The Crisis of the Zionist Left Oz Aruch

The Crisis of the Zionist Left Oz Aruch

PEACEMISM | What Happened to the Israeli Peace Camp? 1/27 The Crisis of the Zionist Left

Oz Aruch

Over a period of one and a half years, oath never to again join a Netanyahu-led extending over all of 2019 and half of government, proclaimed: 2020, the Israeli political system underwent unprecedented turmoil. It took a grand “We are joining a unity government as equal total of three consecutive election members; the Labor Party is returning to the campaigns and one global health crisis national leadership. In a national, health and to bring about the formation of a national economic emergency, we have decided again government. Electoral trench warfare was to be on the side that acts to fulfil our social- waged between the party, led by democratic worldview, to stand again at the longstanding Prime Minister Netanyahu, center of the political stage, and to restore and the “Blue and White” list, headed by the Labor Party to an important, significant former general and political novice Benny and influential position of influence on Israeli Ganz, both of whom had failed to rally the government policy.” parliamentary majority needed to form a government on their own. Eventually, The Labor Party chair’s reference to the the Covid-19 epidemic and the ensuing “equal membership” in the new government, economic crisis offered the necessary might create the impression that it was boost and cover for the formation of a formed by the two rival ideological camps broad government joining Netanyahu’s in , i.e. between the right-wing and right-wing bloc (comprising Likud and the left-wing camps, and that the Labor Ultra-Orthodox parties) with the Blue-and- Party, which for decades following the White and Labor parties. establishment of the state led the Israeli left-wing camp, played a significant role in Acceding to collaboration with Netanyahu the process, as was the case in all previous despite having vowed against it for three unity governments in Israel. However, this consecutive election campaigns, Blue-and- depiction could not be further from the White and Labor justified the concession truth. The 18-month long election campaign, by depicting the new government as an as well as the various coalition talks and “emergency unity government,” the merging of the establishment of the alleged “unity two rival political camps in the country, willing and emergency” government were not part to put aside their ideological differences to of a process that took place between the tackle the spiraling health, economic and Israeli right-wing and left-wing camps, but political crises ailing the country. between Netanyahu’s right-wing bloc on the one hand, and a mix of parties that consider In his statement of intent as he led the themselves center-right, and whose leaders Labor Party into the newly formed unity made sure to declare at every opportunity government despite having publicly that they did not belong to the left-wing shaved his iconic moustache (so that the and/or represent leftist ideas. viewers could “read his lips”) in a dramatic

Heinrich Böll Stiftung | PEACEMISM 2/27 The Crisis of the Zionist Left Oz Aruch

For the first time since the establishment of Instead of offering a clear alternative to the the State of Israel, the declared parties of the right-wing, Blue-and-White seemed rather Zionist left, namely Labor and have to communicate to their potential voters been swinging at the electoral threshold, that they had no significant ideological

For the first time since the establishment of the State of״ Israel, the declared parties of the Zionist left have been swinging at the electoral threshold, viewing the political ״goings-on from the sidelines viewing the political goings-on from the disagreements with the governing Likud, sidelines, devoid of political support and only that contrary to the latter, their influence. These two parties, which in the representatives were not tainted with 1992 elections won 44 seats (Labor) and corruption. Thus, on a range of key political 12 seats (Meretz), together representing issues that have tended to delineate the 47% of Israeli voters, during the last round divide between the right-wing and left- of elections scraped by with a mere six wing camps in the country in recent seats, representing roughly 5% of the vote. decades, especially on issues of foreign By leading his small party, represented by and security policy and the future of the just three seats, into the right-center “unity” Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it was difficult to government (in turn also precipitating a identify any significant differences between split from the Meretz Party), Labor Party the agendas of Likud and Blue- Chairman Amir Peretz might have very and-White. Furthermore, the -Blue-and״ well signed the death warrant for the main political platform that purported political platform of the Zionist left. to represent an alternative to White seemed the Israeli right also featured to communicate The virtual absence of the Zionist leftist prominent right-wingers who that they had parties from one of the most dramatic had defected to Blue-and- no significant and polarized political campaigns in the White from Likud (for various history of the country was not a function reasons, ideological differences ideological of some refreshing ideological breeze or disillusionment of the right- disagreements with offered by Blue-and-White, or a more wing agenda not among them) the governing Likud, accurate representation of a conceptual who supported the expansion only that contrary alternative to the decade-long right-wing of Jewish settlements in the to the latter, their rule under Netanyahu. Rather, Blue-and- . representatives White, which rose to prominence thanks were not tainted to left-wing voters and alleged to offer the Finally, the fact that Blue-and- ״only alternative to Netanyahu and Likud, White and Labor, that for three with corruption announced day and night that it was not consecutive election campaigns left-wing and refrained from conveying claimed to present a political alternative to any messages that could be construed as the right, agreed to include a clause in the “leftist” or even as an ideological break coalition agreement that sanctioned the from the right-wing agenda of the past annexation of parts of the West Bank to Israel years effectively leading to the erasure of as of July 2020, exemplifies the fundamental the Zionist left’s traditional positions from change in the composition of the Israeli the public discourse. parliament. For the first time in decades, the

PEACEMISM | What Happened to the Israeli Peace Camp? 3/27 The Crisis of the Zionist Left Oz Aruch

Knesset is no longer divided between a left- variable and fluid. We can, however, identify wing camp that supports the advancement three conceptual arenas that have tended of the peace process and the right, which to define the right-to-left divide in Israel objects to it. The decision of the Labor Party, in recent decades: the social-economic, once at the helm of the Zionist left and religion and state, and the Israeli-Palestinian the peace camp, to join this government, conflict. In addition, in the last decade of even signing a waiver relinquishing the right right-wing rule, the independence of the to object to any legislation relating to the judiciary, the character of Israel as a liberal annexation of parts of the West Bank, is democracy for all its citizens, and the rule tantamount to an admission of guilt and a of law itself have become divisive issues concession of defeat. between the left and the right.

While the public’s identification with the left camp has״ dropped to unprecedented lows, an overwhelming majority of Israelis favors the positions of the Zionist left relative to ״those of the right

How did the Israeli Zionist left parties, As far as the social-economic arena is and most notably the Labor Party, concerned, the Israeli left’s positions are which established the state and ruled it similar to those of left-wing movements unchallenged until 1977, reach the brink of elsewhere, namely promoting social welfare extinction? And how can one account for policies, and government intervention in the fact that the nearly complete departure trade and private equity to reduce economic of the Zionist-left parties from the political and social disparities. In the relationship stage took place, of all times, at one of the between religion and state, the left most critical junctures in Israeli history, advocates for the separation of religion when the status quo regarding some of the and state, a pluralistic approach to different most fundamental tenets defining Israeli streams of and the dismantling of public life, including the rule of law, Israel’s the Chief Rabbinate of Israel. Finally, in the character as a Jewish and democratic state, arena of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the and the future of the Israeli-Palestinian left supports the resolution of the conflict conflict, was being called into question? through territorial compromise and the promotion of the two-state paradigm.

