Pocket - Politics - Articles about Israel

One is required to heed
the teachings
of Jewish sages
��
��
��
even when they call left right
and when right is called left
- Sifri, Devarim 17

Israel's political system does an interesting reversal on the concept of dealing with the party that's "in the politician's pocket."

The party in power considers its situation and inevitably determines that their own party is not going to cause any problems. They are "in their pocket," and they will not abandon them. That party thus feels that it has no reason to consider the needs of its own constituents.

The leaders then reach out to the major opposition and to the minor parties. They need their help in order to be able to gain and hold the support that they crave, so that they can remain in power. The resulting negotiations are likely to involve far-reaching compromises.

The politicians in power have just told their electorate that they would follow a certain path or policy. However, in order to attract partners, they now make promises that violate and contradict their statements. The Prime Minister-elect generally has no choice but to reverse his policies in order to attract partners to form a government.

That politician must do more than make idle promises. If he would do so, then his newly-attracted partners would threaten to leave his fledgling government. He must keep the promises to his new partners.

What demands will be made by those in his coalition? Obviously, they are not interested in the prime minister's existing promises. They want him to offer policies that are alien to his own philosophy and to that of his own political party. The opposition partners want to promote their own ideals.

Let's review the situation so far: The prime minister makes promises to his own party. He then promises the opposition different and sometimes contradictory things in order to form his cabinet. Those opposing promises must be kept, since the opposition is not going to remain automatically in his pocket.

Thus, the strongest and most binding promises are made to the opposition. Those promises further the opposition's goals and ideals.

The weakest claims and promises are made before the election, to the candidate's own party. Those promises have no substantial bearing on future government policy. They are empty words, intended to convince potential constituents in the candidate's own party to vote for him.

As a result, voters for the Left find that day-to-day policies reflect one of two platforms:

The demands of the opposition Rightist party

The demands of minor parties who have been co-opted to the coalition.

Leftist goals are sacrificed so that the party remains in power.

History traditionally reflects this strange situation. New territory is gained, and new West Bank settlements are built and strengthened during the pacifist Leftist governments. Yeshivas flourish, desecration of the Shabbat is curbed, chametz is not sold during in public on Pesach, and other needs of the religious people are met during Leftist administrations.

These policies violate Leftist policies. However, the incumbent leftist regimes felt that they had the Left in their pockets, so they tried to stay in power by wooing the Rightist religious parties and those who believed in a Greater Israel.

Similarly, the Rightist parties that are in office pander to the left. Only a strong Rightist leadership could have given away Sinai and Yamit in order to pacify their coalition partners; only the Right could have agreed to the Road Map; and only the Right could have removed funding from Yeshivas across the board.

Thus, the Rightist government is actually perceived as weaker by Israel's unfriendly neighbors.

This circumstance makes voting very, very difficult.

On the other hand, this confusing situation is to be expected during the period preceding the coming of the Mashiach.

Such is the strange reality of Israeli politics.

Where do you want to go now?