ISRAEL: Will Barak survive early elections?

December 6, 2000
Issue 

BY AHMED NIMER

RAMALLAH — The ongoing uprising and the violent Israeli reaction in the West Bank and Gaza Strip took a new twist on November 28, when Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak announced that early Israeli elections would be held only two years into his four-year term.

Barak made the announcement as he realised that a bill sponsored by the opposition Likud party to dissolve the Israeli parliament — the Knesset — would pass with the required majority. Barak's announcement means that new elections will be held within the next three to six months.

Barak's announcement came amidst widespread criticism over his handling of the current Palestinian uprising. Likud and some sections of the Israeli security establishment have lambasted Barak for not taking an "iron fist" approach against the Palestinians. The Palestinian parties, occupying 10 seats out of the 120-seat Knesset, have also attacked Barak for his violent response to the uprising and indicated that they would support early dissolution of the Knesset.

The Israeli political landscape can be a confusing one at times, particularly because of the inappropriate use of the terms "left" and "right" to describe the different political tendencies.

The left is generally described as being composed of Barak's One Israel party (the main faction of which is the Labour Party), Meretz, and the Palestinian parties (note that this refers to Palestinian citizens of Israel, not Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip who do not participate in Israeli politics). The Israeli right is generally referred to as the Likud party and smaller pro-settler parties representing Israeli settlers in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

In addition to these broad definitions, there exists a host of religious parties (the principal one being Shas) and parties that represent Russian and other immigrant groups.

In reality though, these definitions are extremely misleading. Israel is a state founded on the ideology of Zionism — the notion that Jews throughout the world form a nationality and Israel is the "Jewish homeland". In practice this means support for the historic dispossession of the Palestinian nation and denial of their right to national self-determination.

All political parties within the Israeli Knesset — with the exception of the Palestinian representatives — wholeheartedly agree with and support the Zionist conception of the Israeli state.

Israeli politics is best understood through the prism of three questions: the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, the question of the relationship between religion and the state, and the racial and national differences within Israeli society.

Overarching all of this is the fundamental issue of Israeli class structure. Most analysis of Israel overlooks this point and instead, the right becomes "left" and the rest is reduced to "religious fundamentalism".

Labour Zionism

As a society of immigrants, the early Zionist state had an extremely fluid class structure. Most Jewish migrants who colonised the land of Palestine came from petty-bourgeois backgrounds — shopkeepers, small merchants and semi-skilled artisans — or were unemployed workers prior to immigration. Wealthy Jews did not make the move to Palestine but preferred to immigrate from Europe to the US.

On arrival in Palestine, the Zionist movement was faced with two questions — how to colonise a land in which another people was living, and how to encourage and support further waves of Jewish immigration. It was as a solution to these two problems that Labour Zionism was born.

Labour Zionism stressed the primacy of the new Israeli nation above all other questions. Class struggle was frowned upon as disruptive of the unity of the nation. In addition, Labour Zionism promoted the notion of Jewish-only labour. This was critical in excluding Palestinians from economic life, particularly in working as labour in the agricultural sector.

Whether cheaper Palestinian labour should be employed on Jewish farms was a critical debate at the time in the Zionist movement. The Labour Zionist movement argued against this and prevented the weak Jewish land-owning class from employing Palestinian labour.

It was this situation which led to the birth of the kibbutz and the co-operative farming model which is so often mis-represented as socialist by left-apologists for Zionism. Cooperative farming was a Zionist solution aimed at excluding Palestinian labour and based on the expropriation of Palestinian land. It had nothing in common with the principles of socialism.

Private farming was opposed by the Zionist movement because it would have meant Palestinians remaining on the land as cheap labour. The only way to ensure the successful eviction of the native population was through their simultaneous exclusion from the labour-market (through the principle of Jewish-only labour) and the land-market (expropriation of land).

It was the success of this project which guaranteed Labour Zionism the leadership of the state for the first three decades of Israel's establishment.

