Every since the Knesset speaker was replaced and the Likud-led bloc started legislating the measures guaranteed under the coalition agreements, the conventional wisdom was that the outgoing government would use the backwind for its unrestrained attacks on the yet-to-be-sworn in government. There were some who were convinced that Prime Minister Yair Lapid's bloc would follow through on threats it had made, at least in the Knesset – where they have the easiest platform to express its opposition to various initiatives.
Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram
Despite being in the minority, the outgoing bloc has enough tools at its disposal to wage some obstructionism, through real fights in the committees, endless filibusters, and more. But to everyone's surprise, all the tough talk on civil disobedience and massive demonstrations have been replaced by a whole host of deals on procedural matters in the Knesset.
Along with the sighs of relief among right-wing lawmakers on being spared the need to stay days on end in a never-ending plenum session to deal with the slew of procedural objections from the opposition to slow down the process, they have also been slightly concerned that there is some hidden reason for this lack of fighting spirit on the part of the opposition. Something doesn't compute in having the Knesset just ends its deliberations that day at the early hour of 6 p.m. without much debate, and everything is run so smoothly in the plenum despite Netanyahu being days away from his deadline and there being at least 4 bills that still need to be passed. Perhaps there is the World Cup games that everyone wanted to get home to watch, but that's the only thing that makes sense.
Their suspicion intensified as soon as it transpired that the main point person negotiating the terms on behalf of the opposition is Ze'ev Elkin, from Defense Minister Benny Gantz's Blue and White, rather than an MK from Lapid's party, Yesh Atid.
The big question that has emerged in the wake of the election is whether the Gantz option has been completely taken off the table. This question has once again come up this week, in the wake of the intense criticism of the Likud coalition-in-the-making and its various agreements catering to far-Right and Haredi elements.
Netanyahu's response to these attacks over the past few days could indicate where he is heading. He has not endorsed the demands made by his right-wing elements, nor does he justify them, but he has explained that he will ultimately be the final arbiter. In other words, he is trying to send the message that even he is uncomfortable with those requests, and the right-wing parties have overplayed their hand by demanding such high-profile portfolios and control over agencies and budgets that far exceeds their relative strengths and size. Netanyahu is also trying to suggest that if he only had an alternative option that he could wave at them, like Gantz joining his coalition, he would gladly do so if that meant putting Itamar Ben-Gvir, Bezalel Smotrich, Aryeh Deri, and Moshe Gafni back in places. To put it mildly, these right-wing party leaders have jumped the shark in recent days by making their outlandish remarks.
The Gantz question is all the more pertinent in the wake of his decision to distance himself from Prime Minister Yair Lapid's combative grassroots activity against Netanyahu. While Gantz is in the anti-NEtanyahu bloc headed by Lapid, he continues to act independently, and in some cases, he has not shied away from attacking the outgoing prime minister publicly or disavowing his comments. ."Leaders need to lead protest movements, and I don't think that standing on some bridge in some corner is the key model for this, but everyone can choose their own path," he said, sending a zinger over to Lapid's way during the Blue and White faction meeting. He also made sure to stress that unlike Lapid's comments "our camp doesn't think the Netanyahu coalition is lunatic, crazy or insane."
But despite the concern on the Right, the chances of Gantz joining at the last moment to Netanyahu's coalition are all but nonexistent according to political insiders. The conventional wisdom is that the various arrangements with the outgoing government were designed to delay the legislation of the various measures Netanyahu seeks without debilitating the Lapid camp in a pointless battle; it is not designed to bring about a Gantz membership in the coalition.
It is abundantly clear that this time around, if this was to happen, Gantz would at most get to keep the defense portfolio; he would not get the alternate prime minister role he had during the previous rotating premiership agreement he had with Netanyahu. Nor would he get parity in terms of size and appointments or veto powers on any major decision, two prerogatives he was granted in the last round. He would, at best, be an outsider in a coalition that would not need his vote. Netanyahu would also not be able to promote his various reforms in the judiciary if he were in the coalition, nor would Netanyahu be able to accommodate the Haredim's requests.
Not burning bridges
What is known now might not hold true a year from now or several months down the road. No one in Gantz's State Party or Likud would bet on the defense minister ruling out a future partnership all four years. Many see the possibility of having Gantz join the coalition as a very realistic option that would serve both Gantz and Netanyahu. They have also pointed to the differences in tone and tenor Gantz coming out of Gantz compared with Lapid.
Both oppose the bill that would lift the restrictions on Deri becoming cabinet minister, but whereas Lapid has attacked the Shas leader head-on, called him a convict, and warned that he was not fit to serve as finance minister, Gantz has attacked the bill on procedural grounds, saying it was not right to pass legislation that is custom-made to serve a certain individual rather than the general public
Lapid sounds like someone who knows that Deri would never sit alongside him in a coalition, but Gantz sounds has been cautious, presumably because he thinks there is still a chance for collaboration in the future. The same with his posture toward United Torah Judaism and its demands. Lapid, like a fighter charging a hill, has warned that coalition agreement with the part is akin to having Israel become like Iran and its Sharia laws, but Gantz has only voiced moderate opposition, perhaps even with a wink.
