Palestinians Comment on Israeli Democracy

Since the results of the Israeli elections were published, the Palestinian media has focused on the implications of the political change in Israel on the Palestinians and the peace process. But, on the margins of the political discussion, many of the Palestinian commentators also discussed the nature of the elections in the democratic state. These writers praise Israeli democracy and express their envy due to the lack a democracy in the Arab world.

Hasan Al-Kashef, Director-General of the Palestinian Authority Information Ministry, described the reaction of the Palestinian public to the political change in Israel, saying: 'The Palestinian public followed Netanyahu's immediate recognition of his defeat and his [decision] to leave [political life] with happiness and surprise, exactly as it did [after] Areyeh Der'i's departure [from heading the Shas Party] for the benefit of his party and as was the case with Beni Begin's, Refael Eitan's, Avigdor Kahalani's, and others' voluntary departures after being rejected by a decision of the majority of the electorate.'

According to Al-Kashef, 'there is no Palestinian who can erase from his consciousness the humiliating comparison [between democracy in Israel and the political condition of the Palestinians]. No Palestinian cannot forget the questions asked in our political life regarding several names in our leadership, in the [political] currents, in the parties, and in the [public] forces that continue [to govern] by the power of the subjective decision of their executive committee only, despite the fact that their weight in the Palestinian street - which yearns for the right to vote and the ability to make free decisions...'

'In the history of the new national Palestinian movement, no recognition of defeat by any Palestinian 'leader,' or [of the failure] of his plans, or a [recognition] of his [limited] training for his post has ever been registered. Furthermore, in this history, no natural retirement [of a person or a political current] has ever been registered...'[1]

Columnist Ata Al-Qemari appers to express envy of Israeli democracy in the daily Al-Quds: 'I participated in the [happiness] of my [Jewish] neighbors [due to Netanyahu's failure], but I am also envious of them. Look at all of the Arab tigers and lions [the Arab leaders], standing on their back feet, expecting the verdict of the simple Israeli citizen who can, with one ballot deposited into a small wooden box, humiliate one leader and raise another, demand accountablity from one government and bring to power another [in its place]. I envy them and desire a similar regime in my future state. It is true that I am appalled by the culture of curses and profanities in the Israeli political arena, but I respect the democratic discussion, debate, decision, the sovereignty of law, and freedom of the press...'[2]

Columnist, Dr. Ali Al-Jirbawi, in the daily Al-Ayyam, explains the meaning of truly democratic elections: '...among the most important things we can conclude from the elections in Israel... is that they are real elections that cause change in the political condition of the society and are not a pre-staged ornament which grants the leader eternal continuity in power.'

'Netanyahu, who was nicknamed 'King of Israel,' fell [out of power] and within half an hour relinquished leadership of his party; the lesson [that we must learn from this] does not relate only to rejoicing at his calamity, but also to the meaning of the existence of real elections, which expressed changing public opinion regarding the survival of the leader in power until he is removed or until his death.... Such elections are the result of a democratic regime that accepts change [by means of] elections as the basis of governance.'

Al-Jarbawi also adds a comparison to the Arab world, stating, '...In the Arab reality, real elections do not exist, and therefore, political stagnation is the basis for political activity, the center of which is maintaining the continued [rule] of the leader until he disappears from the political arena, and then the regime is torn to pieces [already after] it passed away from the world.' [3]

Columnist, Dr. Talal Al-Shareef, in the daily Al-Quds, asked 'whether Israel was in danger during Netanyahu's regime?' He answered positively: 'Israeli democracy - which encompasses all of the divisions [in the Israeli public] and satisfies all sides in the spirit of sportmanship - saved it...'

According to Al-Shareef, 'it is possible that the most decisive proof of the fact that Israeli democracy saved the Israeli nation from the sorrows brought about by Netanyahu is that if such a condition should [occur] in an Arab state, it would have entered the circle of danger without any of its citizens having the ability to replace the ruler or to stop him, [even] if he became a danger [to his country]. On the contrary, the drummers and the flute players would compete in praising the [ruler's] cleverness, power, and ingenuity. This, despite the defeats, disasters, and suffering which result from it due to the lack of democracy...'

Al-Shareef criticizes Palestinian society: 'Israel has proved that for fifty years its real power is in its democracy, guarding the rights of its citizens, applying laws [equally] to the rich and poor, the big and the small... and in the participation of the nation in the development of institutions according to ability and efficiency and not according to closeness to [the ruler], [belonging] to a political party, and connections.'On the other hand, the Palestinian parties and factions, including the ruling party, proved that they cannot bear democracy and they engage in a Byzantine debate regarding participation or lack of participation [in political life.] Moreover, for thirty years they were a fundamental impediment to Palestinian democracy... All our parties, including the ruling party, still cannot lead our people to true democracy....'[4]

[1] Al-Ayyam, May 22, 1999.

[2] Al-Ayyam, May 22, 1999.

[3] Al-Ayyam, May 22, 1999.

[4] Al-Quds, May 27, 1999.