Because an indigenous Israeli capitalist class was almost non-existent and not in a position to build the state, economic and political power was divided between state-run economic monopolies and the Histadrut — the Jewish-only trade union federation which excluded Arab labour and strongly policed the working class.

It was Labour Zionism which led this bureaucratic elite, the Israeli army and the key echelons of economic power in the state.

From the mid-70s onwards, the Israeli class structure began to take a more solid shape. A modern working class was brought in, composed of Jews from northern Africa and Arab countries — to replace the potentially "natural" working class of a European colonial-settler state, the indigenous Palestinian population, which had been largely expelled from its land. The small number of Palestinians who remained on their land joined this working class but were subject to racist discrimination.

In addition, following the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip in 1967, an itinerant and cheap Palestinian labour force from these areas formed a key feature of Israeli capitalism.

Concurrently, a fully-fledged Israeli capitalist class began to emerge through the privatisation of state-owned enterprises and the consequent fusion between the Labour Zionist bureaucracy and private capital.

These are the origins of the two major trends within the Israeli political system — the Labour Party and the Likud. The Labour Party (in its most recent reincarnation as Barak's One Israel) is the progeny of the Labour Zionist movement. It represents the economic and political elite of Israeli capitalism. The Labour Zionist stream is composed largely of Ashkenazi Jews (Jews from European countries).

Likud and the religious parties

The Likud first gained power in 1977 through championing the demands of the new Jewish migrants from North Africa and other Arab countries. It opposed the decades-long hegemony of the Labour Party while promoting a vitriolic and militant Zionism. Its earlier origins lie in the right-wing of the Zionist movement which opposed the dominant Labour Zionist trend.

The social base of the Likud is the Mizrachi, or non-European Jews. Its leadership is largely Ashkenazi though, with the same racial origins as the Labour Zionist movement.

The process of privatisation of state-owned businesses accelerated in the 1980s accentuated the differences within the Israeli political system. In particular, Orthodox Jews came to play an increasingly important role.

The Orthodox draw their origins from 18th century Jewish ghettoes in Europe. Strictly observant Jews, who emphasised practice rather than beliefs, the Orthodox were a reaction to the anti-feudal Enlightenment and the process of capitalist modernisation which accompanied it in western Europe.

The Orthodox drew the walls of the ghetto around them and insisted that the modes of behaviour characteristic of 18th century Europe were the only true form of Judaism. Their beliefs are based on many of the highly reactionary teachings of Jewish mysticism, or the Kabbala.

Initially the Orthodox opposed Zionism, as it represented a threat to the traditional rabbinical rulers. However, following the first waves of Zionist colonisation of Palestine, the Orthodox split into two factions — the Modern Orthodox and the Haredim.

The Modern Orthodox argued that the period of "redemption" had begun, and thus it was permissible to support the Zionist movement. Today, the Modern Orthodox are represented in the Knesset by the National Religious Party and two smaller parties. Their social base is the settler movement in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

The Haredim continued to practise their 18th century life-styles. In the current period, they argue strongly for Jewish religious law to be form the basis of the Zionist state's legal and political system. They oppose any work on Saturday, are hostile to education for women, and argue for the introduction of the death penalty for homosexuals and for the rabbinical courts to become the highest legal authority.

The Haredim are willing to form coalitions with either One Israel or the Likud, depending on which of them will provide it with the largest funding for its religious schools network.

Non-European Haredim are represented by the Shas party. Shas has built a huge constituency among the poor neighbourhoods and is now one of the largest parties in the Knesset with 17 seats (One Israel has 26 seats). The growth of Shas has been largely at the expense of the Likud, from whom it has drawn its social base of those disenchanted with Labour Zionism.

Judaism and Zionism

In order to understand the role of Shas and the Orthodox parties in general, it is necessary to examine the contradictory place of religion within Zionist thought.

