The Jewish people lost an invaluable asset with the passing of Sheldon Adelson this week. When you follow the path of donations he generously scattered for years, it seems there is only one thing they have in common: the good of the Jewish people. It is as if the entire financial empire he built with his own two hands was directed first and foremost at serving this end.
Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter
Someone who saw this from up close is Dani Dayan, who served first as the head of the Yesha Council, the umbrella organization of municipal councils of Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria, and later as Israel's consul in New York.
"He was wholeheartedly involved in every issue for the benefit of the people of Israel and the land of Israel," Danon said. "Sheldon didn't shy away from donations to small organizations as long as they served the same purpose.
Danon called Adelson's donation to the Ariel University's school of medicine "a strategic donation for the development of Samaria. The place is creating an entirely different reality, he is fortifying the status of Ariel and all of Samaria and bolstering it more than ever. I was in attendance when he announced the $70 million donation to Taglit-Birthright, which is aimed at the continuation of Jewish existence in the US and Israel's connection with the younger generation that faces assimilation and alienation. He carried this project almost entirely on his own shoulders, the same with the donations to Yad Vashem [Holocaust memorial and museum in Jerusalem]. It wasn't just the political issue that was important to him, but the continued existence of the Jewish people and ensuring the connection to the State of Israel would not be severed.
"I've always lamented that US Jews don't put the treatment of Israel at the top of their priorities when they vote for the representatives in the elections, but Adelson did. When he would meet potential presidential or senatorial candidates, the only thing that interested him was their attitude toward Israel. That action should have made him an example to US Jewry, and I continue to hope it does."
Moving past the 'voting in droves' gaffe
With Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu under ongoing attack for daring to ask the Arab public for its support in the upcoming election, we must remember his comments were not racist. Even his poorly worded "flagship" remark that the Arabs were voting in droves was not said in a racist context. All Netanyahu meant to say was that the Joint Arab List would grow due to an increase in voting in the sector. That's not racist, it's political. Then why was this statement such a failure? It was said in an offensive and generalizing way that provided a tailwind to those who do hate Arabs. Sometimes it doesn't matter what someone says, it only matters what their listeners hear. This is all the more true when the speaker is a leader.
Over the last year, there has been an attempt by leftists in the political system to blur the divide between attacks on Arabs that have even an iota of racism, but sometimes more, and legitimate criticism of the opinions of Arab lawmakers, which is something else entirely. The positions of the Arab lawmakers are indeed dangerous to those who believe Israel is the home of the Jewish people and not the home of various peoples. To say this opinion is a racist one is lie saying the Law of Return is racist.
Ever since the Arab lawmakers entered the Knesset on separate lists, they have raised the banner of opposition to Israel as the Jewish state. They have always seen Zionism as a foreign entity that has no right to exist in the Middle East and maybe anywhere else for that matter. All the Arab lawmakers from all the Arab parties, without exception, adhere to this belief.
That is why no one in any Israeli government ever considered including an Arab party in the coalition. Last year, when the successors of the Left's mythological leaders' only agenda was to bring down Netanyahu, this principle that a state cannot include those who are against its very existence in the government was trampled upon and turned into a plaything. But there is no connection between this and the civil rights of Arab Israelis who are state citizens. Every government has seen a need to look out for the welfare of the Arabs in their communities and villages. In fact, Netanyahu was one of the leaders to invest more in their sector, whether through budgets, his five-year plan for the economic development of the sector, or expanding aid in the fields of security and government services. That is why, in contrast to the assertions of Meretz's Nitzan Horowitz and Yair Golan and Joint Arab List head Ayman Odeh, Netanyahu's visit to the Arab-majority city of Nazareth wasn't entirely disconnected from the moves he has made behind the scenes. That's not to say there were no political motivations. There most certainly were. But it wasn't a hypocritical move.
Netanyahu came to understand the sector's power in the last election when he increased Ethiopian support for the Likud by convincing Gadi Yevarkan to leave Blue and White for the Likud. In these upcoming fourth elections, the focus will be on the Arab population. The potential is not that great, amounting to maybe one Knesset seat. Suspicions among members of the sector remain high. However, the damage this does to the Joint Arab List, an automatic member of the anti-Netanyahu bloc, could be major and possibly decisive.
Netanyahu has seen certain polls that predict he could do even better and point to a rift between the Arab community and the Joint Arab List. Many are furious that Arab lawmakers opposed the Abraham Accords that normalized ties between Israel, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain. Netanyahu's general vaccination campaign also has their attention. According to the data, the premier is seen as something of a savior there, too. According to the data, support for Likud could result in up to three Knesset seats from the community. The familiar faces now coming out in support of Netanyahu, Nazareth Mayor Ali Salam and Ra'am party head Mansour Abbaas before him, are helping to advance this slow process.
