Follow us on social

google cta
Shutterstock_1660566379-scaled

Israel’s unity government protects Netanyahu from prosecution, paves the way for annexation

Gantz was never going to stop annexation, but his partnership with Netanyahu will now make it easier for the new government to move forward on it in a more effective way.

Analysis | Middle East
google cta
google cta

Benjamin Netanyahu’s stunning victory after three rounds of elections spanning more than a year is now complete. The man who last year surpassed David Ben-Gurion as the longest-serving prime minister of Israel will continue his seemingly interminable tenure for at least the next 18 months, and it cost him amazingly little to convince his new partner, Benny Gantz, to give him most of what he wanted.

Gantz, a political neophyte, was overmatched by Netanyahu, who knows every trick, dirty and otherwise, in the book. The agreement they finally came to granted Gantz’s party some key portfolios, including defense and foreign affairs, but left Netanyahu in position to get what he wants in virtually every realm.

For example, Netanyahu’s Likud party will get to appoint the next speaker of the Knesset, an important role for Netanyahu to control the legislative procedures, which he often uses to get what he wants. Gantz technically has veto power over the nomination, but the two apparently agreed on putting Likud Knesset member Yariv Levin in that role, limiting the effect of Gantz’s veto. While Gantz’s Blue and White party will have control of the Knesset House Committee, which deals extensively with the legislative agenda, Levin’s role as speaker will give Netanyahu a great deal of influence.

Netanyahu gave up a good deal of control over the economy, but his primary goal was to ensure his personal safety from the corruption charges against him. Gantz gave him this when he agreed that Netanyahu would have veto power over the appointment of the next attorney general and state prosecutor. Gantz also agreed to Netanyahu’s veto power over judicial appointments, which had been a major sticking point. Gantz’s former partner, Yair Lapid, tweeted in response, “So the compromise on the Judicial Appointments Committee is that Bibi chose all its representatives. Gantz and Ashkenazi agreed to allow the criminal defendant to appoint the judges that will adjudicate his affairs,” referring to Blue and White Knesset member Gabi Ashkenazi.

Netanyahu won several other provisions to protect himself from prosecution, so the major concern remaining for him was his intention to annex large chunks of the West Bank. While some had looked to Gantz to put the brakes on the annexation momentum, he showed scant interest in doing so.

Part of the unity agreement is that for the first six months, the new government will operate as an emergency government to deal with the coronavirus. This means there will be no major legislation of appointments in that period, with one exception. Annexation can be brought to a vote in the cabinet and the Knesset as early as July 1. It is likely to enjoy majorities in both.

Gantz will point to the stipulation that annexation must be done in coordination with the United States, but this is hardly a concession. Netanyahu froze the far-right Yamina party out of the coalition government, giving most of the portfolios Yamina hoped for to Blue and White and other coalition partners. No doubt, this was intended to lessen the right-wing pressure on his government to annex quickly without regard for the concerns of his and Donald Trump’s friends in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and other key Arab governments.

The Trump administration’s “Deal of the Century” featured extensive Israeli annexation of West Bank territory. But the clumsy rollout led to a problem for Netanyahu when his right flank balked at the prospect of holding off for a little while on annexation until Jared Kushner and the rest of the Trump team could ease Arab concerns about the move.

Now, with the U.S. election drawing closer, Trump will want to throw a meaty bone to his evangelical Christian base, and annexation is the best one he has left. The agreement with Gantz gives Netanyahu a minimum of two months to work with the White House to find ways to mollify Saudi and other Arab concerns before annexing chunks of the West Bank. Trump, reeling from his failures in dealing with the coronavirus crisis, will not want to wait much longer than that to impose his “peace plan.”

Yamina will still be offered a place in the coalition. At the moment, they say they will not accept the current conditions, but that could change. Even if it does, their influence — as well as that of the right flank of Netanyahu’s own Likud party — will be diminished, resolving what would have been a very difficult dilemma for Netanyahu. He had been facing a choice between enraging his right flank by continuing to delay annexation and alienating the Trump administration, which has shown unprecedented generosity in breaking with previous norms and handing Israel gifts like moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem and recognizing Israel’s annexation of the Golan Heights without demanding anything in return.

