See if this sounds familiar: A cynical and self-admiring politician finds himself confronting the legal consequences of his low deeds and corruption. He faces criminal investigation, multiple indictments, trials, even prison. To defend himself from the potential consequences of his acts, he does not merely hire lawyers; he tries to stay in power. And, to obtain power, he is willing to deepen and inflame the worst tribal conflicts in his country. He is willing to undermine the rule of law. He is willing to make common cause with the most hateful voices in his society and place them by his side. In the end, he is willing to erode the liberty of his people to insure his own.
The eagerness to put self before country, of course, is the common thread between two profoundly unprincipled politicians, Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump. And, as such, the dispiriting turn in Jerusalem on Monday—the Knesset’s vote to diminish the powers of the Supreme Court and, therefore, enhance an imperilled Prime Minister’s ability to skirt justice—serves as a warning of what might take place in this country in the fall of 2024.
The decision in the Knesset could easily lead to even more illiberal measures, from the annexation of the West Bank to the suppression of critical press outlets. The weeks leading up to the vote saw unprecedented protest marches. Now, one friend from Tel Aviv told me, “The streets will burn.” Another friend sent a photograph of a mock military graveyard that demonstrators near the Knesset had erected. The gravestones provided only the names of the fallen and the single repeated epitaph: lashav, in vain. That is, they died in vain.
Israeli commentators have reached for a range of analogies to describe the situation. Some compare trends in Israel to the dwindling of legal and democratic norms in Poland and Hungary. Others point to parallels in Lebanon’s history, with a deepening tribalization of Israeli society and the very real possibility of sustained civil strife.
Israel has been locked into a prolonged political crisis, with repeated elections and incredibly narrow margins. Netanyahu returned to power most recently with a campaign that made little mention of curbing the judiciary. He campaigned far more on lowering consumer prices, making peace with Saudi Arabia, and containing the nuclear threat from Iran. In fact, as recently as 2012, he posed as a guarantor of the rule of law, delivering a speech in which he defended a “strong and independent” legal system. He portrayed himself then as a valiant protector of the courts, saying that he had “shelved every law” aimed at diminishing the independence of the legal system.
What’s the difference between 2012 and now? The difference is that Netanyahu’s hopes of eluding conviction on multiple charges of corruption depend on his maintaining power and holding together a ruling coalition featuring a menagerie of reactionaries, including the justice minister, Yariv Levin, the political and ideological engine behind the new law curtailing the authority of the Supreme Court. Levin has a serene sense of his own power. In the Knesset on Monday, with Netanyahu sitting nearby, the defense minister, Yoav Gallant, reportedly begged Levin to “give me something.” He hoped to arrive at some kind of compromise on the bill, so that reservists in the military who are protesting the legislation do not abandon their service—and that society, in general, does not explode. Levin refused, and Netanyahu did not force the issue. Netanyahu, the Times of Israel explained, “looked understandably exhausted.” Over the weekend, doctors provided Netanyahu with a cardiac pacemaker. What the doctors could not provide him was courage. In the end, Netanyahu chose his own political survival over political consensus; he chose tribe over compromise. And, in doing so, he risked the stability of his country.
As the day progressed, the protests, now in their twenty-ninth week, swelled yet again. Polls conducted by the Israel Democracy Institute have shown that a substantial majority of the country, including a meaningful proportion of voters aligned with Netanyahu’s Likud Party, opposes the legislation. By defying that majority, Netanyahu and his coalition have done what no progressive politician has been able to do for many years—energize a liberal-minded coalition, a popular, broad-based movement that does not want to see Israel, which is already endangered by its inability to resolve the Palestinian question, take an increasingly illiberal path.
There is hardly any guarantee that this popular movement will lead to the end of the coalition government anytime soon. This is still a country of popular elections, and why would the coalition, which holds a narrow majority, put itself out of business? The spectacle of Netanyahu, Levin, Itamar Ben-Gvir, Bezalel Smotrich, the whole cast of extremists in power, could last for a long time to come.
Perhaps, though, they can serve as an example to the American electorate. “Many people think that Bibi imitates Trump, but, in terms of following the right-wing-populist path, Bibi was there first,” the Israeli journalist Barak Ravid told me. “Watch Bibi fighting for his freedom not only against political rivals but against the legal system, the media. Israel and the U.S. don’t have the same political culture, but look at what’s going on in Israel right now and you will see a scenario of what is possible in a democratic country.”
Listen to what Trump is saying about prosecutors, judges, the rule of law, as he faces multiple indictments. Listen to him arouse the fury and tribalism in American society. “I am your retribution,” he has said. He casts his 2024 election campaign as “the final battle” against his enemies, against “communists, Marxists, and fascists.” His poll numbers are high. No one in the Republican field is close. And so you have to ask yourself, Is there anything that Donald Trump, like Netanyahu, would not do to regain power and protect himself from the reach of the law? 
In Israel, a Glimpse of a Trumpian Future
Source: News Flash Trending
0 Comments