IN LESS than two months, Israel will once again hold national elections, potentially changing the political landscape of the Jewish state in significant ways.
There might be surprises, since even those who know whereof they speak are finding it hard to prognosticate.
One of those experts, former Member of Knesset Dr. Einat Wilf, smiled somewhat ironically when the Intermountain Jewish News asked her to prophesize.
It is the first time in awhile that the elections are truly open, truly and sincerely open, says Wilf, who addressed Denver AIPAC members last week, on Winning Hearts and Minds: Making the Progressive Case for Israel at Temple Emanuel.
In fact, almost every permutation is possible. You could have a situation where Netanyahu is prime minister, where [Labor Party head Isaac] Herzog is prime minister, where both are prime ministers. And both of them recognize that these are open elections.
Still other scenarios are possible, says Wilf, who politely declined to name her own favorite.
One cannot dismiss Tzipi Livni, former head of the Hatnuah party and currently campaigning with Herzog on a joint list called the Zionist Center, who Wilf feels will likely be a powerbroker.
Nor can Naftali Bennett, Minister of the Economy and leader of the Jewish Home party, or Yair Lapid, chairman of the Yesh Atid party and former Minister of Finance, be ruled out of the final equation.
The uncertainties, Wilf believes, are reflective of the hard-to-discern mood of the Israeli electorate.
It is, at the moment, in flux, she says.
From the strengthening of the Herzog-Livni camp, you could argue that there are people who are optimistic in a way that they havent been for awhile; that they can pursue a policy of pursuing peace or social democratic policies. Some people will say that around Bennett theres a certain sense of optimism; that here is a person who has a plan for the future of Israel.
I wouldnt say that the mood at the moment is desperate or gloomy. People are looking to what can be done. Theyre voting for people who they think they can do something.
WILF, WHO holds a PhD in political science from Cambridge, served in the 18th Israeli Knesset from 2010-13, originally as a Laborite and later as a member of Ehud Baraks left-center Independence (HaAtzamaut) spinoff faction.
Shes a sought after writer and speaker these days, a senior fellow at the Jewish People Policy Institute and adjunct fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, but she hasnt given up her political career.
There are pros and cons to being outside of the Knesset, but I dont hide the fact that at one point I would like to go into political life and I have to decide when. She also must decide, Wilf says, which party she would affiliate with when that time comes.
My views have evolved, changed. Theres a sense that this is still way out and well see what I do in the interim. I dont have to make that decision at the moment.
In the meantime, she likes to call herself a roving ambassador for Israel through her work as a writer (she has authored three books and dozens of print and online articles), a public speaker (shes booked for the next six months for audiences across the world) and a knowledgeable resource on Israel and the Middle East.
Most of the groups asking her to speak are pro-Israel in orientation, both Jewish and non-Jewish. Her audiences are all over the map, Wilf says, including students, Jewish activists and foreign policy professionals.
They want to hear people who can speak for Zionism in a way thats centrist. Thats what I bring to the table.
She is actually quite liberal on many issues expressing support for feminism and gay marriage and congratulating Colorado for its revolutionary decision to legalize recreational marijuana and more conservative on others.
Wilfs political bottom line, however, is that she is an unshakeable and unapologetic Zionist.
Im an atheist, she says, and Im very secular, but Im also very Jewish, very committed to the Jewish people and I very much believe in the Jewish right to self-determination. The Jewish people have a right to a state of their own in the only land which makes sense.
I equally believe in the right of the Arabs to a state of their own. There are two peoples in the land and they should both have the right to self-determination.
This was the essence of Wilfs talk on the progressive case for Israel before AIPAC supporters in Denver last week, but she makes it plain that although she speaks for many organizations she always represents herself alone.
I do not work for any organization. I work with all organizations that are pro-Israel. Im not a representative of the Israeli government, not a member of the Israeli parliament. I am my own person.
WHILE WILF says its not even clear yet what the issues will be in Israels March 17 elections its a sure bet that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will be among them.
Thats simply because the issue is a permanent fixture on Israels political scene.
Its always an issue and will always be an issue, Wilf says. We live in the same tract of land so somehow or other this issue will never go away. Even if we make peace we will have other issues. Theyre not going away, were not going away.
The new elections, however, are unlikely to trigger seismic shifts in the conflict, she believes.
Netanyahu, if reelected, would probably be reluctant to initiate new negotiations with the Palestinians, based on his experience in dealing with Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinian Authority, while Herzog or Livni probably would try to set up talks.
The question is whether any of that matters.
There is a question whether what Israel can give meets what the Palestinians are willing to take, Wilf says. This is bigger than whether Herzog and Livni are nice people or not. And I think its wrong to personalize the conflict.
Both Israelis and Palestinians are at the stage, she feels, where the concept of a comprehensive peace between them seems highly unlikely.
