The March to Gush Katif and Israeli Democracy
Listening to the radio in Israel always a trip into Fantasyland. Bear in mind that practically all of the stations are controlled by either IBA (the Israel Broadcast Authority) — i.e. the government — or the army (Galei Tzahal and Galgalatz). There is no Fourth Estate here; all mouthpieces are extensions of the current administration (with minimal external influence still exerted by the labor unions, but I digress — I’ll pick on Amir Peretz another day).
Oh, actually, there *used to* be a divergent opinion on the airwaves, but they were declared illegal and shut down, despite all efforts to obtain a proper license. In the US, if you want to run a radio or TV station, you have an opportunity to be licensed by the FCC. Granted, it may not be cheap, and the radio spectrum in large cities is already over-crowded, but anyone can run their own media outlet with their own spin. That may seem quaint in the era of blogs, podcasts, blogcast, etc. but despite what you may read online, many people in Israel commute with non-satellite radios and get their primary news from Kol Israel.
This morning’s news led off with 3 stories about the continuing standoff between the banned anti-disengagement march to Gush Katif and the police. The stories all suggested that the “right-wing settlers” were rioting violently, despite all efforts by the Yesha Council to keep them calm and negotiate with the police. A few arrests were mentioned. You have to wonder what the government was thinking by coming down on the protest so hard. If the army hadn’t declared Gaza a closed military zone, and the police ignored the march, there really wouldn’t have been much of a news story. Right now, Sharon is giving the protesters a golden opportunity to martyr themselves for the cause. This standoff is of the government’s making alone.
And here’s the Fantasyland bit: Item 4 on the news was about some Palestinian mortar fire and gunfire directed at the Gaza settlements. No injuries, no serious damage, no further details. At the same time that 10,000 police officers are blockading a legitimate non-violent protest within a democratic country, our citizens are under continued attacks and we do nothing. The Palestinians do nothing. The Bush administration says nothing. Sharon has said repeatedly that there will be no disengagement under fire (but there *will* be a disengagement, make no mistake about that!), but on this point, he’s decided to go soft.
Fantasyland goes up a notch in News Item 5: Pro-disengagement groups have started roadside “blue” protests, to counteract the “anti-democratic” orange protests. “Anti-democratic” is a big word in Israeli governmental PR, and is perhaps the greatest insult. Never mind that it’s applied to you opponent only, regardless whether it’s left calling right or right calling left. To paraphrase a famous line, I do not think that word means what they think it means. Anti-democratic *should* mean acting against the establishment of a governing body selected by the citizens. It should refer to such acts as vote fraud or a military coup. Given that today we associate freedom of expression with a democratic society, acting to squelch the right of others to freedom of expression could also be considered anti-democratic. But holding a protest against the policy of a duly elected government, while recognizing its authority? There’s nothing anti-democratic about that. If anything, that’s a high form of democracy in action. The protest is to convince the government that its policy does not reflect the will of the people (at least, that segment of the population) and to illustrate that they will be voted out of office in the next election.
What we’re seeing in Israel right now is the inherent problem of the multi-year cycle of representative democracy. Once you’ve elected a representative to the government, then you’re stuck with him. He has complete freedom to take whatever positions or work towards whatever policies he wants. He only has to keep you happy enough to vote for him in 4 years. Actually, this problem should be more pronounced in the US with the 2 term limit on presidents, but there really aren’t enough consequential issues in the US to really make a difference. With Ariel Sharon, who is thinking only of his legacy and his retirement, he is not held accountable even by the flimsiest of control devices inherent in democracy. He has no interest beyond the disengagement. While I disagree with his policies and his methods, I admire his resolve to finish his career in a blaze of glory. Nonetheless, those who call his opponents anti-democratic would do well to examine their own feelings on democracy and freedom of expression.