The Riddle of the Zionist Left The decline of support for the Zionist left left parties, as reflected in the past Although it is common to divide the Israeli elections, is confirmed by variouspublic political map into the “right,” “left” and opinion polls. According to surveys from “center,” the terminology is not accurate for the past year, only about 15% of the Jewish several reasons, including sectoral voting public in Israel defines itself as belonging patterns, the fact that the positions of many to the political left. However, while the of the political movements and citizens public’s identification with the left camp are not necessarily coherently aligned and with its official parties has dropped with any one of the approaches, and the to unprecedented lows, attitudes on a fact that the content of politically right range of public issues demonstrate that and left positions in the Israeli context is an overwhelming majority of Israelis favors

Heinrich Böll Stiftung Tel Aviv 4/27 The Crisis of the Zionist Left Oz Aruch the positions of the Zionist left relative to support the separation of religion from state those of the right, further compounding could see themselves as right-wingers. But the riddle of disenchantment with the left. here too, the data from various polls and surveys presents a different picture whereby With regard to the relationship between in the third arena of the Israeli-Palestinian religion and state, according to the Hiddush conflict, a majority of the Israeli public has Religion and State Index published in for the past three decades consistently September 2017, support for the separation supported the left-wing position regarding of religion and state has been rising steadily, the future of the conflict, namely the two- climbing from 56% in 2012 to 68% in 2017. state solution. Likewise, on the question of LGBT rights, 78% of the adult Jewish population in Israel Thus, despite the decline of Parties that purport supports the recognition of same-sex the Zionist left parties, their to represent an couples (55% support same-sex marriage declared positions are popular alternative to the while 23% support the legal recognition of among Israelis. It is therefore same-sex unions). conceivable that if the electoral right-wing rule are system were designed so that evading the “left” Public opinion in the social-economic arena Israelis could vote on their label like the plague illustrates a similar picture: According to a political convictions rather than survey by the Katznelson Foundation from for a party, the governing policy in a variety December 2018, 76% of the Israeli public of political arenas in Israel would have been believes that the state should fund free guided by what is deemed in Israel as a education from birth; 71% favor restoring rather leftist agenda. And yet, Israeli left- natural resources to state ownership and wing parties have been stripped entirely of 69% define themselves as social democrats. their electoral assets, while the right-wing A further survey by the Israeli Democracy has completely dominated Israeli politics for Institute published in September 2019 over a decade now, even though its official echoes these findings: An absolute majority positions seem to have no broad support of Israelis (93%) believes that the share of in society. In the meanwhile, parties that the national budget allocation for health purport to represent an alternative to the expenditure should be increased, while 82% right-wing rule are evading the “left” label favor an increase in public expenditure on like the plague. How might this conundrum education as well. A large proportion of the be explained? Israeli public also supports increasing the welfare budget (72%) and expenditure on In order to provide a satisfactory explanation transportation (71%). for the withering of the Zionist left and its departure from the public stage, one Interestingly, the Katznelson Foundation must first know something about its survey also shows that of the 69% who representatives and their positions, and consider themselves Social Democrats, 64% understand how it is perceived in the public define themselves also as right-wingers. sphere in Israel. To this end, we invited This apparent contradiction could support twenty academics, journalists, activists, the claim that it is actually the third arena, and former politicians and generals to shed namely the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, light on some of the key processes in Israeli that delineates the line between right and society that have shaped the development left, and therefore, Israelis who consider of the Zionist left over the past few decades. themselves social democrats and may even

PEACEMISM | What Happened to the Israeli Peace Camp? 5/27 The Crisis of the Zionist Left Oz Aruch

The Zionist Left and the Peace The connection between the Zionist left Camp parties and the Peace Camp is far from obvious Posed with the question of what the Israeli The connection״ left stands for, the ordinary Israeli today As demonstrated by former might answer, “the belief that peace can Minister and longstanding be made with the Arabs.” Indeed, during MP of the Labor Party Uzi between the Zionist the decades since the signing of the Baram in his essay “The left parties and the Oslo Accords in the 1990s, a complete Labor Party and the Peace Peace Camp is far ״terminological fusion between the “Israeli Camp,” the breakdown from obvious left” and the “Israeli Peace Camp” has taken into rival political camps in place. Accordingly, the slogan “land for Israel in the first decades following the peace” became the main, if not exclusive, establishment of the state of Israel was very hallmark of the Zionist left. This association different from the current division, revolving, of willingness to relinquish territory (in among other things, around the tensions return for peace) with the Israeli left-wing between the socialist and liberal camps and has become so deeply ingrained in the the country’s positioning vis-à-vis the Soviet public psyche that even elected members Union. This latter issue especially polarized of the Likud who have never been members the Zionist left parties, which were known as of one of the Zionist left parties, such as the “workers’ camp” and which considered , , and in some cases, as their ideological rivals not the proponents even the “father” of the settlements, Ariel of a “greater Israel,” but much more the Sharon, have been variously identified with , who were identified with the “left” due to their willingness to transfer European liberals and supported private territories from Israeli to Palestinian control property and capitalism. Other political and to advance a political settlement of the issues that polarize Israeli politics nowadays, conflict based on territorial compromise such as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict or (in the case of Olmert and Livni). the status of Arab Israeli citizens (subjected to military rule until 1966) hardly played a role in Israeli public discourse in the Since the signing of the Oslo first decades after the founding of״ Accords in the 1990s, a complete the state. terminological fusion between the “Israeli left” and the “Israeli The seeds of change that would bring together the Zionist left and the Peace Camp were sown only after the 1967 ״Peace Camp” has taken place War. Still, two decades past the war, The popular conception that conflates the the Israeli peace camp, a loose network of Zionist left with the peace camp obscures movements and civil society organizations, the historical truth that these two entities remained light years away from formal party have not always overlapped. In what follows, politics and from the Zionist left parties. In we will examine their respective trajectories fact, during the first years after the capture and separate histories. Decoupling them will of the West Bank, Gaza and East provide the reader with an understanding during the 1967 War, there was a euphoric of the disappearance of the Israeli left in consensus across the Israeli politics, and prospects for a peace regarding Israel’s right to these territories. supported by the Israeli public-at-large. Individual and tiny cells on the radical left, such as “Matzpen” (Compass) opposed

Heinrich Böll Stiftung Tel Aviv 6/27 The Crisis of the Zionist Left Oz Aruch the occupation from the beginning, but as of this organization of murderers.” the Deputy Speaker of the Meretz Referring to Arafat’s visit to Austria when faction and former President of the Israel addressing the Knesset, Peres stated that National Fund, Professor Naomi Chazan “When Arafat says he aspires to establish a demonstrates in her essay, “The Rise of the secular and democratic state, we know what Israeli Peace Camp,” these groups were as secular and democratic model is closest to alienated from the Zionist left parties as his heart: that of Khomeini, whose they were from the right-wing camp: sense of democracy begins and Tiny cells on״ ends with a firing squad.” Peres “With virtually no public support further stated that even if the the radical left and remarkably little access to the PLO were to one day change its opposed the establishment, the fledgling peace camp, ideological platform, negotiations occupation from which first emerged on Israel’s social were out of the question, because the beginning, but and political fringes after the 1967 War, they would be nothing more than were as alienated had negligible influence over Israeli a pretense. policy and decision-makers for the first from the Zionist 20 years of its existence.“ Rabin, as well, the leading political left parties as they figure of the peace camp in the were from the ״Indeed, even the leaders of the Zionist 1990s and a consistent opponent right-wing camp left most closely associated with the of the settlement enterprise in peace camp, Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon the heart of Palestinian population, opposed Peres, were not necessarily the natural any talks with the PLO led by Arafat on the candidates to lead it. During his time as grounds that it was a “murderous terrorist Defense Minister in the 1970s, organization that should not be legitimized played a significant role in the founding through dialogue.” At the outbreak of the of the settlement enterprise. According in 1987, Rabin found himself in to Benny Katzover, a founding member of the position of Defense Minister as part of Gush Emunim and prominent leader of the a unity government between Labor and the settlement movement, Peres “was defense Likud and was harshly criticized for the use minister during the most critical period in of excessive violence against Palestinian the history of settlement enterprise and protesters. His tone-setting comment that the main driver for the approval of the IDF soldiers should “break the hands and first settlements.” Alongside his critical legs of Palestinian stone throwers” as a support for the settlement enterprise, means of deterrence led to confrontations Peres also vehemently ruled out any sort with the peace camp. of engagement with the PLO.

