February 17 2020 Netanyahu’S Economic Plan: Who Will Believe the Spin?

Israel and the Middle East News Update

Monday, February 17

Headlines:

• U.S. Ambassador to Israel to Lead Joint Committee on Annexation • Palestinian PM: Trump's Mideast Plan 'Will be Buried' • Security Ties with Israel Won't Last Forever, Abbas Spokesperson Says • Hospitals and Cheap Houses: Netanyahu, Barkat Unveil Financial Plan • Right-Wing Religious Parties Renew Pledge to Back Netanyahu as PM • Mandelblit, Ashkenazi Recordings from Harpaz Affair Aired for First Time • Lapid: If Democrat wins, Netanyahu-Led Israel in ‘Deep Trouble’ • J Street Calls for Democratic Group to Take Down Sanders Aattack Ad

Commentary:

• Ha’aretz: “Whether Gantz Wins or Loses, It Will Be on Netanyahu’s Terms” - By Anshel Pfeffer, commentator at Ha’aretz • Ma’ariv: “Netanyahu’s Economic Plan: Who Will Believe the Spin?” - By Yehuda Sharoni, commentator at Ma’ariv

S. Daniel Abraham Center for Middle East Peace 633 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, 5th Floor, Washington, DC 20004 www.centerpeace.org ● Yoni Komorov, Editor

News Excerpts February 17, 2020 Ha’aretz U.S. Ambassador to Israel to Lead Joint Committee on Annexation The administration of U.S. President Donald Trump confirmed on Saturday that its ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, will lead the joint Israeli-U.S. committee that will discuss the Israeli annexation of West Bank settlements. The committee was announced by Trump last month during the unveiling of his Middle East peace plan, which would see Israel applying sovereignty to swathes of the West Bank in exchange for parts of Israel's south and a cluster of Arab-majority towns in the north. The participants' goal, as Trump said, is to "convert the conceptual map" shown in the plan into a "more detailed and calibrated rendering so that recognition can be immediately achieved.” See also, “US-Israeli mapping committee for Trump peace plan said finalized” (TOI)

Ynet News Palestinian PM: Trump's Mideast Plan 'Will be Buried' The Palestinian prime minister lashed out Sunday at U.S. President Donald Trump's proposal to end the Mideast conflict, saying it would be "buried very soon." Speaking at the Munich Security Conference, Mohammad Shtayyeh said the U.S. plan was "no more than a memo of understanding between Netanyahu and Trump." Shtayyeh criticized the fact that the proposal would leave a future Palestinian state fragmented and with "no sovereignty, "allowing Israel to annex large parts of the West Bank. He urged other countries to reject the Trump proposal while maintaining that Palestinians "are open to serious negotiations." Israel and the Palestinians have not held peace talks in almost than a decade. See also, “Palestinian Authority PM: Trump’s peace plan ‘will be buried very soon’” (TOI)

Ha’aretz Security Ties With Israel Won't Last Forever, Abbas Spokesperson Says The existing security ties between Israel and the PA won't last forever, a spokesperson for Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said Sunday, stressing that the PA is investing great effort to battle terror in the West Bank. Speaking to Israeli journalists in Ramallah, Nabil Abu Rudeineh said that the PA doesn't intend to interfere in Israel's general election on March 2, but merely seeks a real partner for peace. "The PA merely seeks a partner who is interested to reach a sustainable honest peace treaty, like Peres or Rabin," he said, referring to slain Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and late President Shimon Peres. See also, “PA Spokesman: Israelis have to live with us, not the Sudanese” (JPost)

