Mahzor

New York Public Library

Churches

Sarajevo Haggadah

Mah Nishtanah

Sarajevo haggadah

Antaea Darom

Israeli women's art

Action

Torah as music

Ben Heine

Action

ceramic bowl

Mohammad Said Kalash, "Offering Reconciliation" exhibit (photo: Ilan Amihai)

Action

Punch and Judy/Pinchas and Jamila

Avi Katz

Action

David Grossman

Ben Heine

Action

Eldrige Street shul

Lower East Side

Action

Dove

Ben Heine

Action

Two birds

Hoda Jamal

Action

Israeli and Palestinian boys

from documentary, Promises

Action

Cat in the Hat

Yiddish version

Action

Daylight through the Wall

Banksy: graffiti art on Separation Wall

Action

Maurice Sendak's Brundibar set

New Victory Theater (photo: Nan Melville/NYT)

Action

Daniel Barenboim, West-Eastern Divan Orchestra

Palestinian-Israeli musical ensemble (photo: Kerstin Joensson/AP)

Action

Great Day on Eldrige Street

N.Y.'s klezmer greats celebrate shul rededication (photo: Leo Sorel)

Action

Joint Appeal for Peace

(Avi Katz)

Joint Appeal for Peace

Ketubah, Ancona, Italy (1772)

(Jewish Theological Seminary library)

Ancona ketubah

Posts Tagged ‘israeli-democracy’

Shin Bet Restricts Gag Orders, Detainee ‘Disappearances’

Thursday, December 8th, 2011

When I first began writing this blog, a question that always nagged at me was: why?  Why write a blog?  Who does it impact?  What does it change?  Now, these questions don’t bother me as much.  But if I ever needed an answer to them I’d have it now, based on an Israeli security source, who notes that the new Shin Bet chief, Yoram Cohen, has ended (according to his/her claim) the agency’s use of gag orders and “disappearances” of detainees.  The new director appears to have learned a lesson his predecessor, Yuval Diskin, did not: that when they engage in such draconian conduct, they only prove the arguments of their detractors, who say they are among the chief violators of civil liberties in Israeli society.

In other words, the oversight, as meager as it may be, by this blog and many others in Israel of the actions of the security apparatus has an impact.  According to my source (and only time will tell if s/he is right), there will be no more secret arrests of Anat Kamm or Ameer Makhoul or many others whose detentions I’ve exposed here.  Of course, it would even better were these individuals not arrested at all and instead given medals.  But that, alas, is too much to hope for at the present moment.  We have to be content with the fact that the system may have changed incrementally for the good.

Here is an example from the Hebrew press of the way the new system works.  A security arrest is made and announced the same day in the press.  Those arrested are named in the article.

Of course, an agency as set in its ways as Shabak is liable to take a long time to truly change its colors and there may be backsliding to the old ways.  For example and contrary to what the source claims, I’ve noticed cases in which arrestees still either aren’t named or their names are placed under gag order.  Recent examples, are the mosque burning in Tuba Zangariyye and the Peace Now attacks.  In both examples, detainees or suspects were not identified and I named them in both cases.  It’s possible that some of these cases involved the police rather than Shabak and the former may follow different rules.  It’s possible that Shabak is more willing to name Palestinian detainees and less willing to expose Jewish ones.  At any rate, we’ll have to observe for ourselves (and you too will, dear readers) whether they’ve changed their spots.  If they have, we should give credit.  If they haven’t, we will be here to note that as well.

East Jerusalem Palestinians Must Vote, If Not in PA Elections Then in Israeli Ones

Wednesday, December 7th, 2011

Avi Issacharoff has penned another one of his stenographic reports that could’ve been dictated (and very well might’ve been) by the right wing political or military leadership.  In it, he claims that Hamas and the PA will demand that in the coming Palestinian elections Hamas be allowed to run in East Jerusalem as it did in the last 2006 elections.  They will do so, the reporter claims, in order to embarrass the Israeli government since they “know” the far-right Israeli government is unlikely to permit Hamas to run.  In the eyes of Issacharoff and his sources, it’s the obligation of the Palestinians to accommodate the political interests of Israeli nationalists.  Since East Jerusalem Palestinians live in territory annexed by Israel if the latter allowed Hamas to run for office there it would give the Islamist group a foot in the door to gain legitimacy both among Palestinians and within Israeli-controlled territory.