Thus, when Yasir Arafat, leader of the PLO was firstwelcomed in the summer of 1979 for talks with Austrian Chancellor Bruno Kreisky and former West German Social Democratic Chancellor Willy Brandt, Peres, as head of the opposition under the first right-wing government led by , joined hands with Likud in a rare display of unity to issue a bi-partisan condemnation of “the reception given by Chancellor Kreisky to the

PEACEMISM | What Happened to the Israeli Peace Camp? 7/27 The Crisis of the Zionist Left Oz Aruch

The Peace Camp’s Journey to that conflicts could be resolved through Mainstream Israeli Politics territorial compromise.

The recognition ­– in Israeli society and the According to Hecht, the fatigue resulting Zionist left in particular ­– of the Palestinians from the , followed by the and their right to self-determination, was First Intifada in 1987, also played a role in a gradual process that took place during driving home to the Israeli public the social the 1980s, as demonstrated by cost exacted by an ongoing military conflict journalist and publicist Ravit Hecht in her and control of a foreign civilian population. essay: “Lefties and Peaceniks: A Detrimental This public mood gave rise to a growing Symbiosis”? According to Hecht, the sector that was increasingly receptive to the evolution of the Israeli public’s stance idea of diplomatic compromise, and even, regarding the Palestinians was enabled of recognizing hitherto demonic enemies by two deep societal processes. The first such as “PLO terrorists.” The idea of ​​”land concerned the overall erosion of the appeal for peace,” first promoted and implemented of the socialist agenda, which had once by the right-wing government under Prime constituted an essential element of the Minister Begin, began to look attractive to identity of the Zionist left. The collapse many, because unlike the situation that of the Communist bloc, the exposure of prevailed before 1967, such a compromise its failures alongside the consolidation posed no potential harm to them or their of the Israeli middle-class, rendered the property. Similar to the peace treaty with socialist agenda antiquated in the eyes of , Israel would cede land and receive many Israelis. The second process named peace and security in return. The price of by Hecht was the erosion of the paradigm peace would be paid by the settlers in the of military dominance and territorial Palestinian territories, and in return, the expansion following the devastating and Palestinian refugees would agree to put traumatic Yom Kippur War with its many aside the historic keys to their homes in victims and social crises, alongside the Haifa and Lod, because they would now signing of the peace treaty with Egypt, under have their own state alongside Israel. right-wing leadership, which demonstrated

← Israeli prisoners of war in Syria (Photo credit: Wiki commons)

Heinrich Böll Stiftung Tel Aviv 8/27 The Crisis of the Zionist Left Oz Aruch

In light of these deep processes, the Zionist “victims of peace are preferable to victims left’s leaders identified the Israeli public’s of war,” it was the Zionist left exclusively receptiveness to the vision of peace and that came to be synonymous with the Peace began to establish a network of actors from Camp and identified with the slogan of the Zionist left parties and civil society “land for peace.” that came to be known as the Israeli Peace Camp. The reshaping of the Zionist left’s The fusion of the Zionist left with the Peace identity, this time as the “Peace Camp,” Camp during the 1990s took place, then, not thus served the interests of both the Zionist thanks to any natural alliance between the left parties, which were in need of a fresh two, but rather because the Labor Party’s narrative due to the depletion of their leadership framed the pursuit of peace socialist messages, and the tiny handful as a cornerstone of its newly founded of civil society actors that advocated for identity. The Zionist left thus situated the the division of the land between the Jordan pursuit of peace within a broader paradigm, River and the Mediterranean Sea into two presenting a vision to the Israeli public states, and recognized a golden opportunity that territorial compromises with the to enter the Israeli mainstream. The 1992 country’s Arab neighbors, would lead to the election victory and establishment of the normalization of Israel’s relations with its second Rabin government signified the hostile environment and, even further, to a culmination of this merger: for the first time snowball effect that would usher in a new in Israel’s history, the prospect of a peace era of regional prosperity. Shimon Peres, treaty with the Palestinians not only made who had opposed any dialogue with the PLO it to the national political stage, but even some two decades earlier, published a book became the hallmark of the Zionist left. in 1993 titled “A New Middle East,” in which

The idea of ”land for peace” began to look attractive to״ many Israelis, because unlike the situation that prevailed before 1967, such a compromise posed no potential harm to ״them or their property

During the 1990s, with the Israeli-Palestinian he outlined this vision where economic and conflict and the peace process at center national interests would sustain peace in stage in Israeli politics, the division between the hitherto troubled region. the left and the right was recast. The Israeli left was now widely seen as the Peace Camp, while the Israeli right built its identity as No Partner & Villa in the the camp opposing the Oslo Accords and Jungle the promotion of the peace process with the PLO. Thus, even though the Israeli right The power of the Zionist left’s “peace was the first and only political camp to sign paradigm” did not emerge from nowhere, a peace treaty with an enemy state that as shown by Oren Nahari in his essay included secession of territories (the Sinai “Disillusionment.” From its inception, the Peninsula to Egypt) and although it was “peace paradigm” was closely intertwined Likud Prime Minister Begin, who in defense with political dynamics in the international of the peace treaty with Egypt declared that sphere, created and shaped by the euphoria

PEACEMISM | What Happened to the Israeli Peace Camp? 9/27 The Crisis of the Zionist Left Oz Aruch that prevailed in the West following the and regional events such as the 9/11 attacks, collapse of the Soviet Union and the Eastern the invasion of Iraq, followed by a decade of Bloc, and the expectation that the Western terrorist attacks against Western targets political order based on democratization, across the globe further eroded the underlying secularization, and peaceful conflict optimism of the 1990s and the belief that resolution under the now unchallenged a new better world order based on peace US hegemony would trickle down to other and the expansion of democracy around countries beyond Europe’s borders. But just the globe, including in the Middle East was as the rise of the left and the Israeli peace possible, let alone inevitable. camp in the 1990s was closely linked to the atmosphere in the West, so was its decline. Ironically, just as the Zionist left has become associated with the achievements and The “peace paradigm” was closely slogans of the right-wing in favor of peace intertwined with political dynamics in the (especially the slogan: “land The “peace״ international sphere, created and shaped for peace” and “the victims by the euphoria that prevailed in the West of peace”), so has the Israeli paradigm” was following the collapse of the Soviet Union right become identified with and the Eastern Bloc statements made by the last closely intertwined acting prime minister of the with political The first cracks appeared already in the Zionist left, , namely dynamics in the 1990s, as a wave of terrorist attacks against that “Israel is a villa in a jungle,” international civilian targets shook the Israeli public. and, following the failure of sphere, created Initially, however, buoyed by the overall the peace talks in Camp David and shaped by optimistic mood in the West, the public in 2000, that “there is no the euphoria that discourse around the promotion of peace Palestinian partner for peace.” as the main agenda topic in Israeli politics prevailed in the persisted. Even the Netanyahu-led Likud The Israeli right under West following party campaign in the 1996 elections Netanyahu has wholeheartedly the collapse of the rather than rejecting a peace deal with the adopted these two narratives. Soviet Union and ״Palestinians outright, employed a slogan The “no partner for peace” the Eastern Bloc suggesting that only Netanyahu could narrative gained further bring peace without jeopardizing Israel’s traction among the Israeli public following national security interests. Netanyahu’s Hamas’ rise to power in the in the Likud defeat in the 1999 elections and the aftermath of Israel’s unilateral evacuation renewed launch of the peace negotiations of the Gaza Strip in 2005 and the failure of with the Palestinians under the Labor-led peace talks with the Palestinian Authority left-wing government raised new hopes in 2008 in Annapolis. On the regional among the shattered Israeli left that the level, the Arab Spring and the devolving of straggling process could be reignited by several Arab states into horrific civil wars their assassinated leader’s successor. further confirmed for the Israeli public the pertinence of the narrative of Israel as a However, the transition to the new millennium, villa in the Middle Eastern Jungle and the which coincided with the collapse of the irrelevance of the left-wing motto “land peace negotiations in Camp David and five for peace.” The two narratives, coined by long and traumatic years of the Second Barak, and later appropriated by Netanyahu, Intifada led to a deep crisis of trust in the resounded across the Israeli political “peace paradigm” of the Zionist left. Global spectrum. The Zionist left, which had tied