Ynet News Hospitals and Cheap Houses: Netanyahu, Barkat Unveil Financial Plan Netanyahu and his candidate for finance minister, Likud MK Nir Barkat, on Sunday presented a financial that contains several wide-ranging and ambitious reforms. The plan is set to be implemented by Netanyahu's next government if his Likud party emerges victorious at next month's elections. Netanyahu said if he is to be re-elected after the March 2 vote, he would lead six major financial reforms, including: lowering house and food prices; massive investments in health care; investment in Israel's socio-geographic periphery in the Negev, Galilee and the West Bank, and investment in small businesses, start-ups and technology. See also “Nir Barkat to i24NEWS: Gantz will never fulfill Trump peace plan” (i24 News)

Times of Israel Right-Wing Religious Parties Renew Pledge to Back Netanyahu as PM Right-wing religious parties allied with Likud on Sunday again declared their loyalty to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, putting their signatures to a document pledging to back him for premier after next month’s national election. The letter was signed by Yamina, United Torah Judaism, and Shas. It was initiated by Minister of the Interior Aryeh Deri, the head of Shas. “We’ll only support Netanyahu. We are convinced that the right-wing bloc will succeed in getting 61 seats in the elections and assembling a strong nationalist government for the people of Israel,” the letter said. Netanyahu cheered the move, saying it was the “nail in the coffin of [Benny] Gantz’s bluff,” in reference to the prospects of his rival, the leader of the Blue and White party, of forming a governing coalition.

Jerusalem Post Mandelblit, Ashkenazi Recordings from Harpaz Affair Aired for First Time Recordings of Avichai Mandelblit and Gabi Ashkenazi discussing strategy in the midst of the 2010 Harpaz Affair were aired for the first time on Sunday night by Channel 13. The cases against both of them were both eventually closed. Mandelblit is now the attorney-general, but was the IDF's chief lawyer at the time, while Ashkenazi is now a top Blue and White MK, but was the IDF chief-of-staff at the time. The recordings portray two powerful men whose voices are filled with concern by a complex quandary which they have not yet figured there way out of. Ashkenazi had been given a problematic forged document, but failed to report the document to the authorities because of the complex issues it implicated.

Jerusalem Post Lapid: If Democrat wins, Netanyahu-Led Israel in ‘Deep Trouble’ Israel will be in “deep trouble” this November if Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is still in office and a Democratic candidate wins the US presidential election, Blue and White coleader MK Yair Lapid said Sunday. Speaking to The Jerusalem Post, Lapid said Netanyahu has damaged the cause of bipartisanship in general, and Israel’s relationship with the Democratic Party in particular. In a wide- ranging interview that will be published in full this weekend, Lapid also addressed how Blue and White intends to deal with the ongoing problem of Hamas terrorism from Gaza, the party’s stance on the Trump peace plan and what advice late senator John McCain gave him for sleeping well at night. Talking about Israel’s relations with the Democrats, Lapid asserted that Netanyahu has taken steps during his tenure that have deeply angered the leadership of the party.

Ha’aretz J Street Calls for Democratic Group to Take Down Sanders Aattack Ad The liberal Zionist organization J Street called on Saturday for a pro-Israel Democratic group to take down an ad attacking presidential candidate Bernie Sanders. Ahead of the February 22 Nevada caucuses, the Democratic Majority for Israel (DMFI) was unleashing TV ads in the Silver State blasting the Vermont senator on the idea that he’s not electable, Mediaite reported. “DMFI in reality represents a minority of pro-Israel Democrats who seem more concerned with targeting progressives over Israel policy than with confronting the destructive agenda of Donald Trump,” said J Street president Jeremy Ben-Ami. “Like their partner organization AIPAC –DMFI’s right-leaning positions on Israel and US foreign policy are completely out of touch with the vast majority of Democrats and American Jews, who are both supportive of Israel and strongly critical of the policies of the government” he added. 3

Ha’aretz – February 17, 2020 Whether Gantz Wins or Loses, It Will Be on Netanyahu’s Terms