Zionism has generally presented itself as a secular nationalist movement, and argued that Jews form a nation whose homeland is Israel. Despite its attempts to portray itself as a secular movement, it is impossible for Zionism to separate itself from the Jewish religion. This is true for two reasons.

Firstly, it is religion or religious tradition which forms the common link between Jews around the world. Secondly, the Zionist movement needs religion to justify its claim to the land of Palestine.

On the other hand, with the consolidation of an indigenous Israeli capitalist class, the Labour Zionist movement has attempted to turn Israel into a "normal" capitalist society with the consequent separation of religion and state. This has inevitably led to a conflict with the Haredim, who want Israel to be ruled by a clerical political system similar to Iran or Afghanistan.

Numerous examples of this contradiction exist. Debates over the autonomy of rabbinical courts, the enormous funding of the religious schools network and compulsory military service for the Haredim are the most important of these.

The sharpening of these two major contradictions within Israeli society — a clericalist versus a secularist state, and Mizrachi versus Ashkenazi — must be seen as a result of the growth of a modern, indigenous Israeli capitalist class that is linked with international capital. This economic change is also at root of the current debate around the so-called "peace process".

Since the beginning in 1993 of the "Oslo peace process" there have been dramatic developments within the Israeli economy. It has moved away from a system of state-operated monopolies based on the production of low-technology products such as textile and garments to a high-tech economy dominated by privately-owned monopolistic companies.

The political process that has accompanied this change is the attempt to "solve" the Palestinian question so as to cement Israel's role as the "resident" imperialist power in the Middle East.

For this reason, the Oslo process — essentially the maintenance of the Zionist state through giving "self-rule" and an illusion of independence to the Palestinian population in the territories occupied by Israeli in 1967 — is the project of Israeli finance capital and its political representatives, the Labour Zionist movement.

In order to complete the implementation of this project, it is necessary to subsume the other contradictions within the Zionist state. This is the root of the current anarchical situation in the Israeli Knesset.

Negotiations with PA

Following the announcement of early elections, Barak moved quickly to resume negotiations with the Palestinian Authority (PA). Commentators agree that if an agreement can be reached, then Barak would probably have the necessary support to win new elections. If an agreement cannot be reached, then it is likely the Likud would take power again — maybe under the leadership of Ariel Sharon, but more likely under a resurrected Benyamin Netanyahu.

It is still too early to predict what will happen in the few months ahead. If Barak is unable to reach an agreement, it is possible Avraham Burg, the Knesset Speaker and One Israel member would challenge him for the Labour Party leadership. Burg is seen as one of the most trusted political representatives of the Israeli business elite. He has said that he will not challenge Barak if a deal is reached, but he has strong support within the Labour Zionist movement.

The Likud, despite its rhetoric, essentially shares a similar view on the final settlement with the PA as the Labour Party. Its social base — settlers and the Zionist ultra-right — may make it difficult for a Likud government to sign an agreement. The PA senses this, and urged Palestinian Knesset members to vote for Barak in the recent no-confidence vote.

Shas, which is in principle not opposed to signing a deal with the Palestinians, will give support to whichever party gains a majority in the Knesset in order to further its social aims and secure its financial base.

The fundamental question though is the same as it has always been since the onset of the Zionist project in Palestine. There can be no real peace in the Middle East as long as the Israeli state continues its colonial practices — whether through the physical occupation of land or economic exploitation through some form of apartheid system.

For lasting peace to come, the Zionist project will need to be defeated and a democratic, secular state created in Palestine which accords full civil and political equality to Hebrew-speaking Israelis and Arabic-speaking Palestinians.

You need Green Left, and we need you!

Green Left is funded by contributions from readers and supporters. Help us reach our funding target.

Make a One-off Donation or choose from one of our Monthly Donation options.

Become a supporter to get the digital edition for $5 per month or the print edition for $10 per month. One-time payment options are available.

You can also call 1800 634 206 to make a donation or to become a supporter. Thank you.