Heinrich Böll Stiftung Tel Aviv 10/27 The Crisis of the Zionist Left Oz Aruch

← Terror attack on a bus in Haifa during the Second Intifada in 2003, Wikipedia its identity and destiny with the peace policy paradigm ex negativo vis-à-vis the paradigm, found itself at a loss and with peace paradigm, replaced by Netanyahu’s no way forward. doctrine that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict cannot be solved and should instead be managed. In the regional arena, and in line Has Israeli Society Swung to with the “villa in the Jungle” narrative, the the Right? Zionist left’s approach of normalization with the Arab world via dialogue, eye-level About a decade has passed since the diplomacy, and willingness to compromise, Annapolis Conference – the last significant was replaced with a drive to bolster Israel’s attempt to advance the Israeli-Palestinian superior economic, technological and peace process – and the outbreak of the military position in the region, grooming Arab Spring. It was a decade marked by the it for the role of a leader that interacts Israeli right-wing rule under Netanyahu, who with its regional neighbors from a position in the meantime has broken the record of of power. David Ben-Gurion as the longest standing prime minister in the history of the State Under Netanyahu’s rule, the Israeli right״ of Israel. For the younger generation of Israelis that exercised its right to vote for increasingly defined its foreign and security the first time in the 2020 elections, it is policy paradigm ex-negativo vis-à-vis the ״probably hard to remember that there ever perceived failure of the peace paradigm has been another prime minister in Israel.

In her essay, “The Lost Decade of the Netanyahu’s framing of his foreign and Israeli Peace Camp,” Former Knesset security policy agenda in diametric Member of the , Dr. Ksenia opposition to that of the Zionist left was Svetlova demonstrates how actors from demonstrated during his speech at a the right wing sought to consolidate ceremony marking the naming of a nuclear their power by ridiculing and demonizing research facility after Shimon Peres: the peace paradigm of the Zionist left. Under Netanyahu’s rule, the Israeli right increasingly defined its foreign and security

PEACEMISM | What Happened to the Israeli Peace Camp? 11/27 The Crisis of the Zionist Left Oz Aruch

← Netanyahu’s speech at a ceremony marking the naming of a nuclear research facility after Shimon Peres | Twitter

“Shimon (Peres) aspired toward peace, but paralyze and dismantle the Zionist left was he knew that true peace can be achieved not the result of the migration of left-wing only if our hands strongly grasp defensive voters to the right. Rather, Ayalon attributes weaponry. In the Middle East, and in many this success to effective intimidation tactics parts of the world, there is a simple truth: that fed on the ongoing war trauma of Israeli There is no place for the weak. The weak society. Ayalon further attributes the shift crumble, are slaughtered and are erased to the failure of the Israeli mainstream to from history while the strong, for good or distinguish between the two types of wars for ill, survive. The strong are respected, and that Israel leads, just wars and unjust wars. alliances are made with the strong, and in Ayalon writes in his essay: the end peace is made with the strong.” “Israel’s history reveals that we have been The consolidation of the right-wing’s fighting two separate wars. The first was leadership under Netanyahu since 2009 fought for the establishment and defense alongside the gradual erasure of the Zionist of a Jewish and democratic state within the left from the political map has led many to pre-1967 borders. The second was aimed speculate as to whether Israelis have simply at expanding Israel’s eastern border to bought into the right-wing’s message and the Jordan River by means of settlements swung to the right. In his essay “Just Wars?” facilitated by military occupation. Yet look , former Member of the Parliament through the Israeli lens, and you will see only for the Labor party, Head of the , one war: the ongoing fight for the existence Israel’s secret service, and commander-in- of the Jewish people in their homeland, chief of the Navy, makes a strong case that against enemies who deny their right to the success of the right-wing campaign to self-determination.“

Heinrich Böll Stiftung Tel Aviv 12/27 The Crisis of the Zionist Left Oz Aruch

Indeed, as demonstrated by Dr. Ori Goldberg for the dizzying success of the right-wing in his essay “In the Military We Trust,” the delegitimization of the left as anti-patriotic unique narrative that accompanied the and a threat to national security? establishment of the State of Israel as a safe haven for Jews from around the In her essay “Knocked Out,” in which she world uniquely shaped the Jewish Israelis’ reviews the left-wing camp’s responsibility interpretation of the “quest for peace”, as for its disappearance from the political well as the choice of public representatives arena, the director of the progressive think deemed suitable to its pursuit. The concept tank Molad, Liat Schlesinger, argues that the of peace in Israeli culture, maintains rise of the right derived not from a crisis Goldberg, does not stand for a lack of on the left, but from its own strategic pivot hostility between former enemies, but and revised messaging strategy Since the״ rather for the aspiration to eliminate any once it was clear that it had lost physical threat to the Jewish collective, the battle over Israeli public which can only be ensured by Jewish military opinion regarding the future of signing of the prowess. Goldberg writes: settlements and the establishment Oslo Accords of a Palestinian state alongside in 1993, there “The Israeli understanding of peace is Israel. Schlesinger writes: has been a therefore significantly shaped by the dramatic surge military, both as an institution and as a “The calculated incitement that in the degree of dominant facet of the collective Israeli has drastically altered public support among identity. What is clear is that the military discourse in Israel was born out will need to evaluate and approve a peace of a historical crisis on the right. the Israeli public plan if and when the possibility to achieve In the 1990s, as the peace process of the option for it presents itself“ took off, […and] even during the the two-state ״disengagement from Gaza solution in 2005 […] the Israeli The concept of peace in Israeli public displayed indifference״ culture does not stand for a lack of towards the evacuation of hostility between former enemies, settlements. It was at this time that but rather for the aspiration to the campaign against the left was eliminate any physical threat to initiated, as central figures in the the Jewish collective right-wing leadership understood that while the settlements – the ״ central political project of the The framing of the quest for peace as a Israeli right – had grown significantly, they promise of security is corroborated by the were on much shakier ground in terms of fact that the two Zionist left leaders who led public support than was commonly thought. the peace camp in the 1990s were also two It became clear that the Greater Israel of the most decorated generals in the history ideology did not have a broad electoral of the (IDF), Yitzhak base in Israel“ Rabin and Ehud Barak. Indeed, since the early 1970s the vast majority of senior security Indeed, as stated, while many more Israelis officials have chosen to join the left-wing are prepared to identify themselves with the parties after retiring from service, such that right than with the left, political positions to this day, the positions of the Zionist left affiliated with the Zionist left enjoy far are backed almost unequivocally by the greater support than those of the right, security apparatus. What, then, accounts including the issue of the preferred solution

PEACEMISM | What Happened to the Israeli Peace Camp? 13/27 The Crisis of the Zionist Left Oz Aruch to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through various domestic tensions within Israel, the two-state outline. the rule of right-wing governments since 2009, and the growing conviction in the In her essay: “A Swing to the Right?” public last decade that it is impossible to reach a opinion researcher Dr. Zipi Israeli of the permanent agreement with the Palestinians. Institute for National Security Studies shows that while the Israeli public was not at all However, as Israeli further demonstrates, open to the possibility of establishing a parallel to supporting the two-state solution Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza in theory, most members of the public feel prior to the Oslo Accords, since the signing that this attitude is not applicable in reality: of the Oslo Accords with the Palestinians in 1993, there has been a dramatic surge in the “Israelis have been also asked whether they degree of support among the Israeli public believe a peace agreement can be reached of the two-state solution. This support has with the Palestinians in the near future. The been stable over the years and even today, data here show that the public has been after more than a decade under right-wing pessimistic for years – 60%-70% believe rule, it retains a stable majority in Israeli that a peace agreement cannot be reached” society. Israeli notes: Indeed, data from various surveys from In 1987-1990, only 21%-27% of Jewish- recent years consistently show that most Israelis supported the idea of a Palestinian of the Israeli public feels that change is state. The years 1991 to 1996 saw an not possible. And if Bismarck is right, that increase to a support rate of 32%-45%. “politics is the art of the possible,” then From 1997 to 2017 support for a Palestinian Israeli public opinion on the viability of peace state was high, sometimes even exceeding is crucial. As Avishay Ben Sasson-Gordis 60%. The timeline shows support for the writes in his essay “Skeptic Doves,” most two-state solution both in times of crisis of the controversy surrounding the future and during calm periods, with no relation of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict concerns to the identity of the government. This is not the nature of the desired solution, but significant given the diplomatic stalemate,