East Jerusalem Palestinians must be allowed to vote for elected PA representatives.  They must have the same choices other Palestinians in the West Bank or Gaza have.  If they don’t, then they are not fully enfranchised.  If that is so, then Israel must allow them to vote in Israeli elections and preferably make them Israeli citizens.  If neither of these alternatives happen, then Israel is an apartheid racist state which offers Jews a superior level of citizenship, Israeli Palestinians a middling level of citizenship, and East Jerusalemites almost no rights at all.

Israel has to decide which option to follow.  Refusing to allow East Jerusalemites to vote is impermissible and should be sanctioned by international bodies if it happens.

MK Danny Danon: Latest in Racist Legislative Fashion

Monday, December 5th, 2011
danny danon

Likud's Boy Wonder: Danny Danon

If you want to check on the pulse of Israeli fashion–that is the “fashion” of Israeli racism–you can do no better than study MK Danny Danon’s legislative agenda.  I don’t usually write about individual bills since there are so many far-right imbeciles who must have their say and they come up with more nonsense than you can shake a stick at.  But for MK Danon, for whom Matan Lurey has developed an apt moniker, ‘MKKK,’ I make an exception.

His new bill would demand that any Israeli seeking any sort of government ID whether a driver’s license, passport, graduation certificate, would have to sign a loyalty oath (Hebrew).  The provision is designed to disenfranchise Palestinian Israelis who, Danon presumes, would not do so.  One of the many lunatic aspects of this bill is that non-Jewish Israelis would have no problem signing a statement expressing loyalty to Israel.  Because they are loyal to Israel.  An Israel, that is, that is democratic and offers them rights as citizens.  This fact, that his bill would not achieve his aim, undoes all the venom Danon is attempting to inject into the social discourse with this harkening back to Nuremberg-type laws.  For Palestinian Israelis to refuse to sign, it would have to include a provision demanding loyalty to “the Jewish state, that is Israel.”  Even if such a bill with such language did pass, I doubt it could pass muster in the Supreme Court.  That is, unless new legal provisions permit a politicization of the nomination process allowing the Court to swing toward the settler outlook.

As if he hadn’t done enough to raise the volume of Jewish racism in Israel, Danon also added this zinger:

Israeli Arabs disrespect the laws of the nation having far higher rates of criminality than any other ethnic group.

Among his claims is that these Israeli citizens have voiced support for those “calling for the destruction of the State of Israel.”  Of course, he doesn’t say which Israelis did this, what they said, which group they allegedly supported, nor did he offer any support for the claim that the group mentioned supported the destruction of Israel.  Danny has a wee small problem with evidence.  He’s much better at the smear than at offering facts.

Another Likud ‘solon,’ Ofir Akunis, made the brilliant observation, in defending the Knesset’s draconian set of anti-democracy bills, that Joe McCarthy “was right in every word, the fact is -there were Soviet agents.”  This is the same distinguished advocate for free speech and democratic values who co-sponsored the bill which would outlaw foreign funding for Israeli NGOs.  In fact, in this interview he was arguing that Israeli NGOs. by accepting foreign money, are agents of foreign powers.  That makes the United Nations and European Union the equivalent of 1950s-era Communist subversives.  If you follow this argument to its proper insane conclusion you could argue that any American Jewish group that received any funding from Israel or an Israeli organization was an agent of a foreign power (i.e. Israel).  Is that really where you want to take this argument??

You have to wonder what planet these people are living on.  Akunis attempted to dig himself out of the hole he was in by claiming after the fact that McCarthy was only right in the sense that he pointed out Communists in the U.S. government.  You see, there’s a problem with idiots like this attempting to expound on subjects they know nothing about.  I’d rather him blather on about Israeli history.  At least he’d have half a chance of being accurate once in a while.  About U.S. history he’s hopeless.  McCarthy didn’t uncover a single Communist, though he sure as hell tried hard enough and ruined enough careers in the process.

H/t @OriNir_APN.

