested fear tactic pointing to the Iranian centrifuges churning out enriched uranium, the possible unfavourable outcome of the “Arab Spring” and the threats from Hezbollah and Hamas.
Referring specifically to the latter, they warned that cutting the defence budget would adversely affect the acquisition of additional Iron Dome System units.
The Trajtenberg Committee’s findings were published but so far haven’t been adopted by the government. Netanyahu’s coalition partners want to adjust it to suit their needs.
Professor Trajtenberg cautioned the government that shelving the report would have devastating consequences.
The social justice protesters knew that the Trajtenberg Committee manacled by its constraining mandate couldn’t possibly help them.
An alternative unofficial voluntary committee comprised of a formidable battery of economic faculty heads and experts in social welfare matters assembled to help and advise the protesters.
Economic affairs journalist Meirav Arlosoroff compared the two committees in an article she published recently in Yediot Ahronot
“The Trajtenberg Report and the report issued by experts aiding the protest movement part ways on public spending, the labour market and the need to democratise decision-making.
The differences between the Trajtenberg Report, issued at the behest of the government, and the report issued by experts aiding the protest movement aren't in the principles but in the details, the protesters' experts say. Nevertheless, the details matter: The Trajtenberg Report, they claim, won't change government policy materially.
The reports agree on the main goals and on ways of achieving those goals. But the devil's in the details: They part ways on public spending, the labour market and the need to democratise decision-making.
Both agree on the need to increase social equality and public involvement in the socio-economic discourse. Both also agree on three ways to do that: spend more on social services, reform the labour market and lower the cost of living.
The protesters' experts say the government's civilian expenditure has contracted by 5% of Israel’s GDP; hence the protest. They suggest restoring half of that, paid for by tax hikes. The Trajtenberg Report rejects increased government spending. It suggests expanding public services by cutting defence and other spending, and would increase public spending by only half the amount the protestors demand.
Also, while Trajtenberg focused on education (free day care ), the protesters are more interested in healthcare, housing and welfare.”
A few days before the Tel Aviv municipality wardens swooped down on the tent encampments an editorial in the Jerusalem Post advised the protesters to “fold up their tents.” Without a mentioning why the protesters had camped out the editorial chose to concentrate on the collateral damage caused to the residents near the encampments. Furthermore, the Post pointed out that, “The tent protest is by no means an innovative 2011 concept. “ And then proceeded to list earlier similar protests that yielded few tangible results.
In my prejudiced opinion the editorial was belittling the whole protest phenomenon by accentuating its downside and denying its originality.
The protesters alliance comprised of affordable accommodation seekers, students, parents and other people feeling the pinch of rising prices found a novel way of improving their welfare.
The success of the cottage cheese boycott prompted its initiators to send a letter to food companies' CEOs, demanding across the board 30% price reduction. Protest leader Itzik Elrov said, The days of thinking you can overprice products and the public will just keep on buying them are over.
If they refuse, we shall call on the public to boycott these companies, which undervalue their customers."
Well it seems the boycott threat is effective. The Israeli economic publication Calcalist reported that CEO Zehavit Cohen who headed the Tnuva and Psagot food concerns has resigned. In addition, the Tnuva has decided to reduce the prices of a number of the company’s products.
You will read this letter a few hours before Yom Kippur.
If you are fasting I wish you well over the fast.
Beni 7th of October, 2011.
No comments:
Post a Comment