Cracks are starting to appear in Israel’s robust public relations
strategy. It has taken decades for the Israeli government to convince
supportive governments in the West, most notably the US, that the country was a
full-fledged democracy. The apparent hurdle has been the unavoidable reality of
Israel’s control of millions of Palestinians. In the face of this glaring
inequality, the country has managed to market itself as the Middle East’s only
democracy. This core talking point for Israel’s supporters worldwide is now at
risk.
اضافة اعلان
Israel’s recently elected government — the most openly right-wing in the country’s
history — is pushing a proposal that would effectively remove the power of
the Supreme Court. With a simple majority, the Israeli parliament could
overrule the Supreme Court and set unchecked laws on everything from free
speech to voting rights. The proposed law, which has passed the first of three readings in parliament,
includes a provision that laws passed by the parliament are unreviewable by the
Israeli court system. According to Israeli law professor Gila Stopler, the stage has been “set for the deepest and
most dangerous constitutional — and even existential — crisis in Israel’s
history.”
According to Israeli law professor Gila Stopler, the stage has been “set for the deepest and most dangerous constitutional — and even existential — crisis in Israel’s history.”
As noted above, Israel is not a full-fledged democracy because it
denies millions of Palestinians under its control rights on both sides of the
green line. Thus, the fever pitch around these judicial reforms is that they
will affect the country’s Jewish citizens, who have full democratic rights.
Even if these reforms fail to pass, Israel will remain a half-baked democracy
in which rights are granted based on ethnicity and religion. If Israel passes
the judicial reform, it will just erode the democratic process for a select
group of its citizens.
The Supreme Court’s track record
The politicians driving this historic overhaul have long argued
that the Supreme Court is an unabashedly political body hiding behind a veneer
of judicial legitimacy. Over time, the Supreme Court has been one of the only
government bodies that has pushed back against aspects of Israel’s occupation
of Palestinian land.
This is not to say that the Supreme Court has an anti-occupation
bias. Instead, the court has ruled in favor of Palestinians regarding issues
such as the Israeli separation barrier and other land
takeovers. Perhaps more importantly for the judicial reforms, the court has
also counterbalanced the deep-seated corruption pervading the Israeli political
establishment. It is no shock that Benjamin Netanyahu, who is currently facing
major corruption allegations in the court system, is the prime minister
overseeing this dramatic change.
Economic consequences
The judicial crisis has set off numerous frantic pleas from
Israel’s steadfast supporters and nationwide protests. Israel’s business
establishment, especially in the vaunted high-tech sector, has been among the
most ardent critics of the judicial overhaul.
Even if these reforms fail to pass, Israel will remain a half-baked democracy in which rights are granted based on ethnicity and religion.
Several influential technology CEOs have said in no
uncertain terms that they will look to move their businesses outside of the
country if the reforms pass. Whether or not these threats amount to posturing
remains to be seen. The Israeli Shekel is down more than 6 percent
over the last month and is currently at its lowest level against the dollar in
three years.
Israel’s media pivot
Ardent Israel supporters such as Michael Bloomberg and New York Times
columnist Thomas Friedman have used their
platforms to warn that if the reforms become law, it will significantly blow
their pro-Israel efforts in the US. They might be jumping the gun. If the
reforms pass, Israel’s PR strategy will have to shift.
We are already seeing evidence of this taking place. Groups such
as the Israeli-American Council have already rolled
out new talking points minimizing the reforms and suggesting that any criticism
of Netanyahu is antisemitic. While these talking points are divorced from
reality, it is vital to focus on how Israel is currently using the media
diversion from the reforms to push through its long-term objectives.
Undeniable annexation
Last week, the horrific settler attack on the Palestinian
village of Huwara demonstrated the lengths the current Israeli government will
go to encourage and enable settler violence against Palestinians. A couple of
days before the attack on Huwara, the new Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich
was given full governing authority over many aspects of
life in the West Bank, including urban planning, building, and infrastructure.
This was remarkable because transferring the authority of a territory under
military occupation to a civilian minister is a form of formal annexation.
After the authority was handed over, the leading Israeli human
rights lawyer Michael Sfard wrote on Twitter
that “today the government of Israel has taken an action which entails de
jure annexation of the West Bank”.
Yet, these developments barely escaped the Israeli mediasphere
despite all the coverage of judicial reforms and the pleas from columnists like
Friedman that the world must save Israel's soul.
The regime, uncloaked
However the reforms end, the debate might have a positive
long-term effect. A new discussion about the hollow nature of Israeli democracy
is starting to break through decades of Israeli PR. Such conversations need to
happen if the international community is going to get serious about the reality
of the Israeli regime.
There cannot be any genuine peace deals between Israel and the Palestinians if the true nature of the Israeli government is cloaked in fantasy.
There cannot be any genuine peace deals between Israel and the
Palestinians if the true nature of the Israeli government is cloaked in
fantasy. This is not to say there will be any change to the peace process
because of judicial reform — quite the opposite. But at least there is a slight
chance for a more honest discussion about Israel and its views on democracy.
Joseph Dana is a writer based in South Africa
and the Middle East. He has reported from Jerusalem, Ramallah, Cairo,
Istanbul, and Abu Dhabi. He was formerly editor-in-chief of emerge85,
a media project based in Abu Dhabi exploring change in emerging markets.
Syndication Bureau.
Read more Opinion and Analysis
Jordan News
.jpg)
.jpg)