New Truthout Story on Assault on Israeli Democracy and Peace Now Intimidation Campaign

Sunday, December 4th, 2011

I’ve just published a new piece in Truthout giving an overview of my latest reporting on the assault on Israeli democracy underway via the Knesset and Prime Minister Netanyahu.  The piece focuses on the death threats and vandalism directed at Peace Now by Dor Oved, who’s being protected by an Israeli judge’s gag order designed to protect his father, Shahar Oved from exposure since he’s a Shin Bet officer.  I think this is a major abuse of the rule of law in a democratic society and have therefore broken the gag.  I hope, as has happened with other stories of gags I broke involving Anat Kamm and Dirar Abusisi, that mainstream journalists will take up this worthy cause and begin reporting the story as well.  This is the only way the Israeli judicial and media system will think better of this short-sighted policy of protecting the powerful and well-connected.

I was interviewed today on Kol Yisrael by Elihu Ben Onn, the late night talk show host.  The interview starts around minute 23:00 of the program.  A warning: it uses Castup technology which I find extremely annoying.  I can never get Castup video or audio to work on Google Chrome or Firefox.  I recommend using IE, with which it seems more compatible.  The interviewer is a bit intrusive at times and I didn’t succeed in conveying the full breadth of my views given his interruptions, but considering that the show was heard by Israelis not only in Israel but all over the world, it was a useful exercise.

On a totally different subject, my website has had a few hiccups lately which I hope most of you haven’t noticed.  But if you get any error messages when you try to access my site could you e mail me with any information you have when this happens including the message you see.  If you are a subscriber to my daily digest plugin, you may not have received e mail notices of my new posts.  If you used to receive such notices and haven’t on a daily basis, this has to do with a conflict between my web host and the plugin generating the e mails.  I’m working to resolve this issue.  If you begin receiving these messages please let me know.  And if you don’t receive them but believe you should, let me know that as well.

Amos Schocken: Israel ‘Apartheid Regime,’ ‘Jewish Lobby Addicted’ to Settlement Ideology

Saturday, November 26th, 2011
amos schocken

Haaretz publisher, Amos Schocken

Amos Schocken published an eye-opening, remarkably candid op-ed  (and Hebrew) in Haaretz about the extent of the catastrophe that Israel currently faces, which includes a raft of repressive bills and laws threatening everything from freedom of speech to freedom of the press to academic freedom to minority Arab rights.  We’re used to the agonizing of liberal Zionists who decry the obvious but always seem to stop short of acknowledging just how bad things are, and how radical the solution needs to be.  Schocken, to his credit, faces things I’ve never heard a liberal Zionist face, and calls a spade a spade in his article.  The “Jewish lobby” and even the Supreme Court come in for their share of criticism.

He begins with a 1993 speech by Yitzhak Rabin to the Knesset, in which he warns of the dangers of Iran seeking a nuclear weapon.  But unlike Netanyahu, who uses this possibility to spook the nation into submission to authoritarianism, in much the same way Bush-Cheney did in the aftermath of 9/11, Rabin tells Israel that we must seize on Iran’s pursuit in order to pursue peace:

The possibility that someday Iran might have nuclear weapons must worry us, and is one of the reasons why we must exploit this window of opportunity and progress toward peace.

What a difference a day and a prime minister make, don’t they?  Bibi the manipulator, the exploiter of national insecurity in order to bring a nationalist settler state; Rabin a wise warrior who knew the horrors of war well enough to know that peace was preferable to a nuclear arms race.  But, Schocken continues, Rabin’s way as represented by the Oslo accord was overwhelmed by the settler enterprise, one of whose acolytes assassinated him.

Though liberal Zionists like Gershom Gorenberg and many other Haaretz columnists have decried the settler enterprise for decades, few have been willing to acknowledge the rot it has caused inside Israel.  Few have been willing to go so far as to acknowledge it is likely to destroy nation.  For the conventional liberal Zionist, Israel can be saved by degrees, by small improvements, by nibbling around the edges of injustice.  Schocken seems beyond this.

To his credit, Schocken doesn’t flinch from seeing that mess Israel is in and calling it what it is.  Here are some memorable passages:

According to the Gush Emunim ideology, Israel is for Jews.  Not just the Palestinians of the Territories are irrelevant, but Palestinian citizens of Israel too are subject to the same oppression and denial of their citizenship.  This is a strategy involving seizure of territory and apartheid.

