Israeli leaders, such as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, frequently trot out the specious claim that their country is the Middle East’s only democracy, and for decades, US politicians have reflexively amplified that claim without examination.
Some, like former US president Barack Obama, have gone further, to laud Israel as the region’s only true democracy.
Both assertions are easily disproved. The pedantic argument is that there are other democracies in the region, and two of them — Turkey and Lebanon — have been around longer than Israel has existed as a modern nation. The more pertinent point might be that, notwithstanding Obama’s presidential plaudits, a state that reduces 20 percent of its population to second-class status is not a true democracy.
However, events of the past few months have demonstrated that Israeli society, distinct from the Israeli state, has strong democratic credentials. The massive rallies against Netanyahu’s plan to neuter the country’s judicial system have been popular, peaceful and persistent, and now it looks like they have been productive.
In a prime-time address, Netanyahu said that he would pause his push for parliamentary approval of the legislation, saying: “I am not ready to divide the nation.”
Netanyahu’s coalition, in office since December last year, has been seeking to rein in the Israeli Supreme Court, which has historically blocked right-wing goals, such as settlement-building in the occupied West Bank and exempting the Orthodox from military service. The prime minister wants to make the judiciary more answerable to the executive, and is using his coalition’s slender majority to ram through far-reaching legislation.
A law approved last week stipulates that only the Knesset and Cabinet can declare the prime minister unfit and remove him from office. (Netanyahu is under trial for corruption.)
Protests against these changes have swelled in the past few weeks, drawing hundreds of thousands. Inevitably, the rallies have drawn comparisons with the Arab Spring protests of 2011, with the implication that Israelis are learning from, rather than setting an example for, others in the region.
However, democracy, as the Middle East has shown many times, is about more than elections and protests. It is also about institutions that push back against the autocratic ambitions of leaders.
Here, too, Israel has passed the tests: From civic groups to labor unions, all manner of institutions have come out against Netanyahu’s plans. Israeli embassies and consulates were shut on Monday as diplomats joined other government workers in a general strike.
Perhaps most remarkable of all, large sections of the military establishment have openly opposed the judicial “reforms.”
This brings to mind the role played by the Tunisian military and civic bodies in sustaining the protests that brought down the dictatorship in 2011.
Israel’s business community, less dependent on state patronage than its Arab counterparts, has been bolder in speaking out against any changes that weaken the independence of the country’s judiciary. Their argument that this would be bad for business has been echoed by international credit rating organizations, which warn of a negative effect to the economy.
“Stronger fiscal and debt metrics may not be sufficient to offset weakening institutions if the content of the judicial reforms and the way they are passed point to such weakening,” Moody’s said in a report, adding that capital inflows to the technology sector, a critical part of the economy, could be especially vulnerable.
Other tests are likely to come — of vigilance and stamina. Even if the judicial overhaul is set aside for now, Netanyahu might return to it, whether for reasons of self-preservation, to forestall judicial action on the corruption charges against him or under pressure from the far-right elements of his governing coalition. When that happens, the demonstrators and Israeli institutions would need to show that their ardor for an independent judiciary is undiminished.
However, the ultimate test for any democracy is freedom for all citizens. Conspicuously absent from the demonstrations are Palestinians, who have good reason to feel they have no dog in this particular fight. Few of those Israeli individuals or institutions that are taking a stance against the judicial overhaul have protested against the injustices visited on Palestinians.
Until that changes, Israeli society will have no more claim to represent “true” democracy than the Israeli state.
Bobby Ghosh is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering foreign affairs. Previously, he was editor-in-chief at the Hindustan Times, managing editor at Quartz and international editor at Time.
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
RSS