Addict (drugaddict) wrote,
Addict
drugaddict

Uri Avnery on Israeli Politics--3/3/07

In the United States, the ministers are appointed by the president and
serve only as his aides. If he wants, he appoints talented people. If he
feels like it, he appoints perfect fools, cheats and fanatics.

Uri Avnery
3.3.07

           The Book of Esterina

"PATRIOTISM," SAID Dr. Samuel Johnson over 200 years ago, "is the last
refuge of a scoundrel." If we substitute racism for patriotism, then we
have a perfect match with the Esterina Tartman affair.

She could have been a popular member of the Knesset. She belongs to a
respected Oriental family (The Shabtai family, seven generations in the
country). She is pretty and looks very much younger than her 50 years.
She is the mother of four. She has recovered after a severe road accident.

She appeared on the public stage at the end of the last Knesset, when
she took the place of a deceased member. From the very first moment, she
aroused strong feelings of rejection, disgust and even loathing.

Why? Because she is a vulgar person. Her "big mouth" has become her
trademark. Not only is she a member of Avigdor Ivette Liberman's
nationalist-racist faction, "Yisrael Beitenu", which exudes the odor of
fascism, but she herself is prone to voicing discordant opinions. Her
rabidly racist speeches have won her headlines in the media, but
repelled decent people on the Left and even on the Right. "An ax has
been raised against the tree called Zionism", "The evil must be
uprooted!" she declared after a Muslim-Arab had been appointed a
minister for the first time.

Such statements are probably music in the ears of Ivette Liberman (no
one knows why his Russian or Moldavian first name sounds like a female
French one.) So it was only natural that he decided to give Esterina the
post of Minister of Tourism, which was offered to his faction. Since he
is the sole leader of Yisrael Beitenu ("Israel is our Home"), that was
enough. When asked how the decision was taken, he replied, with
unintended irony, "democratically and unanimously." Unanimous" comes
from "one mind", in this case his own.


AND THEN, just a moment before the appointment was confirmed, it became
known that the beautiful Esterina was a fraud, who claimed academic
degrees which she had never been awarded. Also, it was discovered that,
after her road accident, she had used dubious testimony in order to
obtain compensation and incapacity-rates (52%) from the insurance
companies. In another case, after hitting a pedestrian, she claimed that
the victim had caused the accident intentionally, to gain compensation.
The courts reprimanded her for this argument and took away her driving
license for a long time.

It was the academic titles that were her undoing. Actually, a Knesset
member does not need any. I served in the Knesset three times without
having finished elementary school. So, why did Ms Tartman add the bogus
titles to her official biography? Just for her image's sake.

For several days, the scandal outshone all the other affairs that make
Israeli life so interesting: the sex scandal of the President, the fatal
kiss of the (ex) Minister of Justice, the cloud of alleged corruption
affairs that follows the Prime Minister wherever he goes, the alleged
election bribes of the Minister of Finance, the widespread suspicions of
bribery in the highest ranks of the Tax Authority, the resignation of
the Chief-of-Staff after the Lebanon fiasco, the resignation of the
Chief of Police because he did nothing about Mafia penetration of his
organization.

The Esterina Affair has even eclipsed another major new disclosure: that
Ehud Olmert, in his former capacity as Minister of Industry and Trade,
distributed jobs and other benefits to some 115 members of the powerful
Likud Central Committee, of which he was then a member, in order to
ensure his place on the party's list for the next elections. And indeed,
how could such routine corruption compete with the juicy affair of the
"Tartarina" (as she was dubbed by one Knesset member.)


HOWEVER IT IS not the cheating of Tartman that is the main point, nor
even her vulgar racism, but a nagging question: how could such a person
(almost) become a member of the cabinet?

True, the Minister of Tourism does not have a very important portfolio,
but is still the equal of all the other members sitting around the
cabinet table, with a vote on matters of peace and war. This vote can be
decisive in sending thousands of soldiers and civilians to their death.
The minister takes part in votes that decide the future of the state for
generations to come. How could such a dubious individual ever reach such
a high station?

That is not a purely Israeli question. It has been raised in many other
democracies, too.

In the United States, the ministers are appointed by the president and
serve only as his aides. If he wants, he appoints talented people. If he
feels like it, he appoints perfect fools, cheats and fanatics.

