opinion
Ruthie Blum
I sraeli President Isaac Herzog’s
latest plea for judicial-reform
compromise was more than
merely impassioned. Indeed, his
speech to the nation on March 9
was downright angry and with good reason.

As he pointed out in his concise address — deliv-
ered with a cracking voice and grim facial expression
— he spent the previous 10 weeks “working around
the clock, meeting with everybody, including with
those who don’t agree with [him], even those who
refuse to admit it.” He also mentioned the “harsh and
hurtful” criticism he’s received for his efforts, though
he claimed to take it “with love.”
That’s a bit hard to believe, given the wrath he
incurred from anti-government protesters last month,
when he dared to express sympathy for “both sides”
of the debate. As a former head of the Labor Party,
he wasn’t accustomed to the level of vitriol typically
reserved for the right in general and Prime Minister
Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu in particular.

But all he had to do to spark hate-filled demon-
strations outside his residence — rife with threats
against him and his wife — was acknowledge the
concerns of each camp. The one that favors judicial
reforms, he said on Feb. 12, “feels that an imbalance
has developed between the branches [of govern-
ment] and that lines have been crossed for years,”
while the opposition considers the bills put forth by
Justice Minister Yariv Levin to be “a real threat to
Israeli democracy.”
To ignore either, he stressed — before presenting a
five-point alternative plan as a “basis for immediate and
decisive negotiations” — would be a “grave mistake.”
He must not have anticipated that even a nod to
the legitimacy of the democratically elected ruling
coalition would be seen by the left and fellow travel-
ers as a mortal sin. Nor, apparently, had he imagined
that willingness to discuss his proposal would come
solely from pro-reform corners, despite its contain-
ing elements unacceptable to them.

He was foolish not to have realized that the Yair
Lapid-led opposition, and the movement running
the “resistance,” wouldn’t be satisfied with anything
short of a complete halt to the legislative process
and the ultimate fall of the right-wing government.

He seems to have wised up a bit since then — or at
least changed his tactics.

This explains his frustration. It also sheds light on
14 MARCH 16, 2023 | JEWISH EXPONENT
the shift in tone and substance of his recent words.

Whereas he initially tried to stave off “civil war”
by honoring his role as an impartial figurehead and
brokering a proverbial peace accord, on March 9 he
denounced Levin’s plan by echoing the false narra-
tive of its detractors.

“The legislation in its current iteration has to
disappear and fast,” he declared. “It’s erroneous;
it’s predatory. It shakes our democratic foundations.

It must be replaced by a different, agreed-upon
blueprint. And immediately.”
Israel’s democracy, he continued, “is a supreme
value. A strong and independent judicial system is
a supreme value, [as is] the preservation of human
rights, for both men and women, with an emphasis
on minorities.”
Because of his earlier insistence that he’d
succeeded in reducing most points of contention
between the sides — and perhaps to soften the
outrageous implication that Levin and his backers
don’t possess such values — he tipped his hat to the
Israelis who favor the reforms. You know, a majority
of the electorate.

“The special, rich Israeli mosaic is a supreme value
and, yes, the diversity of the judiciary, for it to [serve]
all citizens of the country, is a supreme value,” he
said. “And a healthy, stable and clear relationship
between the branches of government is a supreme
value, as well.”
His pretense of evenhandedness didn’t end there.

First, he admonished the “leaders of the country —
the coalition and the government at its head — [that]
we are at a point of no return. It’s a moment to be or
not to be; to opt for consensus and [take advantage
of a] constructive constitutional moment that will
[enhance] us for generations to come, or slide into a
constitutional, security, social and economic abyss.’”
Only afterward did he include the anti-government
bloc in his reprimand. And this was without once
referring to its campaign to vilify more than half of
the populace and disrupt the functioning of the state
whose democracy it professes to be safeguarding.

“You — both the coalition and the opposition —
have to reach a decision,” he announced, posing the
question: “Are Israel and its citizens above all, or will
egos and narrow political interests kick us off the
edge of the cliff?”
Before storming off the podium, he concluded:
“You’re asking me to help you? I’m willing to help
you. But the responsibility is on you, all factions. The
choice is either disaster or a solution. If you continue
as you have been until now, the chaos is on your
hands. History will judge all of you. Take responsibil-
ity right now.”
It’s hard to fault Herzog for trying to appease the
naysayers, whose viciousness takes nerves of steel
to withstand. And he’s not only human but hails from
the left.

There are two problems with his entreaty, however.

The first is that the government is open to reviewing
and contemplating all counter-proposals, such as
that developed by former Justice Minister Daniel
Friedmann and legal scholar Yuval Elbashan. Levin
happily met on March 8 with Elbashan, high-tech
businessman Giora Yaron and former National
Security Adviser Giora Eiland, who drafted the
compromise. It’s Lapid and National Unity Party chief
Benny Gantz who’ve rejected all overtures to parley.

The second hitch in Herzog’s appeal is that it won’t
win him any popularity contests with the radicals
running the show — you know, the “anybody but
Bibi” activists purposely fomenting the “chaos” that
he disparaged. It’s time for him to internalize the fact
that they’d prefer to drag the country down the tubes
than come to the table. 1
Ruthie Blum is a Tel Aviv-based columnist and
commentator. She writes and lectures on Israeli
politics and culture, as well as on U.S.-Israel
relations. stock.adobe.com / Sebastian Duda
Denouncing Israel’s Judicial Reforms
Won’t Have the Effect Herzog Desires