By Anshel Pfeffer, commentator at Ha’aretz

• An aspiring Israeli politician in the age of Netanyahu has two alternative courses of action. He (it’s usually a he) can choose to emulate the prime minister and be a WannaBibi, putting the emphasis on bombastic public performances, on the stage and in interviews, and pretend to have the mega-star-statesman capabilities that have built the Netanyahu myth. Or they can choose to be an anti-Bibi, dial down the histrionics, focus on presenting actual policies and differentiate themselves from Netanyahu’s entire style of leadership. • Benny Gantz cannot afford to choose one or the other. He is running for the prime minister’s job as a centrist who needs right-wing votes to win. His base wants him to be an anti-Bibi, but to beat Bibi, he has no choice but to try and prove that he can be Bibi as well. He has no choice but to try and be both. His problem is that unlike the original, who is a devastatingly effective populist in public, but can be a policy wonk in private, when needed, Gantz is simply not disposed to bombast and populism. Over the last year, his first in politics, he has gotten better at the technical sides of retail politics. But he still cannot convince anyone that it comes to him naturally. • In an interview broadcast on Saturday on Channel 13, presenter Hila Korach said that “you look much less hungry than Netanyahu,” to which Gantz countered – “I’m very hungry, very happy with what I’m doing,” with all the enthusiasm a man his age normally has for undergoing a colonoscopy. It was the least honest bit in any of the five nearly-identical interviews Gantz gave this weekend. • After long months of not speaking with journalists on the record, Gantz finally broke his silence and sat down with five interviewers, in quick succession, at the same desk, wearing the same tie and for equal periods of time each (12 minutes). He said absolutely nothing that was new or news-worthy. In a way, that was an achievement. Gantz’s sudden blitz of interviews took place for one reason only – Netanyahu began his own blitz a couple of days earlier and the Kahol Lavan campaign cannot allow him to dominate the airwaves without a response. • But timing is the only thing the Netanyahu and Gantz interviews have in common. While Netanyahu sought out sycophantic broadcasters (on Channel 20, IDF Radio and a local radio station in the north), who did everything they could to showcase his campaign, rather than challenge him, Gantz gave his interviews to professional mainstream channels (11, 12, 13, Ynet and Walla) where the interviewers, while not hostile, were all professional and not looking to give him an easy time. • It’s hard to sum up Gantz’s performance. He didn’t shine. There were no memorable moments or quips that will be quoted in the future. Neither did he falter in any major way, though Likud, which is doing everything it can to show Gantz as stuttering and insubstantial, made much of the one time where he called Channel 12’s Dana Weiss “Dafna” by mistake, and another moment when he said the election was in April instead of March. Being grilled by five serious interviewers in quick succession is, and should be, an ordeal for any politician, and Gantz has no reason to be ashamed of the result. Except that the man who wants to be Israel’s next prime minister should be expected to offer something a bit more. 4

