News from August 18-August 25
Israeli elections, a thwarted Iranian drone attack, and foreign aid
I’m starting this newsletter because I have found that many people struggle to keep up with the endless stream of Israeli and Jewish news. My hope is that by condensing three events/points/articles a week, maybe it won’t be too hard to keep up! I intend for the newlsetter to be sent out weekly and for it to take no more than 5-10 minutes to read.
Disclaimer: There are going to be significant changes to the format and content of this newsletter as I figure out what people want and what works best for me.
Also Disclaimer: This week is heavy on Israel news, but it won’t always be that way, I promise!
Feedback is welcome!
Israel’s Arab parties are willing to join a center-left coalition:
Background: Israel features a parliamentary style of government which means that the Prime Minister may only serve with the consent of parties holding seats numbering in excess of half of the Knesset (Parliament). In other words, the Prime Minister must gain the support of more than half of the Knesset. Historically, the Arab-Israeli Parties, which recently have held around 10% of the seats in the Knesset, have not been willing to sit in the ruling coalition of Israel. Citing poor conditions for Arab citizens in Israel, the stagnant peace process with the Palestinians, and unequal rights for Arabs in Israel, the Arab-Israeli parties are traditionally anti-Zionist, oppose Israel as a Jewish state, and refuse to join ruling coalitions. To join the coalition, the Arab-Israeli parties have asked for more social programs for Arab citizens, a new hospital, and a thawing of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, among other demands. The parties have also included a demand about ending Israel’s occupation of the West Bank.
What does this mean? A coalition including Arab-Israeli parties would be unprecedented but people have mixed feelings about it. One belief is that allowing anti-Zionist elements of Israeli politics access to state security secrets would jeopardize overall safety. Another belief would be that it as a huge win for all Israelis because it would be a positive step for Arab representation as well as Jewish citizens because it would be further evidence that Israel is not a “racist” state as some critics claim. Still, there is tremendous friction between the Israeli-Arab parties and the center-left bloc that would likely inhibit a coalition agreement.
My Take: It is unlikely that Arab-Israeli parties will be a part of the next governing coalition. For starters, the center-left bloc’s chances of winning are a toss-up at best. Even so, a complete end to the occupation in the West Bank is a likely non-starter even for many in the center-left bloc, especially since many can’t even agree on what the occupation is (for some, the occupation is not just a military presence in the West Bank, but also the presence of settlers). Of course, if the center-left bloc wins the election, and the addition of the Arab-Israeli parties is the only way to dethrone the incumbent Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, anything can happen.
Further Reading: https://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Why-cant-the-Joint-List-join-the-government-599695 (Jerusalem Post)
Israel thwarts Iranian drone attack:
What happened? For the past few years, Iran has been sending military personnel and assets into Syria and Iraq while also bolstering its proxy warfare capabilities in Gaza through Hamas and Lebanon through Hezbollah. Israel has conducted airstrikes to disrupt supply lines and destroy military capabilities to ensure Iran could not establish a presence on Israel’s borders. On Sunday, Israel carried out airstrikes on an alleged Iranian drone operation. Israel claims Iran was going to launch dronestrikes on Israelis in the Golan Heights. The IDF has since released video of the men it claims were preparing to launch the attack. Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s Prime Minister, is celebrating what he described as a “major operational effort.”
What’s the fallout? Other strikes were conducted throughout the day in Iraq and Lebanon, targetting Iranian assets. One airstrike, on a Hezbollah media facility, has predictably enraged Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, who has pledged to shoot down Israeli drones above Lebanon. Iran has denied that any of its military personnel and assets were struck in Syria.
My Take: Israel has a right to its self-defense, which includes pre-emptive measures against imminent attacks. Any country with intelligence suggesting an attack was imminent would carry out similar measures. What intrigues me about this situation is the motivation for the thwarted attack. It would have been too inconsequential to use as the opening act of a larger campaign so it more likely was ordered as a show of defiance against the Israelis who have emerged more or less unscathed by the recent “shadow war.” Perhaps Iran believed that a successful attack, no matter how much damage it caused, would cause Israel to think twice about continuing to attack Iranian targets in Syria and Iraq. I believe that would be a miscalculation since history and Prime Minister Netanyahu has shown that Israel is willing to take all steps necessary to ensure its security.
Further Reading: https://www.wsj.com/articles/israels-shadow-war-with-iran-widens-as-netanyahu-faces-close-election-contest-11566841134 (Wall Street Journal)
Bernie Sanders encourages Israel to decline American aid:
Background: The United States provides Israel with about 3 billion dollars in aid every year. A great deal of that money is used on the Israeli military for defense purposes. One of the requirements for the aid is that it is spent on American technology, so the money effectively acts like a stimulus bill, only with the products going to Israel. Historically, the aid has enjoyed broad bipartisan support.
What’s going on here? In response to Israel’s barring American congresswomen from visiting Israel and the Palestinian territories, Bernie Sanders suggested that Israel turn down the aid it is given by the United States every year.
So what? (My take): Calling on Israel to decline its aid is a hypocritical stance from a democrat (Yes, I know he’s technically an independent, but he’s running for the Democratic nomination so to me, he’s a democrat). Democrats (and Republicans) have been opposed to cutting foreign aid during the Trump administration for moral and national security reasons. I think there is definitely a nuanced discussion to be had about the purpose of the foreign aid, but if its a question of what makes America safer, a strong Israel is better for America than a weak Israel. Through the national security lens, it’s hard to see how cutting aid to Israel is helpful, even if it might produce desirable policy results. A double standard is present here; for Israel, aid can be used to incentivize changes in state behavior but for other countries, cutting aid is a national security risk.
Further Reading: This thread was written by one of the men who helped craft the Memorandum of Understanding (basically a promise to send aid) with Israel. I recommend checking it out.
If you liked this newsletter, make sure to tell your friends and have them sign up using the button below! Also, feel free to respond to this email with any questions or comments!