Weekly Commentary: Israel's Need For Quick Regime Change Outweighs Costs

2006-08-24

Dr. Aaron Lerner

The more it is possible to personalize Israel's failures in the recent Lebanon war, the easier it will be for the Jewish State to rapidly move to restore its perceived image in the neighborhood.

That's because if the bulk of Israel's failure can be attributed to failed leaders (along with logistics, training and other IDF issues that can be remedied within a tight schedule) rather than matters that can require even years to resolve, dumping those leaders may be viewed as going a long way towards solving the problems.

Thanks to Israel's system of parliamentary democracy, failed leaders can be replaced without time consuming elections if 61 Members of Knesset are willing to support the move.

And there isn't time.

No time for elections. No time for investigatory commissions.

No time to lose.

Regional developments before the Lebanon war were already heating up the neighborhood and the post-war situation only brings us that much closer to a dangerous boiling point.

Take a look at the composition of the Knesset and the numbers speak for themselves: unless Kadima splinters it would be literally impossible to come up with the 61 votes required for a regime change.

It could be worse.

If Kadima were a real party composed of MKs sharing a common view and fettered by long ties to a Kadima "movement" splintering the party might be a Herculean task.

But the Kadima Party is, instead, for all intents and purposes, a "flag of convenience" for a group of politicians who joined together, with the help of media advisors, in order to promote their personal individual careers.

Put bluntly: one may be disgusted that there are politicians who vie for the title of "world's oldest profession" - but at this critical time it is fortunate that a price tag might be put on their loyalty.

Kadima MK Ruhama Avraham may have resigned herself to being "only" Chairperson of the Knesset House Committee, but does anyone doubt what she would be willing to do in order to become a deputy minister again?

Yes, there would be a cost to pay in order to provide sufficient "incentive" for at least a third of Kadima to split off to join in a new ruling coalition. But it would dwarf the potential damage of continuing under the current regime.

Critics would certainly jeer at Netanyahu for the "pay-offs", but the Israeli public is mature enough to understand that under the circumstances it was the only viable option. And if it is any consolation, the greater the "pay-off" required by the Kadima splinter to do the right thing, the more the split-off faction will be detested come election day.

A coalition just scraping by 61?

No.

The seven MK's in the Pensioners' Party, despite their personal orientations, are fully aware that their survival beyond their fluke election victory depends on their being in the ruling coalition - regardless of who heads it.

But can parties with social welfare agendas stomach being with Netanyahu given his recent history of slashing the social-welfare budget?

Paradoxically, Binyamin Netanyahu has the best shot at minimizing the war's damage to the social welfare budget today. Netanyahu's hard won credibility in world financial markets would make it possible for him to take steps that the Olmert team could not get away with.

Yes. A "quick and dirty" regime change would be dirty. But when the stopwatch is ticking there simply isn't time for elegant five year plans.

Israel's need for a quick regime change simply outweighs the costs.

Source: IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis