Ignorance or Disingenuousness?—

An Interview With Bibi

Prof. Paul Eidelberg

Many Israelis, especially those born and educated in the United States, almost feel at home when they hear Benjamin Netanyahu speaking their native tongue.  Netanyahu himself was educated in America—MIT and Harvard.  Wow! 

Many American-born-and-educated Israelis regard Israel’s system of government with contempt.  They are appalled by its instability: governments changing, on an average, of every two years, cabinet ministers on an average every 18 months! How can such short-lived governments pursue any consistent, long-range national policies?  Especially when their cabinets consist of five or six or more rival parties?

Although Americans are aware of the shortcomings of American government, they appreciate the merits of a Presidential system and of a House of Representatives whose members are individually accountable to the voters in constituency elections.  Of course, their representatives do not always abide by their campaign promises, but at least a congressman seeking re-election knows that his broken pledges will be exposed by a rival candidate.  No such thing exists in Israel.  So what follows, therefore, is all the more remarkable.   

On June 6, 2007, Likud chairman Benjamin Netanyahu was interviewed by a member of the editorial staff of the Russian Channel-7 who happened to hold a Ph.D. in linguistics.  She asked Netanyahu about the dilemmas involved in coalition governments consisting of rival parties, but prefaced her question with the following remarks:

She first noted that “each leader of a coalition party government behaves as if he were a prime minister of some sort.”  Second, she said “there is no direct connection between the voters and their [so-called] representatives.”  This system, she continued, enabled Sharon to bribe or twist the arms of 22 Likud MKs to vote for unilateral disengagement and thereby betray countless thousands of voters in the nationalist camp.

She then asked Netanyahu, “Do you still think the political system that made this possible is still relevant? Don’t you think it’s time to reform the electoral and political system?”

To this Netanyahu replied:  “I do not think there is a need in changing the electoral system. Suppose, we introduce a presidential system. A president will come and will do whatever he pleases.”

Netanyahu’s response is disingenuous or sheer nonsense.  A President of the United States is checked by two houses of Congress, either one of which can thwart his policies.  Netanyahu saw this happening when the Democrats gained control of both houses of Congress in the 2006 midterm elections, and called for the withdrawal of American forces from Iraq contrary—to the policy of Republican president George Bush.  (In fact, Congress can stymie the policies of any President by its power over the purse.)

Didn’t the American-educated Netanyahu know this? Besides, didn’t he know that, under the American Constitution, treaties concluded by the President must be approved by a two-thirds vote of the Senate, whereas in Israel the Prime Minister does not require, by law, Knesset ratification of agreements with any foreign state or entity?

Indeed, in domestic affairs, a Prime Minister of Israel has more power than the American President because his cabinet coalition dominates the Knesset.  No Likud, or Labor, or Kadima prime minister has ever been removed from office by a Knesset vote of no confidence. 

If Netanyahu was not being disingenuous, then he is suffering from colossal ignorance.  In any event, the editor responded to Netanyahu by saying, “We are not talking now of a presidential system of government. We are talking of district elections.”

To this Netanyahu replied:  “District elections won’t help either. Under the system of district elections each Knesset Member will be responsible only before his own small group of voters. Thus, we’ll get 60 parties.”

Netanyahu’s response is sheer gibberish.  There are 435 members of the U.S. House of Representatives.  They represent 435 districts.  Yet the House has only two political parties.  In fact, 26 countries, smaller in size and population than Israel, have district elections, yet each has fewer parties than Israel!

In any event, Netanyahu avowed that “The key is not in changing the system. Some changes,” he admitted, “may be introduced. But the key element is in electing the right leaders, with a clear program and position.”  Pity he obscured his program and position regarding Palestinian statehood both before the March 1996 election and the February 2009 election!

Postscript

The ignorance among prominent Israelis regarding America’s system of government is shocking—to say nothing of their obscurantism about Israel’s political system.  For example, people in Israel are being misled by a “faith-based” faction in the Likud that aspires to gain control of that faithless party.  It justifies its joining and decade-long effort to wrest control of the Likud by drawing a facile analogy with America’s two-party system: that one must join either the Democratic or Republican party—hence a major party—to lead the country.  The arrogance of ignorance here is astonishing!  America’s two-party system is a consequence of a presidential system of government on the one hand, and a congressional system of multi-district plurality elections on the other.  Neither is present in Israel; and to refer to the American system to justify the maneuver in question is disingenuous, to put it mildly.