← Israel Housing Protests in Tel Aviv on August 27, 2011: Tens of thousands of Israelis took to the streets on Saturday night to participate in demonstrations protesting the high cost of living in Israel

Heinrich Böll Stiftung Tel Aviv 14/27 The Crisis of the Zionist Left Oz Aruch its attainability. The belief in the feasibility affairs, , as party leader, of the two-state solution and the degree led to an abandonment of the foreign and of Israel’s agency in making this solution security policy agenda and a greater focus work, claims Ben-Sasson-Gordis, lies at on social issues such as housing prices and the heart of the differences between the economic gaps in Israeli society. various parties regarding the conflict. The Israeli public’s skepticism, he claims, has led to the decline of the Zionist left, the rise of The Labor party’s attempt to evade and״ the centrist parties, and the consolidation of the right-wing grip on power. “Over time,” blur any clear position on foreign and he writes, “there is a real mental cost to security policy issues gradually led to believing in a solution that one is convinced the disappearance of the public debate can never be achieved.” regarding the future of the conflict as the main divisive issue between the big parties in Israeli politics ״ ”Peace Out“

Indeed, skepticism across Israeli society The Labor party’s attempt to evade and regarding the possibility of advancing a blur any clear position on foreign and peace agreement with the Palestinians security policy issues, particularly the has also trickled down into the Israeli Israeli-Palestinian conflict, gradually led leftist parties, especially Labor. In the 2009 to the disappearance of the public debate elections, which were the first shot fired regarding the future of the conflict as the to mark the beginning of the Netanyahu main divisive issue between the big parties era, which has continued for 11 years and in Israeli politics. Due to the internalization counting, the party dwindled in size to of the belief that the Peace Camp’s agenda become the fourth-lagest party in the was no longer relevant and in light of the Knesset, and for the first time in its history fact that Israeli left-wing voters, mostly was not one of the two largest factions in belonging to the upper-middle class, did not parliament. After the Labor Party’s defeat flock to the new-old Labor party’s social- in the elections, its leader Barak chose to democratic branding under Yachimovich’s join Netanyahu’s government, only to split leadership, the party base continued to the party down the middle two years later shrink while its former supporters sought in order to stay with Netanyahu, bringing a new political home. the party and the image of the Zionist left to unprecedented lows. In her essay “In Search of the Center,” public opinion expert Dr. Dahlia Scheindlin traces The historic nationwide social protest that the phenomenon of centrist politics in Israel, erupted in the summer of 2011, sending including the identity of the parties and their hundreds of thousands of Israelis to the constituents. According to Dr. Sheindlin, streets to demonstrate against the high there have been two key types of centrist cost of living in Israel and the growth of politics in Israel in the past few decades. economic gaps, was seen by the Labor party The first has focused on the issue of the leadership as an opportunity to abandon the Israeli-Palestinian conflict while promoting sinking “peace ship” and return to its former a pragmatic and hawkish attitude that was socialist identity that had been cast aside still open to territorial concessions; the in the early 1990s. The election of a former second type of centrist parties has sought to journalist for social, labor and economic

PEACEMISM | What Happened to the Israeli Peace Camp? 15/27 The Crisis of the Zionist Left Oz Aruch

↑ Screenshot from the Likud campaign video in 2015, depicting Livni and Herzog of the Zionist Union as scared of answering the Red Phone (secured line reserved for matters of foreign and security policy)

ignore the conflict, or play it down on their and economic issues, while intentionally political agenda, focusing instead on other keeping a “safe distance” from foreign political themes such as the cost of living. affairs, security policy and the Israeli- The common denominator for most of the Palestinian conflict, alongside the centrist voters, however, is that they have restoration of personal security under migrated over from the left-wing camp after Netanyahu’s leadership, paved the way having given up on their former parties: for the establishment of the Israeli right, and of Netanyahu in particular, as the sole Since the signing of the Oslo authority on handling foreign and security״ matters. Election videos that had Israeli Accords in 1993, there has been voters try to imagine Netanyahu’s political a dramatic surge in the degree of rivals answering the “red phone” in the support among the Israeli public middle of the night were aimed at the soft of the option for the two-state belly of the general-free center-left camp. ״solution At the same time, the Israeli right, with help “Most of the increase in self-identified by some of the centrist parties that sought centrists in the 2000s came from people to differentiate themselves from the left, who once identified as left wing. Surveys continued to advance the delegitimizing repeatedly show that they share many and derisively dismissive campaign of the basic views with the left but abandoned “Left,” casting it as unpatriotic by identifying that label in anger, fear or simply despair” it with the peace paradigm (now a non-issue among the Israeli public), and associating it The break of the Zionist left into a number with human rights organizations, portrayed of “center-left” parties alongside the as placing Palestinian lives ahead of Jewish gradual disappearance of the generals ones. Over the ten years of Netanyahu’s from those parties, which since 2009 rule, the term “leftist” might be likened to have predominantly focused on social

Heinrich Böll Stiftung Tel Aviv 16/27 The Crisis of the Zionist Left Oz Aruch

← Amos Oz speaks on the opening night of J Street 2012: Making History [Conference] a punching bag tethered to the side of any The Israeli Peace Camp was never politician who dares challenge the right, homogeneous; rather, it was an ecosystem while such politicians themselves struggle of countless organizations and initiatives to break free of the label, cornered into that focused on different issues and explaining why they are not left-wing and forms of action, bound by their shared defending their patriotism. ambition to promote a peace agreement

While in the 1990s the promotion of the two-state״ solution was framed as part of a Utopian vision, today, the key messages are negative and draw on the necessity of ״preventing a dystopian scenario

Civil society organizations, which comprised between Israelis and Palestinians including the heart of the peace camp in the 90s, the establishment of a Palestinian state became the scapegoat of Israeli politics, alongside Israel. With the Peace Camp’s bringing to an informal close the chapter retreat from politics back to the realm of of collaboration between the Peace Camp civil society, the controversies and divisions and the Zionist left-wing parties. The notion between the various actors resurfaced, of advancing a diplomatic agreement with making it difficult for them to speak in a the Palestinians fell from Israeli political united voice and collaborate effectively. In agenda, and the Peace Camp retreated to his essay “Give Separation A Chance,” Dr. the heart of civil society, from where it had Shaul Arieli describes how the dissolution originated in the late 80s. of the peace paradigm of the 1990s led to the disintegration of the peace camp into groups that pull in different, and at times, From Peace to Separation contradictory directions. According to Arieli, there is, however, one thread uniting most “We are not seeking a happy marriage with of the different actors, namely a shift in the Palestinians, but a fair divorce – And this their objective from promoting peace to is what the Two-States solution is about” advocating for physical separation from the Amos Oz on J-Street Convention in 2012 Palestinians in the West Bank. Arieli writes:

PEACEMISM | What Happened to the Israeli Peace Camp? 17/27 The Crisis of the Zionist Left Oz Aruch

