The Palombo Gates

Measured by almost every yardstick the Museum of Art, Ein Harod is an anomaly. Admittedly, kibbutz art museums are not unusual. Indeed, many kibbutz communities have built galleries and museums dedicated to art. Most of them are part of public buildings, often the dining room complex where they occupy a space or hall adjacent to the community library and memorial room. A few, like Ein Harod's art museum are 'stand-alone' structures. Our museum which began in the 1930s as a one-man project, the initiative of a local artist, was housed at first in a wooden hut. In 1948 the corner stone of the museum's first wing was laid at a new site and today it's the third largest art museum in Israel. People visiting the museum for the first time often remark that it's strange to find a museum so large in a rural area. Together with a second museum, a now defunct open-air theatre and two cultural halls, the museum of art formed an intrinsic part of Ein Harod's pioneer philosophy. It was a statement cut in stone rejecting the concept of cultural centralisation.

With the passage of time our Museum of Art has become a "trend setter" and today art in the provinces is as relevant as in the galleries and museums of the main urban centres.

This lengthy preamble serves merely to mention the museum's gates. These impressive wrought-iron gates are immediately recognisable as the work of the late David Palombo; the artist who fashioned the gates to the Knesset courtyard, the portal to our parliament

Writing about the Knesset and its elected members is always difficult, so by way of a digression ahead of the topic I chose to pause by the Palombo Gates before examining what is happening in the halls of government.

By comparison with most other democracies, political parties in Israel are both numerous and fluid. In the last General Election in February 2009, no fewer than 33 parties vied for the 120 seats in the Knesset . Parties are constantly changing name, uniting, splitting and forming alliances. In the last election, 12 political parties secured representation in the Knesset, but only five parties won more than 10 seats

Simultaneously and almost with equal measure, Israeli democracy is a source of both pride and frustration. A few months ago a lead article in The Economist tried to explain our electoral system. "Israelis are rightly proud that their country is the only genuine and functioning democracy in the Middle East, until recently a region dominated by repressive and dictatorial regimes. It is a democracy that has survived repeated wars and that, with a conscript army and formidable military apparatus, remains on a war-like footing. It is a democracy in which the rule of law is so strong that even a president (Moshe Katsav) or a prime minister (Ehud Olmert) can be indicted (for rape and fraud respectively.) On the other hand, Israeli's strange electoral system and fractious political parties virtually guarantee that the government will be a coalition of very different political parties with a strong likelihood that at least one will be a nationalist or ultra-religious one with disproportionate influence in the government. This makes ruling and legislating – even more negotiating with the Palestinians – very difficult, so that on average Israeli governments last only half their permitted term (two years instead of four).

The state was born in war, it has repeatedly engaged in further wars, it has regularly been the subject of suicide bombers and rocket attacks, and it is in a permanent state of war-readiness. It has a large, conscript army and a formidable security service (Mossad). Every family has some connection with the army and many of the leading political figures have had senior experience in the military or intelligence. To an extent unequalled in any other functioning democracy, it is security - and not ideology or economics - that is at the heart of political discourse and policymaking. As in so many states, therefore, democracy here is essentially a work in progress."

The Israel Democracy Institute (IDI) describes itself as an independent, non-partisan "Think-and-Do Tank" that devises ways to strengthen the moral and structural foundations of Israeli democracy. While Israel's policymakers are consumed by crisis management, the IDI attempts to deal with the long-term challenges facing the State in realms such as Political Reform, National Security, Religion and State, and Constitutional Law. Since its establishment in 1991, IDI has supported and advised Israel's elected officials, civil servants, and opinion leaders. Its description of our system of government is slightly more sympathetic. "Israeli policymakers groan under the burden of an overloaded national agenda that ranks among the most complex in the world. Forged in the crucible of war a little more than sixty years ago, Israel’s institutions of government have adapted slowly to the challenges posed by a growing society of extraordinary diversity, living in a near-constant state of emergency. The Israeli Knesset, for example, despite its tremendous array of responsibilities, remains the smallest and most under-staffed House of Representatives in the world; the State of Israel, forced to withstand the relentless pressure on democratic values produced by a state of siege, still lacks a bill of rights that would safeguard individual liberties; and the Israeli political system, faced with momentous challenges that require a strong capacity for decision, is often plagued by instability and paralysis. Lurching from crisis to crisis, Israel’s leaders have little time and few resources to devote to strategic planning and brainstorming."