…This ideology sees in the creation of an Israeli apartheid regime something that is necessary to realizing its goals.  It has no problem with using illegal, even criminal acts because its sacred mission is seen as above the law and having no real relation to the laws of Israel.  Rather, it depends on a perverted interpretation of Judaism.

…This ideology has achieved some of its greatest successes in the U.S…Whether this is due to the enormous numbers of Christian evangelicals, or the problematic relationship between Islam and the west, or the Jewish lobby’s addiction to Gush Emunim, the results are clear: it may no longer even be possible for a U.S. president to pursue an activist agenda against Israeli apartheid.

Paragraphs like the last one will make Bill Daroff howl, as well they should.  Because Daroff is not Israel’s friend.  He is the settlers’ friend.  And we, like this wise newspaperman, must make a distinction.  We must tell the world, Jewish and non-Jewish, that there are Jews who have Israel’s long-term interest at heart, and those who will hasten its demise.  The “Jewish lobby” is in the latter category.  Everyone must know this.  We must not allow them to represent us or speak for us.  We must stop StandWithUs and The Israel Project (and sometimes even J Street) and their like to suck the oxygen out of the Israel debate.  We must tell them that they have no monopoly on either power or (self-) righteousness.

Schocken proceeds to link the lawlessness of “Israeli apartheid” to an upsurge in authoritarianism:

It cannot permit opposition or criticism.  It must eliminate the latter and frustrate any effort to restrain its actions…Any actions which are illegal must be made legal by rewriting the law or by reinterpreting existing law so that what was illegal is now redefined as legal.  Similar things happened before in other times and places [a distinct reference to Nazi Germany].

In such a historical context, we see bills against human rights NGOs, against the press and free speech, and an anti-boycott law which seeks to prevent anyone from dealing with Israeli apartheid in the same way the world dealt with South African apartheid.

Even the Israeli Supreme Court, the crown jewel in the apparatus of liberal Zionism comes in for harsh criticism:

It permitted the settler enterprise and essentially served as a partner to it.

But now, Haaretz’s publisher says, the Court has proven an impediment and must be eliminated as an obstacle to the triumph of this authoritarian regime.  Because the Court has refused to permit settlements on privately owned Palestinian land (i.e. land theft), the Court must be ‘packed’ with judges who themselves live on such land and who will recognize that there can be no such concept as privately owned Palestinian land, because this is Jewish land given to this people by divine decree.  Schocken notes the similarity in this theological approach between Gush Emunim and radical Islamists like Hamas (though I believe Hamas has shown far more flexibility in adapting its ideology than settlerism has).

Schocken closes by raising some deeply troubling questions:

Can there be any future for such an Israel?  Even beyond the question of whether Jewish morality and experience permits such a situation, it puts Israel into an inherently unstable, dangerous position.  It puts Israel into the predicament of living with, by, and under the sword.  Whether the sword is a third Intifada, overthrow of the Egyptian peace accord, or an Iranian nuclear weapon.  This Yitzhak Rabin understood [and Bibi does not].

I think we have to begin to use the F-word though the Israeli publisher doesn’t: we are seeing an incipient Israeli fascism.  Perhaps not yet full-blown fascism.  But like a cancer it begins with one cell and spreads to an entire organ and eventually infects the entire organism.  I don’t know whether this illness is terminal.  But it could very well be.  Temporizing no longer works.  Only a radical transformation can.  One that stamps out setttlerism as a viable political force.  One that embraces whole-heartedly democracy over Jewish triumphalism.  Note I did not say “Judaism,” as religion will play an important role in any future role.  But it will never, if Israel is to survive, give members of one religion the right to deprive members of another of their legitimate rights as citizens.

Knesset Bill Would Criminalize Speech

Friday, November 25th, 2011
20111125-210829.jpg

Hebrew summary of provisions of draconian new libel bill which passed first reading in Knesset (Ynet)

Among a raft of new authoritarian bills and legislation proposed or passed by the current Knesset is one that will essentially criminalize speech. Under a proposed new libel law, plaintiffs would no long even have to prove damages to win tens of thousands from defendants. Penalties in some categories will be increased six times and the highest damage award will rise to $500,000.