I dont think the notion is that peace will never, ever, for all time, be possible. But it is true that both on the left and the right, the notion that theres a solution, that you can tie up things nicely in a bow and then it will be over, does not resonate anymore.
While ceasefires and truces, both with the PA and Hamas, will result in lulls and periods of relative calm, Wilf feels that for Palestinians and most of their brothers in the wider Arab world to accept Jews as actual equals, as indigenous, in their midst, is too high a bar at this point.
Wilf has a theory which holds that for two warring factions to make peace, two elements must be considered: The geopolitics and the conflict itself.
She feels that the geopolitical reality that best favors peace is when Israel is seen as being very strong and the Palestinians and Arab nations as very weak, even though that might seem counterintuitive to many.
The closest Israel and the Palestinians came to peace was in the 1990s, when just those conditions prevailed, Wilf contends.
Placing more stock in such circumstances than in personal leadership, she says it wasnt about Yitzhak Rabin or Yasir Arafat, but about the fact that the USSR had just collapsed and that the Palestinians had lost international standing because they backed Saddam Hussein in his war with the West, the first Gulf War, in 1991.
But the conflict itself hadnt reached what Wilf calls the maturity for a resolution the point where the sides have exhausted all other options in their heads.
Until both of those elements are present, she says, prospects for peace will remain distant, no matter who serves as the leader for either side.
LESS MANAGEABLE than the Israeli-Palestinian conflict itself, and even less likely to be affected by how Israelis vote, is a problem that Wilf views as one of the greatest dangers to Israel.
Anti-Zionism in all its many forms the Boycott-Divestment-Sanctions movement, increasingly virulent demonstrations and activism, strident vilification and demonization of Israel within academia and the intellectual left poses what she calls an existential threat to the Jewish state.
It has really taken off in the last 15 years, Wilf says. It is a deliberate effort to turn Israel into the worlds greatest evil.
The placard strategy employed by anti-Zionists the practice of reducing the complexities of the Middle East into simplistic slogans and epithets is gaining worrisome traction, she believes.
They use the words Israel and Zionism equally. Next to them they put words like colonialism, apartheid, ethnic cleansing and genocide.
Theyre choosing these words because theres a global consensus that these words are evil. By putting them repeatedly next to the words Israel or Zionism they begin to implant in peoples minds the notion that Israel and Zionism are pure evil.
Zionism, rather than being seen as a political movement for the self-determination of the Jewish people, is thus transformed into something dreadful the oppressive and racist agent of a Western-led colonialist empire.
Its preparing peoples minds for the notion that ridding the world of Israel by means fair or foul is a desirable thing, a noble thing, even. And I view it as a true threat to Israel. If you create that intellectual environment, then ultimately it has physical consequences.
This is a propaganda campaign with a sinister purpose. It is not about peace, it is not about a Palestinian state, it is not about having rights for the Palestinians all things that I support. It is about something far more sinister. Its about depriving the Jewish people of their right to self-determination and, I would say, ultimately of their right to live.
Anti-Zionism, in other words, is indeed another word for anti-Semitism. At the core, it is a hatred of Jews as individuals and as a people, Wilf says.
Fueling the movement are several dynamics. One is the fact that the intellectual left has a history of aligning itself with terrible causes, she says.
Despite her doctorate and extensive work in the academic sector, Wilf says she never wanted to be known as an academic because of academias attraction for ideas and individuals that represent the very opposite of liberalism or progressivism.
In academia there is this attraction or passion for chaos, a passion for destruction of truly liberal regimes, she says, and there is a romanticism of terrorism.
FANNING THE anti-Zionist flames higher is the sheer ignorance many activists have concerning the historical background and current realities of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Wilf is frequently asked such questions as: What do you have to say about the apartheid wall? or Please explain to me how you can support a colonialist movement?
They know nothing but they know to call it by that name. They know nothing about Zionism but they know that its colonialist. There is so much work that needs to be done to reverse that.
The obvious danger is that those with a truly anti-Zionist and likely anti-Semitic agenda will invariably influence those who are ignorant of the truth and believe they are acting with the best of intentions.
Its important for many people of goodwill to understand that a lot of the causes they ally themselves with today are not causes of goodwill, Wilf says.
One favorite example is Justice for Palestine.
It sounds like a wonderful cause. Who doesnt want justice for Palestine?
Until you dig deeper and realize that the injustice that is to be corrected is Zionism and the very existence of the State of Israel, the nation state of the Jewish people. Then Justice for Palestine begins to appear as a very sinister purpose rather than a very good cause.
Israel has a crucial role to play in the debate, Wilf says. It must revive its skills at hasbarah Hebrew for public relations and do a much better job of presenting its case to the world.
We were good at it when our survival depended on it. I want to argue that our survival depends on it again and therefore we need to get good at it again.
We need to send some of our best and brightest to our intellectual defense.
Chris Leppek may be reached at [email protected].
Copyright © 2015 by the Intermountain Jewish News