French political scientist and writer Dominique Moisi is more critical. He asks, "What is wrong with Israel? In the last few years, the Jewish state seems to have done more than all of its combined enemies to delegitimise itself in the eyes of the world. Its leaders’ apparent inability to think in strategic terms, and their indifference to the tribunal of global public opinion, is resulting in growing frustration among its citizens and, what may be more dangerous, deepening international isolation." He fears our leaders, "May have lost the ability to act collectively in a “raison d’état” manner." Moisi the son of a Holocaust survivor raises another possibility, "Or perhaps the weight of Holocaust remembrance has blinded Israel’s leaders and distorted their thinking – in ways that, at the time the State of Israel was created, the Holocaust itself almost miraculously did not." Professor Moisi claims the failure of the peace process in the 1990’s, followed by the coming of the second Intifada, appears to have encouraged the radicalisation of Israel’s extremes while discouraging moderates. The revival of religious parties – in a country created by avowed secularists – opened the way for a more politically powerful but also more nationalistic and intolerant setting. Immigrants from the former Soviet Union have made valuable contributions to Israeli society enriching our culture and the sciences. However, Dominique Moisi breaks a taboo singling out a negative attribute of the Russian immigration. "One could also ask whether the arrival of one million 'Russians,' regardless of their actual ties to Judaism, had a negative effect on Israeli society, by encouraging ideological rigidity and a disdain for democracy that did not prevail before." Finally he arrives at the obvious conclusion, "Or is the explanation for Israel’s current predicament to be found on the more prosaic terrain of the country’s dysfunctional democracy? In reality, all these explanations are largely complementary; none is in contradiction with the others. But the most important cause, the one that should be addressed before all others because it is eroding Israel’s very viability, is the near paralysis of the political system.” Moisi reasons that though Italy can survive bad government and corruption because it is surrounded by the placid environment of the European Union. This is not true of Israel. Here he refers to the "bunker mentality" I mentioned last week. "Protected by a 'security wall' on one side and the sea on the other, Israeli citizens may enjoy the feeling of living on an artificial island from which they can connect directly to the areas of modernity and prosperity in Asia and the West. Yet they are surrounded by a sea of angry and frustrated people, and cannot escape the logic of the region they inhabit." I'm not sure I understand what the "logic of the region" is. However, I do agree with the conclusion Dominique Moisi arrives at. "Israel’s political system, through its complex mechanisms of rigged party selection and absolute proportionality, condemns the country to weak coalition governments and escalating corruption. It must be reformed urgently. Government leaders in Israel cannot afford to spend 90% of their time thinking about how to survive politically at a time when the state’s right to exist is being challenged….." Reform of the country’s political system has simply become a matter of life and death."

Dominique Moisi's analysis of Israel's political system isn't exactly a revelation. Laymen and legislators alike advocate change but know that no ruling party is strong enough to bring about that change. The smaller partners in the ruling coalition government are loath to vote themselves into oblivion.

Prime Minister Netanyahu appears to be unbeatable. General elections are not scheduled to take place till next year. "As it stands, Netanyahu's domestic allies still view the prime minister as the man who cannot lose. An ironclad ruling coalition, an opposition which can barely keep its chairs warm, a White House useful when acquiescent and useful when carping. Re-election is assured. Life is good." Observed columnist Bradley Burston in Haaretz. However, Burston knows that Israeli politics are notoriously unpredictable and wonders if Netanyahu is," The man who cannot lose - or can he? "…..

"Netanyahu's government rests on keeping his friends close and Avigdor Lieberman closer. But the foreign minister's crucial 15-strong faction - on a good day a diplomatic albatross of racism and the Zionism of Nastiness - could implode entirely if Lieberman is indicted for fraud and a range of other allegations." January 13^th will be the day of the albatross.

Burston speculates that, "Shorn of Lieberman's lockstep votes, Netanyahu would command a paltry 51 of the Knesset's 120 seats. Early elections would likely ensue, but if Lieberman were out of the picture, the large Russian vote would be expected to split among a number of parties, with a sizeable percentage sitting out the election altogether."

Even if Lieberman avoids indictment, a number of potentially explosive issues lie alongside Netanyahu's path to re-election. They include how he will react to the High Court ruling instructing him to dismantle illegal outposts and the "unknown entity factor." If former Shas party leader Aryeh Deri decides to head a new religious party list in the coming elections political analysts predict he will win five seats. That's hardly enough to make him a "kingmaker," or is it? His five seats could decide the election between a right bloc at 58 seats and a centre-left at 57. Aryeh Deri is still vacillating, so for the time being Netanyahu is safe and sound. Popular TV anchorman Yair Lapid announced his intention to head a new list in next year's elections. Another Haaretz columnist, Gideon Levy commented on Lapid's decision to join the political fray, "A new political species has arrived in Israel, the celebrity-politician, and this is bad news. It doesn't say much about them but it says a lot about us, the Israelis." Known for his cutting-edge cynicism Levy annoys a lot of people. " Yair Lapid, Noam Shalit and Karnit Goldwasser will certainly liven up the dull political map with bright new colours." Noam Shalit of course is the father of Gilad Shalit. He has announced his intention to win a place in the Labour party's list. Karnit Goldwasser is a war widow and she is expected to join Lapid's list. Major-General Shlomo Yanai (reserves) who recently retired as CEO of Teva Pharmaceutical Industries is another name on the list of aspiring politicians. Currently old soldiers are out of vogue, but news media people are definitely the old-new breed seeking to pass the Palombo Gates. Reviewing the new guys on the block Levy said,“The attitude toward each of them was emotional - and nothing more. Lapid created a pleasant atmosphere and amused us, Shalit and Goldwasser touched our hearts, and all three roused in us a bit of identification. In a country where almost everything is emotional, they were the heroes of the hour, the heroes of the time. We laughed with them and cried with them. We followed them and identified with them; they took us into their lives and the lives of their families in good times and bad, but - oops - we really didn't know them at all.

What we know is the image built around them, and that's enough to make them celebrities. But we don't have the slightest idea about their positions, and that's not enough to make them politicians. No one in this country but their family and friends knows anything about their opinions. Maybe they have opinions and maybe they don't. (My suspicion is they don't.)”

Have a good weekend.

Beni 12^th of January, 2012.