• It’s impossible to say whether Gantz did well or badly in the interviews because it wasn’t clear who he was trying to be. There were elements there of Netanyahu; the fake prime-ministerial study as a stage, the uncomfortable suit and tie, the meticulous preparation and rehearsed sound-bites. The meaningless slogans. The half-hearted tough talk. But even though his strategists obviously wanted to use these interviews to reassure Israelis, who see Netanyahu as the master-communicator, that their man can do it as well, Gantz simply isn’t that person. Even if he understands why he has to pretend he is, his heart simply is not in it. • At the same time, Gantz failed to use any of the many opportunities he had in the five interviews to show why he isn’t Netanyahu and why Israelis would be better off with him as a result. “Netanyahu has ended his historic role from a political perspective,” he said, in various variations, but he couldn’t explain in what way Gantz’s Israel would be different, let alone better than Bibi’s. “The public understands that the public is fed up with the situation we’re in,” was the best he could do. • Every time he had a chance to put some real distance between him and Netanyahu, he fell back on meaningless slogans. When the interviewers confronted him with Netanyahu’s claims that the only government he can form will be one with the support of the Arab MKs of the Joint List, he could have explained why for political and ideological reasons, such a government is impractical, but at the same time go on the attack over Netanyahu’s incitement against a community consisting of over twenty percent of Israeli citizens. Instead he parroted his vague commitment to only including parties “that accept Israel as a democratic and Jewish state” in his government. • The one point where he actually seemed to be standing up for Israel’s Arab citizens was when he rejected the section in the Trump Mideast peace plan mentioning the possibility of forcing some of them to become Palestinian citizens. Yet, even there, he couldn’t bring himself to refer to Arab citizens explicitly, saying instead that “Israeli citizens in any place cannot live in another state and no one will be moved against their will.” • On the Trump Plan itself, he said he accepted it “in its generality,” and as “a reference point for going forward.” The long list of empty superlatives he poured on the plan can be compared only to those Netanyahu has issued. But he said nothing of any substance about it, beyond promising that he would first try and implement it “in coordination” with the Palestinians and the Arab states, drawing justified derision from the interviewers. • To Walla’s Tal Shalev, he tried to claim that “there is a very high correlation between Kahol Lavan’s platform and what is in the Trump plan.” Likewise when he spoke of his plans for Gaza, he managed to be both vague and unconvincingly bombastic. If Hamas will not keep the peace and return the bodies of Israeli soldiers, “the fear of the IDF will actively return to the Gaza Strip,” he told Ynet’s Attila Shumfalvi. • Gantz’s best moment in the interviews was when he discussed his plan for reforming the health system with Channel 13’s Korach (who managed in the confines of 12 minutes to get the most out of him). Not that he had time to go into that many specifics, but for a few moments he seemed to be capable of making clear statements regarding his plans. This was one issue on which he didn’t feel he needed to match Netanyahu in any way. • I’ve met Gantz before in scenarios where he wasn’t running for office and didn’t need to prove himself. He was an IDF general and his uniform, rank and position gave him then whatever

credibility he needed. I can’t say that the pre-politics Gantz had sparkling charisma. He didn’t and that was fine. He came over as an intelligent, competent and slightly boring technocrat. He managed to be articulate, without being eloquent. He gave the impression of having a strong set of moral principles, without the need to actually speak out about them. What he didn’t convey, then and now, was whether he would also act upon those principles. • All he convinced us of in the last round of interviews was that no matter how much he rehearses sound-bites with his media-handlers, they will never quite trip off his tongue. He got the answers for the predictable questions right. When asked whether he would debate Netanyahu, he answered that “Netanyahu’s next debate is with the witnesses in court” - but he still managed to repeatedly get the order of the indictments against the prime minister wrong. In his one moment of honesty, when asked by Korach if he was easily pressured, he answered “look, I’m the one who was known in the army as ‘Benihuta (laidback Benny). They criticize me for not being politically violent, for not being rude, not being aggressive.” Off-guard for a second, Gantz was happy to admit that those are good things. • Gantz’s interviews are acknowledgment that whether he wins or loses, he will be doing so on Netanyahu’s terms. Netanyahu has defined for a generation what a winning politician looks like and Gantz lacks the talents to redefine the role. One questions remains, which no interview can answer: Can he still govern as someone different?

Summary: All Gantz convinced us of in the last round of interviews was that no matter how

much he rehearses sound-bites with his media-handlers, they will never quite trip off his tongue. He got the answers for the predictable questions right. When asked whether he would debate Netanyahu, he answered that “Netanyahu’s next debate is with the witnesses in court” - but he still managed to repeatedly get the order of the indictments against the prime minister wrong. In his one moment of honesty, when asked by Korach if he was easily pressured, he answered “look, I’m the one who was known in the army as ‘Benihuta (laidback Benny). They criticize me for not being politically violent, for not being rude, not

being aggressive.” Off-guard for a second, Gantz was happy to admit that those are good things.

Ma’ariv – February 17 2020 Netanyahu’s Economic Plan: Who Will Believe the Spin?