Gant's State Party has not ruled out joining the coalition at some point, but according to senior members, such a plan is currently not being deliberated. They say that the differences that have emerged between Gantz and Lapid are not just a function of how each sees the prospect of talks with the Haredim in the future, but also because of the realization that Gantz could pick up support among right-wing voters who may turn their back on Netanyahu. That's why the State Party will focus on issue-based criticism rather than personal attacks. Lapid's electoral base is very different, and that's why he has had no qualms in riding the wave of hatred they have toward the incoming government.
Conversion therapy
One of the new pieces of legislation that Netanyahu's coalition partners have demanded as part of the coalition agreements is the amendment to the Law of Return. The Religious Zionist Party, Otzma Yehudit, Shas, and United Torah Judaism want to scrap the provision that lets grandsons and granddaughters of Jews make aliyah. United Torah Judaism and Otzma Yehudit want to redefine who meets the criteria to be considered a Jew so that only Orthodox conversion would apply to anyone not born to a Jewish mother.
The High Court of Justice has ruled last year that Jews who underwent Reform and Conservative conversion should be considered halachicly Jewish in certain conditions. Now the legislation will end that.
Netanyahu is not keen on heeding this demand. He is worried this would unleash an outcry in the non-Orthodox Jewish world, which is particularly strong in the US. The provision has a symbolic significance since this is also how the Nazis defined Jews. If Hitler says your grandfather from your father's side makes you Jewish and warrants your murder in the gas chambers, then you should also be considered Jewish for the purposes of aliyah; this was the rationale when the law was first introduced. That said, the law never mentions this in its preamble or introduction. The only reason the state legislated this provision is that the High Court of Justice ruled on a specific case in 1970, setting a precedent that Jews don't have to be practicing Jews as long as they have not converted to another faith.
A recent study that has been shown to MKs in the incoming coalition shows that as a result of the new interpretation, the number of non-Jews who made aliyah under the law skyrocketed and the Jewish majority in the country dropped gradually from 85% in 1970 to 74% in 2021.
Another figure that emerged is that only 57% of Olim who have arrived over the past decade are Jews (including those who were converted in non-Orthodox streams), and this stands at 34% among those who arrived from the former Soviet Union. Some 66% of Olim from Russia are not Jewish and don't define themselves as Jewish. Only 5% of Olim from the West are not Jewish by comparison.
In other words, canceling the grandchildren provision shows will not impact Olim from the US and Western Europe, because only 5% of them arrive in Israel by exercising that clause. Canceling this provision will dramatically impact the immigrants from Russia and Eastern Europe who have found in Israel a safe economic refuge, sometimes without even having their parents in Israel, so there is not even the appearance of family reunification.
This problem has worsened over the years. In 2013, the government had to extend the right to make aliyah not just to grandchildren but also to great-grandchildren, in the name of family reunification. While the percentage of Jews in the population has decreased the damn has been increasingly close to being burst.
The grandchildren and great-grandchildren provision is only the smaller of problems. The next big saga involves the question of conversions in Africa. There are potentially tens of thousands of Africans who consider themselves descendants of lost Jewish tribes who have undergone conversion in recent years. This process has been carried out without any rabbinical supervision, and no stream recognizes it.
The Supreme Court has taken up a petition that seeks to grant this conversion official state recognition. Without adding the word "halachic" to the current Law of Return, the floodgates would open and Israel would see unprecedented levels of migrants. Israel has not been able to properly deal with African illegal migrants, so it is utterly unprepared to deal with the throngs of legal converts who enjoy the full benefits of olim would show the states.
Hypocrisy, old style
The recent attacks by the outgoing government on the emerging coalition are based on the public's short memory, media sympathy, and, apparently also the burning hatred of some of the Left's voters against Netanyahu, the Haredim, and the Right. Otherwise, it is hard to explain the impressive hypocrisy on display.
This is not the first time. After Lapid used harsh language against the Gantz-Netanyahu unity government, he went on to do the same thing - including the rotating premiership deal -with Naftali Bennett. He was also vehemently opposed to the law that allowed ministers to temporarily resign from the Knesset but then used the very same law upon assuming office. He also demanded several years ago that all future governments would have no more than 18 ministers, only to form a government of 30. It's one thing to make bombastic statements and then break your pledges upon hitting reality but attacking someone who has done the exact same thing you have done is just beyond the pale.
Lapid has recently tried to describe Netanyahu as someone whom the Haredim have managed to extort by making him add budgets to yeshivot. But even under a conservative estimate, the outgoing Lapid-Bennett government funded the same Arab parties' pet projects with the same amount that was added by Netanyahu to the Haredi budgets.
Lapid has lamented that Haredi rabbis are going to determine the fate of the state, but he may have conveniently forgotten those nights when he was so eager to get approval for various moves from the Arab parties Shura Council that his government was so dependent on.
Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!