Now Netanyahu can more comfortably go along with the U.S. timetable. Trump has indicated that he wants to get back to his “Deal of the Century” soon, but the COVID-19 crisis has brought everything to a halt. July 1 would seem to be an optimistic target for finding a way to move forward with annexation in a way Trump’s Arab partners would be comfortable with. Netanyahu, who wants to be both the Israeli prime minister who extends sovereignty over the West Bank and who simultaneously opens relations with the monarchies in the Persian Gulf, will be happy to stick with Trump’s timetable as long as the pressure from his right is not too intense. Gantz just gave him that flexibility.

Both Trump and Netanyahu will want to move annexation forward ahead of the U.S. election in November. It fits with Trump’s campaign strategy of focusing on his base, but for both Netanyahu and Gantz, the concern is that Trump might not win. As staunchly pro-Israel as presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden is, he opposes annexation. Biden believes that the two-state process, which was finally buried under his watch as Barack Obama’s vice president, remains the only way forward.

In January, Biden told the New York Times, “I believe a two-state solution remains the only way to ensure Israel’s long-term security while sustaining its Jewish and democratic identity. It is also the only way to ensure Palestinian dignity and their legitimate interest in national self-determination. And it is a necessary condition to take full advantage of the opening that exists for greater cooperation between Israel and its Arab neighbors. For all these reasons, encouraging a two-state solution remains in the critical interest of the United States.”

Though Biden clearly prioritizes Israel’s Jewish character over Palestinian rights, his views align well with the pro-Israel right of the Democratic party as epitomized by the inaccurately named Democratic Majority for Israel, which recently sent a letter to Netanyahu, Gantz, and Lapid cautioning against annexation. “Such a move would make a two-state solution harder — if not impossible to achieve — and would likely have far-reaching negative consequences for the U.S.-Israel alliance,” they stated.

Gantz was never going to stop annexation, but his partnership with Netanyahu will now make it easier for the new government to move forward on it in a more effective way. Coupled with the personal protection Gantz has afforded the prime minister, the former opposition leader got precious little for his surrender.


Photo credit: gali estrange / Shutterstock.com
google cta
Analysis | Middle East
Arlington cemetery
Top photo credit: Autumn time in Arlington National cemetery in Arlington County, Virginia, across the Potomac River from Washington DC. (Shutterstock/Orhan Cam)

America First? For DC swamp, it's always 'War First'

Military Industrial Complex

The Washington establishment’s long war against reality has led our country into one disastrous foreign intervention after another.

From Afghanistan to Iraq, Libya to Syria, and now potentially Venezuela, the formula is always the same. They tell us that a country is a threat to America, or more broadly, a threat to American democratic principles. Thus, they say the mission to topple a foreign government is a noble quest to protect security at home while spreading freedom and prosperity to foreign lands. The warmongers will even insist it’s not a choice, but that it’s imperative to wage war.

keep readingShow less
Trump Maduro Cheney
Top image credit: Brian Jason, StringerAL, Joseph Sohm via shutterstock.com

Dick Cheney's ghost has a playbook for war in Venezuela

Latin America

Former Vice President Richard Cheney, who died a few days ago at the age of 84, gave a speech to a convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars in August 2002 in which the most noteworthy line was, “There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction.”

The speech was essentially the kickoff of the intense campaign by the George W. Bush administration to sell a war in Iraq, which it would launch the following March. The campaign had to be intense, because it was selling a war of aggression — the first major offensive war that the United States would initiate in over a century. That war will forever be a major part of Cheney’s legacy.

keep readingShow less
Panama invasion 1989
Top photo credit: One of approximately 100 Panamanian demonstrators in favor of the Vatican handing over General Noriega to the US, waves a Panamanian and US flag. December 28, 1989 REUTERS/Zoraida Diaz

Invading Panama and deposing Noriega in 1989 was easy, right?

Latin America

On Dec. 20, 1989, the U.S. military launched “Operation Just Cause” in Panama. The target: dictator, drug trafficker, and former CIA informant Manuel Noriega.

Citing the protection of U.S. citizens living in Panama, the lack of democracy, and illegal drug flows, the George H.W. Bush administration said Noriega must go. Within days of the invasion, he was captured, bound up and sent back to the United States to face racketeering and drug trafficking charges. U.S. forces fought on in Panama for several weeks before mopping up the operation and handing the keys back to a new president, Noriega opposition leader Guillermo Endar, who international observers said had won the 1989 election that Noriega later annulled. He was sworn in with the help of U.S. forces hours after the invasion.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.