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



opinion
‘Law & Disorder: Israel’
Mitchell Bard
T he United States has adopted many Israeli
shows; perhaps it is time for Israel to pick
up one of America’s. It could be part of
Dick Wolf’s “Law & Order” franchise called “Law &
Disorder: Israel.”
Ironically, the government is trying to ram through
legislation to improve the legal system while
seemingly losing control of the country, with lawless-
ness growing in the West Bank and tumult inside
Israel. All that’s missing is Jeff Goldblum to explain
chaos theory.

The government makes the case that it is acting
democratically in seeking to reform the Supreme
Court. On the one hand, it is indeed democratic for
elected representatives to make laws as they see fit;
on the other, it is not the case that their proposals
have a mandate from the people. Netanyahu may
claim he was elected to make these changes, but
public opinion polls have shown that the people
disagree with his proposed overhaul. Furthermore,
he is in power because of the support of religious
parties whose constituents care more about avoid-
ing conscription, funding for yeshivas and keeping
secular studies out of the schools.

Some reform supporters refuse to acknowledge
that a single Israeli, legal scholar or world leader
has any valid objections to the proposed changes.

Perhaps Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s
greatest political success was as finance minister.

Now, he oversees the shekel’s loss in value while
economists inside and outside Israel, including his
economy minister, warn of the potential economic
damage if the judiciary loses its independence.

The demonization of critics as just a minority of
leftists funded by outsiders has lost credibility now
that Likud Knesset members Danny Danon, Yuli
Edelstein, Nir Barkat and Defense Minister Yoav
Gallant, together with National Unity Party MKs Chili
Tropper and former IDF Chief of Staff Gadi Eizenkot,
have expressed reservations about the reforms
and called for a pause in the legislative process to
engage in negotiations.

In the West Bank, the situation shows signs of
spiraling out of control. The violence, despite what
the media says, is not new. Not only does it predate
Netanyahu; its origins also preceded the establish-
ment of the state. Hardly a day goes by without a
terrorist attack. Fortunately, most are thwarted, so
they don’t make the news. Too many people use this
as an excuse for the misbehavior of Jewish residents.

On occasions such as the rampage (the word
“pogrom,” used by some, is inappropriate) by settlers
in Huwara, however, it seems the authorities are
failing in their mission. It typically takes a few hours
or days for Palestinian terrorists to be caught. It
should take no more to identify the Jewish lawbreak-
ers. A marauder allegedly killed a Palestinian. If
true, whoever was responsible should face charges.

Sadly, the show’s “order” part rarely applies to Jews
in the West Bank. There would be no “hilltop youth,”
illegal outposts or attacks on soldiers if settlers
were treated with the same severity as Palestinian
lawbreakers. Two men suspected of involvement in
“wiped out.” Now Ben-Gvir reportedly has the genius
idea of demolishing illegally built homes in eastern
Jerusalem during Ramadan.

Demonstrators may seek regime change, but that
is also part of democracy when pursued peacefully.

Netanyahu’s labeling them “anarchists” and compar-
ing demonstrators in Tel Aviv to the rioters in Huwara
is incendiary.

Let’s be clear. The disorder in the West Bank
is a result of the incitement against Jews by the
Palestinian Authority — from the indoctrination of
hatred in its youth to its rewards for martyrdom.

Mahmoud Abbas has lost his grip as Palestinians
have become contemptuous of his corrupt and
Let me suggest that Israelis of all political persuasions
keep chaos theory in mind: “When you deal with
very complicated situations, unexpected things
are going to happen.”
the Huwara incident were arrested, then released
by court order. In a rare use of a practice regularly
employed against Palestinians, Israeli Defense
Minister Gallant placed them in administrative deten-
tion over the objections of National Security Minister
Itamar Ben-Gvir.

Meanwhile, excessive measures are being used
against Israelis exercising their freedom of expres-
sion. Enforcing order applies to Israeli protesters
who block roads or engage in illegal activities.

However, some Israelis, including police officers,
have questioned the use of stun grenades at demon-
strations. “Stun guns are only used in extreme cases
of violence on the protesters’ part against the police
troops. There was no trace of this in today’s demon-
stration,” a senior officer told Haaretz.

One police officer is being investigated for throw-
ing a stun grenade into a crowd of demonstrators in
Tel Aviv. Ben Gvir’s response? “I give full backing to
the officer who dispersed rioting anarchists with a
stun grenade.”
The situation is likely to get worse and less equita-
ble with Bezalel Smotrich and Ben-Gvir in positions
of power. These two should never have been in the
government in the first place, and Smotrich should
have been fired after he said Huwara should be
autocratic regime. The fight for succession when he
dies will only bring greater turmoil and violence.

If all this is not enough, consider the chaos likely
to follow if Netanyahu is convicted of a crime. He
refused to give up the premiership after being
indicted. Will he do the same if he is convicted? His
supporters hope to pass legislation to preempt such
an outcome. How will this be received if adopted? A
bill has already been approved in its initial reading
to prevent the Supreme Court from suspending the
prime minister.

Even more disturbing is the battle royale that will
take place if the government passes judicial reforms
that the Supreme Court invalidates. Who will be
obeyed — the government or the court? What will
the military do? Already, there is a movement by a
still small number of reservists to refuse to report for
service. Since Goldblum isn’t available, let me suggest that
Israelis of all political persuasions keep chaos theory
in mind: “When you deal with very complicated situa-
tions, unexpected things are going to happen.” 1
Mitchell Bard is a foreign policy analyst and an
authority on U.S.-Israel relations who has written and
edited 22 books.

JEWISHEXPONENT.COM 15