“Mutual distrust, the stalled negotiations, Oz’s metaphor, comparable to the difference Europe’s weakness in the face of a growing between reaching into one’s pockets when right wing, civil wars in the Arab world and getting married versus spending money on Trump’s leadership have combined to drive a divorce lawyer. It is understandably less an ideological shift in the Israeli “peace complex to rally support for the former camp”: from seeking a peace agreement, than for the latter. to bilateral or unilateral separation from the Palestinians in the West Bank” In his essay “Do Good Fences Make Good Neighbors?” Meron Rapoport argues that Thus, despite the ostensible continuity in the promotion of the alarmist discourse in the declared objectives of the civil society which the Palestinians are often depicted as organizations that have worked to advocate a “monolithic threat” that needs to be put for the two-states solution over the past behind a fence, has only served to further decades, a profound shift has occurred. undermine the Israeli left and to consolidate While in the 1990s the promotion of the the right-wing narrative. Rapoport writes: two-state solution was framed as part of a utopian, or at least positive vision “A fundamental tenet of the separation that included transforming a negative philosophy is that Israel cannot trust situation of ongoing violent conflict into the Palestinians and must rely on itself. a positive situation of peace, today, the main Therefore, the argument goes, Israel must messages are mainly negative in nature strive to separate from the Palestinians and draw on the necessity of preventing a as soon as possible, before they become dystopian scenario, e.g. potential escalation a majority. […] Peddling this urgency has of the conflict, the undermining of Israeli reinforced the belief among Jewish-Israelis democracy, losing the Jewish majority in the that, as the Palestinians cannot be trusted, country as a result of annexing territories, there is no partner for an agreement. If or international pressure (in the pre-Trump indeed there is no partner for an agreement, era). Psychologically, the difference between maintaining the status quo appears to be the two framings is huge, if to follow Amos the best alternative“

← Controversial ‘Divorce the Palestinians’ Israeli Media Campaign Explained

Heinrich Böll Stiftung Tel Aviv 18/27 The Crisis of the Zionist Left Oz Aruch

The negative discourse that portrays the they believe wronged their ancestors more Palestinians as a threat that must be severely than the Israeli right. disposed of not only harmed the cause of the two-state advocates, according In his essay “(Im)possible Alliance,” the to Rapoport, but also fueled the right- poet Marzouk Alhalabi reviews the key wing demonization campaign against the developments in the relationship between Palestinian population within Israel. The the Zionist left and the Palestinian public in Zionist left’s doomsday scenario, according to Rapoport, in which equal rights might be The leadership of the״ granted to Palestinians who are branded as the ultimate “other” plays to the hands Israeli-Palestinian public is of the right and their intimidation-based currently at a crossroads discourse, while also dividing the Israeli between investing in Jewish- center-left camp around the question of Arab partnership, or the the very legitimacy of cooperating with the independent promotion of Arab (and effectively impeding the sectoral interests ״ .(option of forming a center-left government

The subsiding of the public debate around Israel and concludes that the latter, which the conflict over the past decade has was subjected to intensive delegitimazation made room for the issue of Jewish-Arab in the two decades since the events of relations within Israel to emerge as the October 2000 will not be waiting for the new dividing line between left and right. Zionist left parties’ stamp of approval, This issue figured prominently in the series especially given their waning influence of election campaigns held during the past in Israeli politics. According to Alhalabi, year. The rise of the Joint Arab List as a the leadership of the Israeli-Palestinian prominent political actor has transformed public is currently at a crossroads between the Israeli Palestinians into a significant investing in Jewish-Arab partnership, or the player in the parliamentary arena whereby independent promotion of sectoral interests, it is practically impossible to establish an after the fashion of other parties in the alternative government to that of Netanyahu Israeli parliament, while renouncing their without it. The right-wing slogan: “Bibi or automatic affiliation with the Zionist left. Tibi” (referring to Arab-Muslim MK Ahmad Tibi) aimed precisely at the “Achilles’ heel” of the center parties, which were inundated with challenges from the press questioning the authenticity and viability of their pledge to pose an alternative to Netanyahu without collaborating with the Joint Arab List.

The reluctance to support a partnership between the Arab parties and the Zionist center-left parties is, however, not only the legacy of the latter. As Ravit Hecht points out in her essay, many Palestinian Israelis who now choose to define themselves through their Palestinian identity, prefer right-wing rule in Israel over the Zionist left, which

PEACEMISM | What Happened to the Israeli Peace Camp? 19/27 The Crisis of the Zionist Left Oz Aruch

The Tribal Left groups other than Ashkenazi Jews, including Jews of Arab descent and Arab Palestinians. The gradual demise of the Zionist left parties This ethnic dichotomy laid the foundations was, however, not only a result of the decline for the resulting political power struggles of the “peace paradigm” on the conceptual in Israel in subsequent decades that have level. On the demographic level, too, Israel increasingly assumed the form of arm- has changed substantially since the 1990s. wrestling between different “tribes” and The emigration from the former Soviet Union interest groups rather than ideological of a whopping one million new citizens debates about how to best design a common (in a country with a population of roughly Israeli public space. Illouz demonstrates in 4.5 million in 1990) along with the rapid her essay the detrimental effect of identity population growth in the ultra-Orthodox politics on the Israeli public sphere in the and Arab sectors has led to a significant absence of a universal secular platform: change in the distribution of power in the Israeli parliament and the rise of sectoral identity politics.

While the ideational axis dividing left from right has״ changed in recent decades, there has always existed yet another axis of separation between the Israeli political ״camps, based on identity politic

In her essay “Could There be an Israeli Martin “In the same way the state was thickly Luther King?” Professor Eva Illouz writes Jewish, it was also thickly Ashkenazi that while the ideational axis dividing left – in control over most or all centers of from right has changed in recent decades, power. The Israeli left never fought for a there has always existed yet another universal conception of citizenship (even axis of separation between the Israeli though Ben-Gurion extended citizenship political camps, based on identity politics. to Arabs) because it was shaped by leftist According to Illouz, the State of Israel was ideas inspired by Russian socialism in its established not only as a Jewish state, but organization of production rather than by as a fundamentally separatist project, which leftist ideas in the spirit of , which systematically marginalized all population bestowed rights and freedoms“

← Yemenites go to Aden | Wikipedia

Heinrich Böll Stiftung Tel Aviv 20/27 The Crisis of the Zionist Left Oz Aruch

The right-wing, which spent the first thirty “Peace became the cultural marker and years following the establishment of the coat of arms of a specific social group, state in the opposition, capitalized on the Ashkenazim, who – curiously enough – never “tribal” alienation of the marginalized considered that recruiting Mizrahim to groups, and above all the Jews from Arab their cause was important for both moral background, effectively rallying them around and political reasons. Israel must be one of their resentment of the Ashkenazi elite, the few countries in the world in which the which had excluded them from positions ideal of peace functioned as a status symbol of influence. Thus, while ideological and social marker, as a mark of distinction. battles were raging between Socialists Because peace and human rights have been, and Communists, from the perspective of historically, promoted by a social group some Mizrahi Jews, it was the Ashkenazi that has retained its class, cultural and elite arguing over ideology while finding a ethnic privileges, the Peace Camp became common language to keep them away from marked as the camp of a specific ethnic, the centers of power. educational, and social group“

This came to a head in the national election campaigns of 1981, widely viewed as the Rebuilding an Alternative most tense and violent in the history of Israeli politics, in which Shimon Peres of Given the failure to mobilize the voters of Labor ran against Menachem Begin on behalf the Zionist left of the 1990s around either of the Likud. More than in any prior election peace with the Palestinians or the social- year, these elections were characterized economic banner, and in the absence of by a strong correlation between ethnic any other political message, the center- origin and the respective voting pattern. left parties began to focus their efforts on From the Mizrahi perspective, Shimon forging technical connections between the Peres, who transitioned from hawk to dove, different parties that accommodated the was seen all along as part of the elitist 1990s voters of the Zionist Left, under the Ashkenazi establishment that systematically lowest common denominator of ending marginalized the Mizrahim from positions Netanyahu’s rule. of influence and from the public space The center-left parties began״ regardless of his political position on dialogue with the PLO. Most Ashkenazim to focus their efforts on forging rallied behind Peres and the Alignment (“Maarakh,” an earlier incarnation of the technical connections under the Labor party), while the Mizrahim rallied lowest common denominator of ״behind Begin and Likud. ending Netanyahu’s rule