By Yehuda Sharoni, commentator at Ma’ariv

• After ten years, five of which occurred in Finance Minister Moshe Kahlon’s term, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu remembered to carry out no fewer than six reforms in the sphere of “the essentials.” They include the price of food, the cost of housing, healthcare, the Galilee and the Negev, small businesses and technology. Some of these promises might have been plausible if the person making them were a newly minted and refreshed prime minister, who arrived with a big appetite for carrying out reforms. Netanyahu already did that in 2003, when he served as Ariel Sharon’s finance minister and managed to put in motion a dramatic change in the financial system, the capital markets, pension plans and allowances. • But the prime minister from 2020 is definitely not the finance minister from 2003. This is a weary and exhausted prime minister who is fighting for his survival. After ten years, no one can believe his promises about implementing a series of reforms proposed by a finance minister who might be appointed in the next government. • After ten years in office, this is clearly spin, and it’s not clear which of his close associates think anyone will buy it. “Over the past decade we turned Israel into an economic powerhouse, one of the world’s leading economies. A high-tech power, a cyber power, an independent power,” he said. • So if everything is so good, why do we need six more reforms? “I suggest that you don’t mock. There is a clear choice between the successful and the losers, between a free-market economy and a Histadrut economy,” said the prime minister. So everything’s clear. The “reforms” were a politically-motivated bid to undermine Blue and White, which changed gears and made its economic agenda its top priority. • By the way, Finance Minister Kahlon led the “Histadrut economy”—which Netanyahu attacked, in Netanyahu’s cabinet. We’re being promised a drastic reduction in the price of food by lowering tariffs, breaking up the monopolies and through regulation. Words are cheap, but you can’t eat them. The monopolies aren’t the problem, the government is: with a bloated VAT, with the rates for water, electricity, municipal taxes, other taxes and import regulations. The pledge to dramatically lower the cost of housing immediately brings one to tears. After all, in the past decade of Netanyahu’s government, the cost of housing has skyrocketed by 97%, including a 15% increase during Kahlon’s term as finance minister. • So why sell us illusions for the umpteenth time about freeing up land administered by the Israel Land Authority, reducing bureaucracy, lowering taxation on apartments (where will the money come from?) and subsidizing mortgages? Um, hello? Has anyone in Netanyahu’s bureau heard about the deficit? • They’re talking about huge investments in healthcare, but NIS 30 billion were added to the healthcare budget in the last five years and they went down the drain. Where will the money needed to build four more hospitals come from? The slogan for massive investments in the Galilee, the Negev and Judea and Samaria always works, but it is never fulfilled. Where are the billions of shekels that the Arab sector was promised?

• Promoting small businesses is a worn-out slogan, like Netanyahu’s spin. Except for the matter of freezing municipal taxes at the expense of the dwindling budget for the local authorities, all the other slogans—like starting a revolution in business licensing, and matching social benefits for the self-employed—were tossed in the air and stayed there. • Finally, the pledges to promote technologies of the future like cyber, robotics and communications always work—because no one actually knows how to measure the pace of implementing them. • The bottom line is that it would be enough if even one of the reforms that were presented yesterday were put into practice. It would be even more desirable to hope that Netanyahu upholds his commitment to Nir Barkat and appoints him finance minister, if and when the Likud forms the government.

Summary: After ten years in office, this is clearly spin, and it’s not clear which of his close associates think anyone will buy it. “Over the past decade we turned Israel into an economic powerhouse, one of the world’s leading economies. A high-tech power, a cyber power, an independent power,” he said. So if everything is so good, why do we need six more reforms? “I suggest that you don’t mock. There is a clear choice between the successful and the losers, between a free-market economy and a Histadrut economy,” said the prime minister. So everything’s clear. The “reforms” were a politically-motivated bid to undermine Blue and White, which changed gears and made its economic agenda its top priority.