My Word: Protests, politics, and a presidential compromise

American-born friends – children of the Sixties – who participated in Monday’s mass protest in Jerusalem against the government’s proposed judicial reform likened the scene to Woodstock, with growing numbers of people streaming into the capital.

“By the time we got to Woodstock, we were half a million strong, and everywhere was a song, and a celebration,” go the lyrics of Joni Mitchell’s seminal song.

Israel Railways added extra trains to ferry the protesters pouring into the capital, but the numbers, despite the predictions of the organizers, were closer to 90,000 than half a million, let alone the much-desired million-strong.

Are the current Israeli protests unprecedented?

While the majority – those armed with flags and fervor, who rhythmically chanted “demo-crat-iya” – were obviously acting out of a genuine fear of the reform, I feared there were others who came from peer pressure, or even that social media-era “FOMO” phenomenon: the fear of missing out.

It reminded me of the social protests of 2011, except that then, the high-earning hi-tech entrepreneurs, bank directors and top businesspeople were considered “the enemy.” Now that so many have spoken out against Benjamin Netanyahu’s government and its proposed changes, they have been transformed into the good guys. Even more so if they threaten to take their money and assets out of the country.

Of course, the biggest danger is that threats of irreparable damage to the country’s enviably strong economy are turning into a self-fulfilling prophesy. Opposition leader Yair Lapid presumably understands that risk but is happy to use his oratorical skills as a former TV presenter to whip up the flames even higher.

The protest organizers proudly listed the numerous organizations and bodies allowing their employees to take a day off work to participate. These included hi-tech companies, law firms and universities, among others – many of them receiving free publicity in the mainstream media. I wondered how those workers who might support the reform were faring. It’s not easy to voice a minority opinion when your pay, promotion prospects, and work conditions are dependent on a performance review by someone who tells you “This company is turning out en masse to protest against the reform.”

It reminded me of the not-so-good old days when the Histadrut (the national labor federation) would insist that workers at its companies participate in May Day parades.

Last week, among the protests which attracted headlines, was a march by IDF reservists, including a number of retired high-ranking officers. They made their way from the Armored Corps museum and memorial at Latrun to the military cemetery at Mount Herzl. The reservists occasionally blocked the main Tel Aviv-Jerusalem highway, but that was the least problematic aspect of their march.

The move to bring the IDF into the imbroglio was upsetting; the exploitation of the memory of dead soldiers was reprehensible. Soldiers serve the country, not a particular leader. I have friends buried in Mount Herzl. I didn’t necessarily know their political views when they were alive; I don’t presume to know what they would have thought today, more than 40 years later.

Among the protest’s current big-name leaders are former IDF chiefs of staff Moshe (Bogie) Ya’alon and Dan Halutz. Halutz’s main association, in my mind, is the way the IDF head somehow found time to sell his stocks on the first day of the Second Lebanon War. He is not my idea of an inspiring leader – although he might serve the purposes of those who want to declare political, judicial and economic warfare on the current prime minister. Can a call not to serve be far behind?

While the anti-reform protesters use the word “coup” to describe the government’s plan, its supporters see something frighteningly reminiscent of a putsch. After all, democratic elections were held less than four months ago and Netanyahu and his partners – like them or not – clearly gained enough seats for a dominant coalition.

The protests are obviously still seeking a leader. A string of prominent figures has proven unsuitable for the task. A few weeks ago, Col. (ret.) Ze’ev Raz, a decorated former Israel Air Force fighter pilot, posted on Facebook, “If a sitting prime minister assumes dictatorial powers, he is a dead man, it’s that simple, along with his ministers and followers.”

He continued by arguing that Israel should integrate din rodef (a concept in Jewish law that permits the killing of an individual who intends to kill or harm others). It was a phrase heard among right-wing extremists during the Oslo Accords-period, ahead of Yitzhak Rabin’s assassination in 1995.

Although he later deleted the post and apologized, it is disturbing that Raz thought it would be acceptable to share such a message on social media in the first place. Raz, we were repeatedly reminded, is a decorated hero who commanded the 1981 bombing raid on Saddam Hussein’s Osirak nuclear reactor in Iraq. That does not make him perfect. He is also a former head of the IAF flight school. But that doesn’t make him an educator.

Raz’s comments followed similar statements by another decorated veteran. Former tank battalion commander David Hodak, a lawyer participating in a Bar Association panel on the reform, declared: “If someone forces me to live in a dictatorship and I don’t have a choice, I won’t hesitate to use live fire.” Talk about shooting your mouth off.

Like other unions and guilds, we don’t know what all the members of the Bar Association think. But, they should have all realized that Hodak had crossed a red line and forcefully made it known that it was not acceptable.

Perhaps they had other things on their mind. Israel Bar Association head Avi Himi – among the leaders of the protest movement – had just been forced to resign following accusations that he had sent explicit personal footage of himself to a female lawyer who was seeking a reference from him in her bid to receive an appointment as a judge. This is a family paper, so let’s just say it involved more pleasure to him than to the recipient of the video call.

In his defense, Himi claimed that the act was consensual. It was the second recent alleged sexual incident surrounding a bid for the bench and a head of the Bar Association. The deputy state attorney in 2021 closed the “sex for judgeship” case against the previous Bar Association head, Effi Naveh, on the grounds that it would be hard to prove the alleged improprieties in court. If nothing else, this should be a sign that something is wrong with the way that judges are chosen. Naveh, incidentally, was associated more with the Right.

On Sunday night, President Isaac Herzog made a passionate plea for compromise. In an extraordinary address to the nation on primetime TV, Herzog acknowledged that the system needed reforming but voiced reservations concerning the government’s legislation. He noted the pain, passion and patriotism of both the supporters and opponents of the overhaul before presenting his own five-point plan.

“Conflicts and arguments cannot be denied, but since time immemorial we have known to give more space to what unites us,” the president said.

Meanwhile, the opposition continued to demand that the legislative process be frozen to allow for talks to be held, while the government called for talks with no preconditions on the understanding that – as with any legislation – changes would be made before it passed its third reading in the Knesset.

Many people are referring to the current crisis as unprecedented. As someone who was a university student (and IDF reservist) in the First Lebanon War; covered the Oslo Accords as a parliamentary reporter; and witnessed the rift during the disengagement from Gaza in 2005, I have seen worse – and don’t want to go back down that path.

As journalist Kalman Liebskind has noted, the fact that the country has not descended into civil war despite the splits in the past is largely due to the way that the Right has said that nothing was worth that price. This week, not incidentally, more than 75 rabbis and female religious leaders from the Religious-Zionist community called for both sides to accept the president’s proposal to find a compromise. 

In the words of Mitchell’s “Woodstock,” “We’ve got to get ourselves back to the garden.” In Israel’s case, the Garden of Eden. Nobody wants to lose paradise to politicking.

liat@jpost.com