The bill, which handily passed it’s first reading, would harm all Israeli, but hit bloggers especially hard (Hebrew). I know this from my own personal experience since Rachel Neuwirth did sue me unsuccessfully and Aussie Dave and David Yerushalmi threatened to do so, but never followed through with their threats. There are few NGOs prepared to defend bloggers in such circumstances and how many of us have personal means to do so? A Los Angeles law firm took my case pro bono and spent four years defending me, and the plaintiff is still appealing her loss! If you don’t have a friend who’s a senior partner in a major law firm where do you stand?

There are even fewer such resources for Israeli bloggers. Plus the obstacles in the path of their reporting are even higher than those facing me. They have gag orders and censorship. They have powerful oligarchs with deep pockets and lawyers willing to use the law for the purpose of harassment. They have a draconian security establishment which is a law unto itself. They face a quiescent judicial system designed to favor corporate and state interests at the expense of the individual.

Bloggers in Israel are the canaries in the coal mine of Israeli democracy. The first blogger thrown in prison or bankrupted by such court action under this law will close down a curtain of freedom of the press in the country.

Itzik Sporta of HaOketz said it well when he derided the Knesset for wasting it’s time addressing “problems” that don’t exist rather than ones raised by the social justice movement which cry out for resolution. Israel has the fifth greatest income disparity between rich and poor among OCED nations. One quarter of Israelis live in poverty. Among children, the number is closer to half. There are huge reservoirs of hate and injustice among ethnic groups. Not to mention serious conflicts with its neighbors to be resolved. Instead they’re fixated on helping celebrities, politicians, and oligarchs getting their pound of flesh from the hard working journalists of their country, who labor on behalf of the common person, giving them enough information to make sense out of the mess their country is in.

We might want to start things off after this monstrosity is passed by bringing the first prosecution against the law itself for libeling free speech and press in Israel. One wag quoted in The Marker article says he’s going to exploit the new racist law declaring Israel a Jewish state by suing every Israeli Palestinian who denies it. Then he plans to take the $75,000 he wins from Israeli Palestinian social satitist Sayed Kashua (no doubt a personal friend, I hope) and hire the highest priced psychiatrist he can find to tell the world, he and his country are not insane.

Whether this schandeh of a bill ever passes or not, the damage is done. Merely proposing it has set loose the jackals who circle round Israeli democracy seeking to pick off the weak and vulnerable. First the bloggers, then the journalists, then the NGOs. By the time they come for the average citizen it will already be too late, as Pastor Niemoller so famously wrote. Even Bibi’s own mouthpiece, Yisrael HaYom, warns of the dangers of the law; which is quite ironic since the competition, once it can no longer report anything interesting, will fold and leave the field to Bibiton. The triumph of authoritarianism in Israeli life will only benefit Bibi’s media properties, which will not be challenged under these new measures.

If I were more selfish I’d see this development as a boon to someone like me not subject to Israeli law. After all, when Israel’s democracy dies there only be greater need for blogs like mine. But I’d much rather see Israeli democracy and free speech triumph. Until it does, I will continue doing what I do. And if things turn worse, Israelis who value a free press and who deride secrecy and government impunity may see this blog as their resource and in a way, their insurance policy. I will do whatever I can to protect Israeli sources and bloggers from their work being criminalized. I hope it doesn’t come to Israeli bloggers turning their websites into samizdat, underground knowledge whose sources and web servers must be hidden from the prying eyes of the intelligence agents and wrongdoers who seek to root out the good guys.

Israeli Police Silence Peace Radio Station

Saturday, November 19th, 2011
israeli police silence all for peace radio

All for Peace Radio's comment on its silencing by the Israeli police

Israeli police have just succeeding in murdering peace (Hebrew)–or at least the voice of peace that Israelis and Palestinians can hear on the radio.   Police summoned the Radio Kol HaShalom (“All for Peace” Radio, which is a play on Kol HaShalom, Abie Natan’s radio station which was called “Voice of Peace”) station director to a three-hour interrogation under warning (anything he said could be used to build a criminal case against him), during which they demanded that he sign a statement agreeing to cease broadcasts to Israel (not I presume to Palestinians, though it would be hard to beam a signal that reached one but not the other).  They also demanded that he call the station and direct the radio engineer to take the station off the air.  If he refused, he was told that police would raid the station and do it themselves.  Presumably, they’d confiscate the radio equipment which had taken months and months to arrive from abroad due to delays imposed by, you guessed it, the Israeli police, who didn’t want the station to go on air to begin with.