The fact that at that time the Zionist left The tactic of stitching together different was not affiliated with the Peace Camp in center-left parties during the last three any way did not appear to have mattered rounds of elections, allowed Blue-and-White to any of the sides, certainly not for the to unite all Israelis who sought to bring Mizrahim, who were guided foremost by an end to the Netanyahu era. The strategy identity-based alienation from the Zionist succeeded by maximizing the list’s number left. Later, however, this led to an exceptional of seats in the Knesset, effectively preventing situation where support for peace became a Netanyahu from forming a government social status marker. Professor Illouz writes: during three successive elections. However, since the alliance members neither shared

PEACEMISM | What Happened to the Israeli Peace Camp? 21/27 The Crisis of the Zionist Left Oz Aruch a common ideological outlook nor bothered citizens of Israel, the non-Zionist ultra- to coordinate an orderly partnership of Orthodox, religious liberals and right- interests with other actors outside wing liberal supporters of the state. For Netanyahu’s “right-wing bloc,” they could the peace camp, partition (national and not form an alternative government. The territorial) was synonymous with separation result was that in the third round of elections (sectarian, ethnic, national and religious). held in March 2020, when the parties that The democratic camp, however, seeks pledged not to join yet another Netanyahu- partition (national and territorial) alongside led government won a slim majority of 51.6 integration within Israel (sectarian, ethnic percent of the votes, Netanyahu’s rival, Benny and religious)” Gantz, was some combination of unable and unwilling to create a coalition with the other The demise of the left has led many civil parties, especially with the Joint Arab list. He society organizations to rethink how to therefore preferred to dismantle the Blue- advance the vision of peace in the current and-White platform he had championed for state of paralysis. In her article “Democracy three consecutive election rounds under the Now,” Shaqued Morag, Executive Director promise of bringing an end to Netanyahu’s of the veteran Peace Now organization rule, and instead joined Netanyahu’s fifth describes how the organization is adapting government (with a promise of rotation to changes in Israeli society that have for the premiership after a year and a half). affected it over the past three decades:

Gantz’s defection did not come as a “The loyal core of activists from the surprise to all. In his article “Progressive 1990s has not cultivated a strong group Pivot,” founder of the Center for Liberal of successors. For Israeli young adults who Democracy, Dr. Hillel Ben Sasson writes grew up under right-wing rule, the idea of about the urgent need to rebuild the Israeli peace seems distant and even preposterous, left around a common vision, this time and they often dismiss any reference to not as the Peace Camp, but rather, as the the subject. Exposing future leaders to the democratic camp. This does not mean ideology and activities of Peace Now is a abandoning the principles of the Israeli formidable challenge. What can engage Peace Camp, Ben Sasson emphasizes. young Israelis? How do we battle stereotypes The pursuit of ending the occupation and and entrenched ways of thinking, after years resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict of incitement against the peace camp? How ought to be a substantial pillar of the new can the dominant narrative of “managing Israeli left, but it cannot be its only issue. the conflict” be changed?“

Addressing the role of identity politics in the It was precisely the understanding that the right-left divide in Israel, Ben Sasson states label “Left” is linked to identity politics that that the democratic camp will emphasize an erect unnecessary walls between potential inclusive approach, open to all members of partners from different demographics within Israeli society who identify with the values Israeli society, that prompted the women’s of liberal democracy: grassroots movement “Women Wage Peace” to decouple the pursuit of a negotiated “While the peace camp was led by the liberal peace agreement from its association with left, which grew out of various parts of the the left. The organization consequently Labor movement, the democratic camp presents itself as a grassroots movement comes from the same breeding ground but with tens of thousands of members from aspires to include non-Zionist Palestinian the right, center and left of the political

Heinrich Böll Stiftung Tel Aviv 22/27 The Crisis of the Zionist Left Oz Aruch spectrum, Jews and Arabs, religious and aim of making sure that American policy secular, united in the demand for a mutually towards Israel also focuses on the promotion binding non-violent accord between Israelis of the two-state solution alongside the and Palestinians. One of the founders of continuation of its ongoing support of the the movement, journalist and publicist State of Israel and its security interests. Anat Saragusti, writes in her essay “Women In their essay “A Large Tent or a Divided Waging Peace”: Community,” Director of the Israeli J Street branch, Yael Patir and Researcher Alissa “None of our goals is innovative or Symon, describe the interplay between revolutionary. Yet something about this the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and movement, with its certain degree of naïveté, Israeli-US relations over the past decades is refreshing. After years of watching the as well as their reciprocal influences in Israeli peace camp slowly shrink and collapse shaping one another. into musty paradigms – “right or left,” “for or against a Palestinian state,” “for or against two states,” “for or against withdrawing Concluding Remarks from the territories” – a new young player has entered the field, determined to tear The gradual demise of the Zionist-left parties, down entrenched notions. A grassroots perceived by their constituents as no longer movement that does not accept equating relevant, is the result of the conflation of the support for an agreement with the left and Zionist left with the Peace Camp, and the opposition necessarily with the right“ consolidation of the narratives, according to which Israel is a villa in the Middle Eastern The Anahnu Movement (Together jungle and there is no Palestinian partner Movement), as well, promotes an innovative for peace. Labor’s attempt to shake off its approach to resolving the Israeli-Palestinian association with the Peace Camp following conflict that focuses on both changing the its historical defeat in 2009 by returning to dynamics between the parties, as well as its original social-democratic foundations engaging the various parts of the Israeli and distancing itself from the Israeli- society. The movement believes that formal Palestinian conflict, while occasionally negotiations are not enough, and that the joining the political bashing of “the Left,” Israeli public needs to be engaged as part of were seen by the public as an admission any peace process that would necessarily of guilt. This led to a further devaluation have far-reaching effects on the future of the of the public debate around the conflict, country and its people. Anahnu thus employs casting the mere discussion of resolving it a double strategy: working top-down, by as “leftist,” i.e. detached, messianic, or even holding high-level advocacy meetings, but traitorous. The decision to re-assume the also bottom-up, conducting unique political old-new socialist branding also alienated education projects that promote nuanced many of the Left’s traditional voters, who understanding of the different narratives of belonged to the upper-middle class. the various segments within Israeli society. The Zionist left continued to shrink, as its In addition to the peace organizations former base found a new political home operating in Israel, there are also initiatives among the centrist parties. These parties did that operate in the international sphere. J not belong to the right wing, but were also Street, founded in 2008, is a pro-Israel and not associated with the perceived failures pro-peace advocacy organization, targeting of the peace and socialist agendas of the various stakeholders in the US with the left. Furthermore, the tangible improvement

