Cancelling Israel Prize categories was a tone-deaf decision - editorial

The words spoken and tears shed by entrepreneur Eyal Waldman this week over Education Minister Yoav Kisch’s decision to cancel the Israel Prize categories in humanities, science, and technology, were heartbreaking, disappointing, concerning, and point to the dirty underbelly of power abuse that is sadly present in this government.

This year is unlike any before; the prizes should reflect that, reasoned Kisch last week. On the surface, this is a legitimate enough reasoning, but it is weak and senseless. Retaining the categories doesn’t steal one iota of gravity from the horrors that took place this year. Wouldn’t you want to highlight Israeli genius and creativity under impossible circumstances?

“I did not come here today to explain why I am worthy of the prize; I’m not here to chase it. I am here because I cannot allow those who are fighting to go on fighting, while the people in charge act in a debilitated manner,” Waldman told the Knesset’s Science and Technology Committee on Sunday.

Who is Eyal Waldman?

Waldman didn’t get to say goodbye to his daughter, Danielle, and her partner, Noam, who were killed at the Nova music festival. “Their blood is soaked in this land,” Waldman said, right after placing the blame of the prize loss on Netanyahu confidant and billionaire Shlomi Fogel who later denied any involvement, and Kisch insisted that there were no political considerations. Waldman alleged the call came from higher up.

Why it was canceled, we’ll never know, but we can say this was a horribly-executed, tone-deaf decision.

Waldman co-founded Mellanox Technologies, a supplier of computer networking technology, and was a prominent figure in the hi-tech industry’s opposition to the government’s judicial reform policies.

“He cried for himself,” at the Knesset, Channel 12 political correspondent Daphna Liel said on air on Sunday. “I think he cried for all of us as well.”

Kisch said the canceled categories would be replaced by two new war and volunteer-related categories, an unprecedented move. Yet, throughout the five long months of the war, the category committees continued to meet to discuss and finalize their recommendations, Waldman noted. The decision was made only after Waldman’s name was floated, making Kisch’s decision personal.

If Kisch’s reasoning holds, if it was about the inappropriateness of a celebratory ceremony, if the issue is one of tone, all the other planned ceremonies for Remembrance Day and Independence Day should be canceled as well. University heads have said in the meantime they would hold an alternative ceremony for the canceled categories, providing a ray of decency and truth in this quagmire.

Waldman said, “After the committee insisted... Kisch was left with no choice but to cancel. If this is how the government is acting on a relatively minor issue, we must wonder how it is dealing with the more serious ones.”

Labor MK Gilad Kariv hit the nail on the head when he said Kisch “lied to the Knesset from the podium” regarding his motivations, strengthened by the fact that no Education Ministry representative was sent to the meeting on Sunday.

Waldman drew attention to the government’s problematic conduct on this specific issue, and suggested it was not situational, but deep-seated.

Just three years ago, the Supreme Court intervened and overturned a decision by then Education Minister Yoav Gallant to withhold the prize from Prof. Oded Goldreich, due to his criticisms of Israel’s management of the occupied territories. Then Attorney-General Avichai Mandelblit called Gallant’s decision “unreasonable and illegal.” This paper’s position back then was that the decision by Gallant’s successor Yifat Shasha-Biton to block the prize was “a red line that shouldn’t be crossed.” All the more so, today.

This decision is one of the most scandalous this government has taken. Whether it came from Kisch or from someone closer to Netanyahu, almost doesn’t matter. This was a thinly-veiled power move by those elected with executive powers, against earnest average citizens.

Kisch must recall the decision, to, firstly, right this horrible wrong, but also attempt to reposition the government’s receptivity to people’s needs. So far, it has not risen properly to that occasion; it needs to do better.