The blog post I linked to notes that staff of the station met a number of times during the seven years it was on air with officials of the ministry of communication, including the minister Eli Attias.  Not once did any civilian official complain about the station or threaten to take it off the air.  Now, all of a sudden, the ministry has decided that the “law” must be upheld.  It should be noted that the station has sought a license from Israel for years to broadcast and the government has never approved one.  This conveniently has allowed the authorities to do precisely what they did.  This is freedom of expression and a free press, Israel-style.

The station has been off-air since November 17th.  It had broadcast a mix of talk shows, interviews, and pop music.  I’ve listened to and been interviewed by the station and it wasn’t incendiary or politically radical at all.   It had a feel-good self-help orientation and attempted to promote fairly innocuous values of brotherhood and tolerance without engaging in political advocacy.  It did, however, explicitly endorse a two-state solution.  Apparently, that isn’t a political program endorsed by the Israeli police.

The station also endorsed freedom of speech and democratic values for both societies.  Apparently free speech and democracy are also threatening to the government censors otherwise known as the police.

Among the issues the station addressed was women’s rights and sexual violence, a criticism the pro-Israel crowd loves to point up as a “deficiency” of “Arab culture.”  The police never stopped to think that All for Peace might actually encourage Palestinians to believe that Israelis want peace.  Or perhaps that’s what threatened them because the police don’t believe in peace, but rather prefer constant tension and conflict.  After all, this would mean a career of full employment and high budgets for them.

In Palestine, All for Peace broadcasts legally and the PA has never had a problem with its programming.  One can presume though that if an East Jerusalem kindergarten can be shuttered by the police because its founders are alleged terrorists, that pop music that could be heard by both Israelis and Palestinians would be considered equally subversive.

The Israeli blog reporting this story closed with this passage:

It seems that during these days in which the Israeli Knesset is beset by a wave of anti-democratic legislation, the authorities saw fit to stop the broadcast of the sole station which enabled, in an open studio, deliberations on behalf of democracy.

All for Peace Radio was a small media fry in the Israeli pond.  It was no Channel 10 or Haaretz.  But it was the canary in the coal mine.  As went All for Peace so will go Channel 10.  Bibi Netanyahu prefers to control the media to the extent he can.  That is why all he may need to do is silence these media outlets for the others to get the message if they cross they line they’ll be punished as well.

The station will continue to fight for its right to broadcast and appeal the decision.  The next time you hear Abe Foxman and Alan Dershowitz crowing about Israeli democracy, remember posts like this.  On a related matter, I’m also tickled by Gershon Gorenberg’s new book which also touts Israeli democracy, according to this Amazon blurb:

Refuting…strident attacks [against Israel], Gorenberg shows that the Jewish state is, in fact, unique among countries born in the postcolonial era: It began as a parliamentary democracy and has remained one. An activist judiciary has established civil rights. Despite discrimination against its Arab minority, Israel has given a political voice to everyone within its borders.

To be fair, something Gorenberg wasn’t to me when he lied in calling me an anti-Zionist, Gorenberg does criticize Israel and its democracy.  But clearly he’s a liberal throwing a sop to all those classical Zionists who can’t bear the thought that they’ve lost the cherished Zionist dream of an exclusivist Jewish state.  He allows liberal Zionists to clear their conscience by conceding there are things wrong with Israel, while desperately clinging to the concept that Israel, as expressed in contemporary terms, remains fundamentally sound.

For those in the hasbara crowd who go through this blog with a fine tooth, these comments are not meant to be construed as a denunciation of Israel as a nation, but rather a criticism of the current undemocratic ways in which it is governed.  Contrary to Gorenberg (at least as represented in this blurb), Israel does not give a political voice to “everyone” within its borders.  It gives full voice to Jewish citizens and a muffled voice at best to Palestinian citizens.  That is why Gorenberg, Ethan Bronner, and the liberal Zionists do such a disservice to Israeli political reality and their readers beyond its borders.