After the last election, all of the lines were crossed when the Zionist party heads from the "anyone but Bibi"camp planned to ally with the Joint Arab List in an effort to oust Netanyahu. Even Yisrael Beytenu party head Avigdor Lieberman, who promised to revoke the citizenship of Joint Arab List lawmakers Odeh and Ahmad Tibi, greenlighted the planned effort. It was only thanks to Gesher head Orly Levy-Abekasis, followed by Derech Eretz's Yoaz Hendel and Zvi Hauser, we were spared this exacerbation. In the next Knesset, they may not be able to find three righteous figures, let alone one. Netanyahu's actions are now fuel to the flames of those planning such a move. If Netanyahu can do it, they will argue, so can we.
Yet there is a difference between a government relying on lawmakers that negate the state's existence and believe justice lies with its enemies on matters of diplomacy and security and transferring funds and protecting basic civilian rights. That is why efforts to blur the lines are at their peak and will continue to grow in the coming two and a half months. The Israelis party head Ron Huldai has already announced this week he has no issues with any of the Arab parties outside of Balad. When the time comes, he'll likely accept that party too.
In every election campaign, Netanyahu has explained to right-wing voters that the key to the bloc's success is to have as many people vote for Likud as possible. Up until now, right-wing parties have had no way to fight back against a prime minister that sucks all of their votes dry. The Yamina party believes it has found the solution. In the coming weeks, party members will try to explain by every means possible that the only way to ensure a right-wing government is to vote for them.
According to this logic, the Likud could once again be left without a government, and the state could once again be dragged into another round of elections. In order to ensure the establishment of some kind of right-wing government, whether with or without Netanyahu, a large Yamina is needed. It is the deciding factor between a classic Netanyahu-right-wing-Haredi government and a government headed by either Yamina head Naftali Bennet or New Hope head Gideon Sa'ar.
So what's the difference between Bennett and Sa'ar? After all, Sa'ar is also on the Right, and this week even added former Yesha Council head Dani Dayan to his list. The thing is, Sa'ar doesn't have the first option. He has promised not to join a Netanyahu-led government. Bennett's obligation is first and foremost to the forming of a right-wing government, or at least that's what he says.
Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!
Among Yamina members, the belief is that National Union head Bezalel Smotrich's decision to break ties with their party was planned in advance and that he never planned to negotiate seriously in the first place. They say his talks with Bennett were aimed at distracting voters' attention and place the purported blame on the one who supposedly gave up on values and ideology, something that should have bolstered support for those who remained to maintain them.
They think Smotrich, a principled and religious man, has grown vain, that a few promising polls shook him up. Yamina members believe they are the ones who gave Smotrich legitimacy, taking him from a marginal, radical member to the mainstream over the last year, and now he is embarking on a new path without them.
They think the timing of the talks is proof this was all planned in advance. Last Tuesday, a meeting was held between Smotrich and Bennett. According to Yamina members, the national religious leader didn't discuss any principled issues but focused on the party list. Bennett refused Smotrich's request, and the two went their separate ways. According to his fellow Yamina head Ayelet Shaked, the parties had agreed not to attack each other in public until the party lists were officially submitted. On Saturday night, however, Smotrich blasted Bennett in a TV interview, but Bennett let it slide, and on Sunday, made his final offer. Smotrich turned it down and gave another forceful interview critical of Bennett. At this point, Yamina members say they realized Smotrich wasn't engaged in genuine negotiations and returned fire.
Smotrich tells a different version of the story. From the get-go, he said, the dispute was purely ideological. As the leader of the religious Zionists, he explained, he can't take the public he holds dear on an adventure. Bennett has rid himself of values and announced he was taking a break from ideological issues, and who knows what government he'll prefer to join, even when a Netanyahu-led government is on the table.
Next week, Habayit Hayehudi will hold primaries for party leadership. The assessment is that powers beyond the political system are involved behind the scenes, making this an event to follow. Bennett would like to see Nir Orbach elected leader, making the party ripe for the picking. Smotrich and Netanyahu would like to see Hagit Moshe win.
Orbach was Bennett's right-hand man when he led Habayit Hayehudi and a partner to all his political moves in the party's institutions before he left to establish Yamina. The two have maintained warm ties.
Moshe, who is deputy mayor of Jerusalem, is an entirely different story.
"My objective is to make Habayit Hayehudi a significant party and our ideology a political force." She said she wanted to see a return to the Mafdal party, not in a nostalgic sense, but in its authentic representation of the national-religious public.
"There are kippah wearers in every party, but they aren't necessarily bolstering political power and obligated to the national-religious public. An alliance with Yamina is not an alliance. Bennett has announced his is not a religious party. He has neglected the religious Zionists, headed Habayit Hayehudi, and abandoned it. He wants Habayit Hayehudi as a lifeline to grab onto in case he doesn't garner enough Knesset seats and once he fails to pass the electoral threshold."
