Israel's strangest election yet

NECHEMIA MEYERS

I have witnessed no fewer than 15 Israeli elections, but last week's was the most unusual. A centre party and a pensioners party that didn't even exist six months ago won a total of 35 seats and, by election day, the man who founded the centre party and initially led it was in a coma, unable to lead the country towards the goals many of its citizens had endorsed.

No party got an absolute majority in the 120-seat Knesset. That is virtually impossible in a fragmented country with an electoral system based on proportional representation. But Kadima, the party that Ariel Sharon founded and Ehud Olmert led after Sharon's stroke, did better than any other, snaring 28 seats. Be that as it may, Olmert will not find it easy to establish a stable coalition that will back his declared aim of clearly defining Israel's permanent borders and, in consequence, uprooting dozens of Jewish settlements on the West Bank.

His possible partners include a right-wing-religious bloc, but its 30-odd members are less than enthusiastic about such a withdrawal. At the same time, generous support for yeshivot and other institutions of the observant will win over Shas and perhaps other Orthodox and ultra-Orthodox MKs. Also on the right, but not Orthodox, is Israel Beitainu – the "Russian party," led by Avigdor Lieberman, which won a startling 12 seats. While officially against a pullback, Lieberman might agree to a compromise formula.

Parties to the left of Kadima – Labor and Meretz with 24 seats altogether – will certainly be the mainstay of Olmert's coalition. And certainly outside that coalition will be the right-wing Likud, which suffered a humiliating defeat. It won 12 seats this time as against 40 in the 2003 election. Now the Likud is busy trying to reinvent itself, starting with the question of whether its failed leader, Binyamin Netanyahu, should be thrown overboard.

Also remaining outside any future coalition will be the Arab parties, despite the fact that they increased their representation from eight to 10 members. Their success notwithstanding, the majority of Israelis still feel that the government must enjoy a "Jewish majority." Ten years from now, however, when the Arab parties will hold perhaps twice as many Knesset seats, this may no longer be possible.

The ultra-Orthodox parties still have no women among their Knesset representatives, and aren't likely to have in the foreseeable future. But elsewhere in the political spectrum, women are increasingly influential.

Widely admired Tzipi Livni of Kadima will be deputy prime minister and is expected to wield real power. In Labor, hardly less powerful is Prof. Yuli Tamir, who, like Livni, is head and shoulders above most of her male colleagues. Moreover, they are not mere ornaments. Pre-election polls indicated that their respective parties would have gained an additional three seats had they been headed by one of them.

The most surprising female Knesset candidate was Dr. Tzvia Greenfield of Meretz, who differed in almost every respect from that left-wing party's traditional supporters. She is ultra-Orthodox, wig and all, and yet called for a separation of religion and state. However, this is irrelevant as Meretz did very badly and she won't be in the Knesset.

In general, religion and religious coercion were not on the agenda this time. Shinui, a party that won an extraordinary 15 seats in the 2003 elections on a platform of strident opposition to the demands of the Orthodox and ultra-Orthodox, was obliterated. At the same time, it should be pointed out that one of the key points of its platform, a law to permit civil marriage in Israel, is supported by a majority of newly elected Knesset members.

As was to be expected, many voters were strongly influenced by ethnic considerations. Shas, which won 13 seats, again enjoyed massive support from Middle Eastern Jews, who have retained their old-country religiosity. And among immigrants from the former Soviet Union, a large percentage gave their votes to Israel Beitainu or to other right-wing parties. This is because most are extremely hostile to Arabs, the left and Eastern Jews.

The fact that Labor was headed by Moroccan-born and socialist-oriented Amir Peretz certainly didn't help it win Russian votes. Peretz also lost votes in traditional Labor strongholds, where the Ashkenazi old-timers clearly felt "he isn't one of us." At the same time, Peretz was one of the few candidates who sometimes succeeded in creating real excitement among his supporters, with his call for increased social welfare benefits and doubling the minimum wage to $100 a month.

That aside, there was little of the excitement that has characterized earlier elections. Posters were few and far between and the youngsters who in previous contests had held party banners at almost every intersection were largely absent this time. Apparently, they found better things to do.

Voter turnout was about 64 per cent, significantly lower than the 68.9 per cent of three years ago and far lower than the 86.9 per cent of 1949. It was particularly low among young people. This wasn't for the lack of choice. There were an extraordinary 31 parties from which to choose. But out of indifference – or a feeling that the politicians are "a bunch of crooks who fail to keep their promises" – many citizens stayed at home.

From an historical perspective, the most significant aspect of these elections is the fact that, as the late United States president John F. Kennedy put it in his inaugural address, a new generation has taken the helm. None of the major candidates participated in the War of Independence and all were 60 or under. Moreover, not one was a former general.

Henceforth, those aspiring to lead Israel will almost certainly be men and women who earned their reputation in business, public service or the universities, rather than on the battlefield.

Nechemia Meyers is a freelance writer living in Rehovot, Israel.

^TOP