The formation of the new Israeli government exposed the weakened position of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. His fear from failure and his desperate bid to form a government at any price led him to concede to both Yair Lapid — leaders of Yesh Atid party, and Naftali Bennett — leader of Bayit Yehudi party.
Yair Lapid ultimately received what he sought from the get go. He became a finance minister and his party also received the education and welfare portfolios. This puts Lapid’s party in a strong position to fulfill its campaign promises and pave the way for Lapid to project himself as prime ministerial candidate in the next elections. Of particular importance, the Bayit Yehudi received portfolios that are important for its constituency.
Obviously, settlers are happy with the formation of the government as ministries related to the settlement activities are headed by politicians associated with or by sympathizers with the settlement movement. Settlers believe that the new government will create the momentum to proceed with settlement activities. “After what we’ve been through, we hope the development momentum will continue,” remarked Yesha Council.
Undoubtedly, the real victim will be the peace process. It has to take a back seat for a while. Bennett is most unlikely to support any peace process that entails concessions to the Palestinians. While, the United States can put pressure on Netanyahu to jumpstart the peace process, the coalition will not hold. Netanyahu needs the support of the religious parties — who are left outside the government — should he wish to respond positively to an expected American pressure. This is how many Israelis would like to argue. And yet, the argument that the religious parties are essential to advance the peace process cannot be substantiated with hard evidence. Indeed, on more than one occasion, the religious parties created obstacles in realizing peace. Moreover, the religious parties have been supporting the settlement movement, which in turn makes talking about peace a stale joke.
And yet, the serious internal issue will be the secular-religious rift that is getting deeper recently. Seculars always argue that religious parties have gone too far. In fact, Lapid will use his new leverage in the government to implement his slogan that religious people should serve in the army. And soon, it will be obvious that the real fault line within Israel is not the peace process but the secular-religious divide. Soon the religious parties will start criticizing the government. Their onslaught at the conduct of this government may open up new cracks in the coalition. This government will not be divided over the Haredim (extremely religious factions), but the Haredim issue may divide the wider society.
The truth remains that with or without the Haredim, the peace process will continue to face hurdles. It is not is if the current coalition has shortage of those who oppose the peace process or the two-state solution. In fact, Bayit Yehudi — led by Bennett — is opposed to the concept of the two-state solution. Bennett — whose existence in the coalition is vital — is not expected to accept a genuine peace process with the Palestinians. He may not hesitate to bring down the government should Netanyahu tries to advance the peace process.
Moreover, there is no love lost between Likud and the peace process. Senior members of Likud will undermine any tendency to make peace with the Palestinians. Adding salt to the wound, those Likud’s members will continue with the classic Zionist approach of building settlement to offer them as a fait accompli. People like Moshe Ya’lon — who is expected to assume the defense portfolio — may join the right-wing Bayit Yehudi to help the settlers win any encounter with the government.
Whether observers failed to predict what was all too predictable in Israel does not matter. The result is clear: settlers have all reason to rub their hands in glee for the outcome of elections. The brunt of this failure will be borne by the government itself. Soon, the prime minister will suffer for missing many opportunities to make peace. His insistence on political survival has crippled him from taking the steps necessary to free Israelis from the disproportionate power of minority settlers who have been able to dictate the national agenda for decades. It seems that Rabin’s brave stand facing settlers in the first half of 1990s is a lesson that Netanyahu has failed to pick.