PEACEMISM | What Happened to the Israeli Peace Camp? 23/27 The Crisis of the Zionist Left Oz Aruch in the level of personal security under left from the 1990s i.e. the concept of “land Netanyahu’s rule over the past decade for peace” while confronting skeptical public alongside the simultaneous disappearance opinion; or to try and shake off the “leftist” of the generals from the leadership of the label pinned on to them, thus enhancing the center and left parties, who chose to avoid legitimacy of the right-wing ideology and challenging his foreign and security policy Netanyahu’s brand in particular as its sole agenda, paved the way for the branding of representative. Accordingly, it has become the Israeli right, and Netanyahu in particular, rather likely to hear the term “left” voiced as the exclusive competent authority for rather by actors from the right-wing, who handling matters of foreign and security employ it to chastise their political rivals policy and as an emblem of stability, and as a danger to national security, while the even prosperity. elements labeled as leftists are forced to take up a defensive position, often trying The Israeli right, for its part (with the help to deny the political association attributed of some of the center parties) continued to to them in an attempt to gain legitimacy advance the smear campaign against the to be able to voice their opinion. dwindling Leftist camp, presenting it as anti- patriotic and a danger to national security. On the identity level, the use of the term Civil society organizations that formed the “leftist” has helped Netanyahu rally Likud’s core of the Peace Camp in the 1990s became Mizrahi voters for whom the “left” functions the main scapegoat of Israeli politics, while as a red flag, symbolizing the Ashkenazi the left-wing brand became synonymous elite and the representation of the utter with those seeking to “undermine the state.” “other.” The significance of the identity The delegitimization campaign against the dimension can explain the fact that since left proved to be a particularly effective Netanyahu’s rise to power in 2009, the means of strengthening right-wing rule. Likud party has no longer seen the need The label “left” has become a derogatory to publish a political platform ahead of the term, which is now pinned on any political elections. Instead, Likud’s campaigns during actor marked as potentially in opposition the Netanyahu era so far have focused to Netanyahu, whether the contender is on a few polarizing messages, e.g. “Us or ideological or political. The delegitimization Them, “Strong Right or Weak Left” and in the campaign relies on the dual meaning of last round of elections “Bibi or Tibi.” These the term “Left” in popular Israeli discourse: election slogans have framed any political On the conceptual level, the term “Left” actors outside Netanyahu’s right-wing bloc stands for the “peace paradigm,” or in short, as member of the secular and Ashkenazi willingness to jeopardize Israeli security elite that might jeopardize Israeli national interests in the name of “noble causes,” security interests. The message between while at the level of identity, the term the lines for potential right-wing voters “Left” stands for the Ashkenazi elite that reads clear: If Netanyahu and the Right fail systematically excluded the Mizrahim from to win the elections, the Ashkenazi elites of the avenues of influence. the founding days will return to positions of power, sending the Mizrahim yet again to On the conceptual level, the accusatory the back seat, while surrendering national labeling of any political opponent as security assets to the “Arabs.” belonging to the “left” has trapped Netanyahu’s political rivals in a situation The double catch of the center-left parties, where they were forced to either defend the with their identification with the outdated last known declared positions of the Zionist peace paradigm, and their designation as

Heinrich Böll Stiftung Tel Aviv 24/27 The Crisis of the Zionist Left Oz Aruch representatives of the Ashkenazi elite, and the daughter of former senior Likud sheds light on the conduct of the Blue-and- member David Levy, who is widely perceived White and Labor parties during the past as a symbol of the discrimination against three election campaigns. For Blue-and- Mizrahi figures in Israeli politics, since he White, opposing Netanyahu meant being was looked down on by the establishment automatically framed as belonging to the and was even the butt of a genre known as “Left” camp, regardless of their political “David Levy jokes.” agenda, i.e. the ones who are willing to jeopardize Israel security by “surrendering Peretz’s strategy in trying to break the Labor territories to the Arabs”. To circumvent Party’s association with the Ashkenazi this branding, Blue-and-White attempted elite and its identification with peace, and to shake off any characteristics that attempting to appeal to the Mizrachi Likud might resemble “leftist” traits, selecting voters in the Israeli periphery was based a jingle for Benny Gantz’s original platform on the assumption that Mizrahi right-wing stating that they were neither right nor left, voters in the Israeli social and geographical while introducing a party leadership that periphery, though they shunned association included three former IDF chiefs of staff with the Ashkenazi peace camp, were in and expressing support for the annexation fact well aligned with the positions of the of large portions of the West Bank (despite left with respect to social and economic allegedly opposing such moves behind policies, at least, certainly much more than closed doors). Designating a line-up of with Netanyahu’s neo-liberal party. generals to be the party’s presenters while subscribing to the idea that literally means And yet, the attempt by Blue-and-White and the opposite of the Zionist left’s formula the Labor Party to tow a narrow line within of “land for peace,” Blue-and-White hoped the discursive framework set by Netanyahu, to circumvent the accusation of being failed miserably. They did not convince closeted lefties. Mizrahi voters that the Labor party under a leadership of “their own” was a worthy At the same time, Labor chairman Amir alternative to the Likud, while Blue-and- Peretz, strongly opposed joining the only White, comprising a patchwork of political other Zionist left party, Meretz, even though actors with no unifying ideological thread, his party hovered in the polls just barely had created a paralyzed political entity that above the electoral threshold (Meretz, itself, could not express any clear-cut position on was also flirting with the threshold). In such significant political issues for fear of falling a dramatic elections campaign, where the apart, which eventually did in fact happen. failure of even one leftist party to receive the minimum required for entering the The alliance between the Zionist left and Knesset could mean the establishment of the peace camp, which paved the way for yet another narrow right-wing government, both to a position of national leadership in many were dismayed by the willingness the 1990s, was effectively framed by the of Labor chairman Peretz to take this right in a way that ushered in their collapse. gamble. Nevertheless, Peretz, like Blue- On the conceptual level, the Zionist left and-White, did not want to associate the parties have tied themselves to the peace Labor party with the one party that above paradigm that has lost its relevance among all else symbolized the Ashkenazi elite the Israeli public, while on the identity level, and the Peace Camp, and instead chose to the peace camp has linked its fate with the merge with Orly Levy-Abekasis, a Mizrachi Israeli Ashkenazi elite, ironically leading politician from the periphery (like himself) to the marking of the pursuit of peace as

PEACEMISM | What Happened to the Israeli Peace Camp? 25/27 The Crisis of the Zionist Left Oz Aruch divisive topic that is associated with ethnic The bitter disappointment of the many tensions within Israeli society. left-wing voters who repeatedly gave their vote to the new “Rabin” only to be betrayed The consequent attempts by the center- to his joining Netanyahu’s government is left parties to break up the alliance with understandable, but the writing was on the the peace camp over the past decade while wall. With Netanyahu’s power and popularity retaining the masses of supporters who rising to new heights despite a series of gave their votes in the 1992 elections to indictments, perhaps the realization that the Zionist left parties under the promise of in the absence of ideological alternatives, peace only helped to consolidate the right- Netanyahu and the right will continue to wing rule. In the absence of a compelling prevail, could be getting closer. And yet, alternative narrative to the peace paradigm, despite the helplessness and paralysis the question around the leader’s identity crippling the political representatives outside started to take center stage: Who could Netanyahu’s bloc, support for the positions possibly replace Netanyahu? “There is of the left still enjoys an absolute majority simply no candidate of his stature who could of the Israeli public in all the key issues as compete with him”, the pundits declared. can be seen from numerous public opinion And so, instead of trying to build an inclusive polls. The Israeli public has also showed and conceptual alternative to Netanyahu’s in a series of election campaigns that the narrative, center and left representatives right-wing camp does not have the backing focused on finding a candidate with the of the majority of Israeli society. The Zionist right credentials to rally their supporters, left parties may have stepped out of the who were still awaiting the magical arrival spotlights for now, but their positions still of a successor to Rabin and who could enjoy broad support among the Israeli public; restore the leftist camp to its days of glory it is now time to dare and offer these Israelis in the 1990s. The center-left’s surrender a new and compelling vision. to the right-wing’s framing of its positions as irrelevant while foregoing the attempt to challenge the right-wing’s ideology and politics were exemplified by Gantz’s signature silence in the months following his announcement that he would be joining the political race; he was celebrated as heir to the throne before even uttering a single word.

Heinrich Böll Stiftung Tel Aviv 26/27 The Crisis of the Zionist Left Oz Aruch

←

Oz Aruch Head of the German- Israeli Dialog Program at the Heinrich Böll Stiftung

Oz Aruch is Head of the German-Israeli Dialog Program and Director of the Digital Society Center at the Heinrich Böll Stiftung (HBS), an independent global public policy think- and-do-tank for green visions and policy reforms with an international network of 33 offices around the world.

Prior to joining the Heinrich Böll Stiftung, Oz is a graduate of the University of Oz served in various leadership positions Cambridge, where he was a member of the in tech-startups and non-governmental HBS Scholarships and Leadership Program. organizations.

PEACEMISM | What Happened to the Israeli Peace Camp? 27/27