Netanyahu Gags Shabak Director, Subverts Knesset Oversight Regarding Eilat Attack

Sunday, September 4th, 2011
yoram cohen shabak chief

Yoram Cohen, Shabak chief, usually gags others; this time he is gagged

For those of you who harbor quaint notions about Israeli democracy, tonight’s post should further disabuse you of your illusions.  In most western democracies, the legislative branch of government exercises some oversight of military and intelligence functions.  In the U.S., this includes House and Senate committees charged with reviewing, approving and funding the U.S. military and various intelligence agencies, both overseas and domestic.  Though there is always a tenseness in this relationship and the executive branch at times resists such oversight, the legislative bodies have ultimate authority and can use their subpoena power if their rights to oversee their charges are rejected.

Not so in Israel, where civilian bodies, including both the Knesset and even the prime minister, often exercise nominal control of these government functions.  I’ve reported in the recent past, that Defense Minister Ehud Barak refused to allow chief of staff Benny Gantz to testify to a Knesset committee about Israel’s covert programs to contain Iran.  Now, none other than the prime minister himself has directed the Shabak chief to refuse to appear before the same committee to address questions about the Eilat terror attack.  Yoram Cohen, Shabak director, sent an underling in his place who also refused to discuss the terror attack when asked point-blank by the committee, which is chaired by former chief of staff Shaul Mofaz.

Haaretz has only reported the latter fact, that a Shabak officer refused to answer questions about Eilat.  In truth, my own well-placed source confirms that Netanyahu refused to allow Cohen to even appear before Mofaz’ committee.  Perhaps one should even question the Israeli media itself as to why it hasn’t reported that Netanyahu actually refused to allow Israel’s most senior intelligence officer to testify before the Knesset.  Is my source the only one who knows this happened?  Or do other reporters know the truth and can’t or won’t report it?  Frankly, I don’t know the answer.  I only know that Haaretz and other outlets reporting the story are only reporting half of it, which in turn does a disservice to the Israeli public and Israeli democracy (or what’s left of it).

Ynet indirectly affirms the report of my source by quoting Avi Dichter, himself a former Shabak chief and now Knesset MK, as saying that when he was its director he appeared before the Knesset committee Mofaz chairs.  Maariv quotes Dichter using extremely harsh language, labelling the decision a “gag order” placed upon the Shabak director and chief of IDF intelligence.

Clearly, this is an attempt, so far quite successful, by the prime minister to deny a legitimate legislative body oversight of the IDF and intelligence bodies and to review failures when they occur.  If such a thing happened in America, there would be immediate subpoenas filed to compel Cohen to testify and the matter would end up in court.  Eventually, even if the president dug his heels in hard (which rarely happens, these things are usually ironed out), the court would likely find the executive would have to bend to Congress’ will–at least in terms of appearing and answering questions, if not changing policy.

What is truly poisonous about this is that it leaves the executive to police itself and learn from its own mistakes without the benefit of the people’s elected representatives being able to intercede and learn what happened in events like Eilat and how to avoid them in future.  A society whose legislators are bound and gagged when it comes to exercising this function is a society in which the blind lead the blind.  And it’s no surprise that such a nation will repeat its mistakes over and over because no one can come forward from the legislature and say: No, that didn’t work, you’re not going to try that again.  You’re going to try something else.

I’ve posted here that the Israeli approach to the Eilat attack was a fashlah of massive proportions.  When things like this happen you need legislative oversight to uncover what went wrong and prevent it from happening again.  Such activity by the Knesset would reassure the people that someone, somewhere is concerned about the welfare of the nation.  When the prime minister prevents this, it will only erode confidence that the military and intelligence circles can learn from their mistakes.

Can you imagine the aftermath of 9/11 and Pres. Bush refusing to coöperate with the 9/11 Commission?  This is something like what Bibi has done in this case.  He’s thumbed his nose at Mofaz and told him: I don’t owe you nuthin’.  Losing sight, of course, of the fact that in a true democracy the leader does in fact owe a great deal to the legislature.  In a real democracy, the legislature could turn around and reject the next appropriation bill for the agency refusing to coöperate.  The only problem is that in Israel this type of independent behavior is unheard of.  No Knesset member would dream of rejecting an IDF or intelligence appropriation.  In fact, these budgets are so hush-hush that there are hardly any members who know what’s in them.  They ratify them in a pro forma manner with hardly any discussion or debate.

Of course, there are calls for cutting the defense budget heard when belts need to be tightened.  But invariably, all it takes is one terror attack for those voices to be quashed, but good.

Performance Optimization WordPress Plugins by W3 EDGE