But the President himself, how is he appointed? He needs only one
talent: to convince the electorate to vote for him. After being elected,
he can surprise everybody and turn out to be a real leader, with vision
and integrity (like Franklin Delano Roosevelt, for example), or he may
turn out to be a charismatic con-man, a trickster devoid of values and
principles (see some of the latest names in the media).

Israeli democracy is based on a different system. Since no party ever
wins an election outright, the prospective Prime Minister needs a
coalition in order to put together a parliamentary majority. The
ministries are distributed between the coalition parties as spoils of
war. Only after the parties have been allotted their shares, each
according to its strength, is it decided who shall actually occupy the
seats. In a dictatorial party, like Yisrael Beitenu, it is the leader
who hands out the jobs to his loyal supporters. In a democratic party,
the winners are the politicians who have been most successful in
accumulating power by intrigues, bribing colleagues and setting up
inner-party power centers.


AT NO stage of this process, does one particular consideration play any
role at all: the ability of the candidates to direct the ministries they
are fighting over. That is considered irrelevant.

I remember a diplomatic party, shortly after Ehud Barak was elected
Prime Minister, where I met several of the ministers newly appointed by
Barak. All of them were hopping mad.

Shlomo Ben-Ami, a professor of history, an introverted intellectual with
an interest in social theory and peace affairs, was exiled to the
Ministry of Police. There he was responsible for the "October Events" of
2000, when the police shot dead a dozen Arab citizens. The Judicial
Board of Inquiry reprimanded him harshly.

Yossi Beilin, who had dreamed of the Foreign Office, a man of many
political ideas (some good, some bad, some very bad), was sent to the
Ministry of Justice, which did not interest him in the slightest. Barak
treated the others in the same, almost sadistic, way.

But why turn to the past - the present has enough examples to offer. As
chairman of the Labor Party, Amir Peretz had a right to the most
important ministry allotted to his party: Defense. His tenure there has
turned into a pathetic farce (exemplified most vividly by the famous
picture that shows the minister observing maneuvers through binoculars
with the lenses still capped.

The Foreign Minister, Tsipi Livni, is considered well suited for the job
by her colleagues because other countries - the United States, the
United Kingdom and Austria among them - also have female foreign
ministers. She also has dealings with the female Chancellor of Germany
and may soon - God willing - be meeting with a female president of
France. Since assuming office, Livni has not started any initiative and
not expressed any idea that would suggest that she has any vision at all.

The Minister of Police is a former Shin Bet chief, and therefore sees
the police as a force fighting enemies, rather than protecting citizens.
He has shown his talent by appointing a new police chief, who has in the
past been stigmatized in court as unfit to wear a police uniform. The
new Minister of Justice, who has just been appointed, declares publicly
that his main aim is to cripple the Supreme Court, the last bastion of
democracy in Israel, because a female friend of his failed to be
appointed to this august body. (His main ally in this noble endeavor was
- surprise, surprise - MK Esterina Tartman.) And the appointment of
Avigdor Liberman, the primitive racist bully, as minister in charge of
dealing with the Iranian problem is like introducing a deranged elephant
into a porcelain shop.

And this government remains in power only because practically everybody
believes that another one would be even worse.


ISRAELI SOCIETY is vibrant, multi-faceted and rich in talents. It is
prominent in many fields, such as the sciences, medicine, the world of
computers and especially of start-up companies, the economy, literature,
in several fields of the arts and some sports. Why, then, for Gods sake,
does it elevate to the highest ranks politicians who are good for nothing?

I have the impression that in other democracies, similar questions are
being asked. There, too, a vicious circle is in operation: the political
profession is debased, as a result, good people do not choose a
political career, as a result, the political profession gets even more
debased.

According to a Hebrew proverb, "the trouble of others is half of a
comfort". Not in this case.

Israel is facing many problems, more than most democratic countries. It
craves recognition from its neighbors. It must overcome the negative
aspects that accompanied a hundred years of Zionist endeavor. It needs a
settlement, peace and conciliation with the Palestinian people, and with
the entire Arab world. It must cope with deep domestic schisms - between
the secular and the religious, between the poor and the rich, between
the Jewish majority and the Arab minority, between the various Jewish
ethnic communities.

In order to cope with these tasks, we need outstanding men and women,
people with vision, integrity and talent. And, yes: patriots who are not
refuge-seeking scoundrels.

In short: men and women who are the very opposite of Ivette and his
Esterina.
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 0 comments