Jun 7, 2012
Blaming UTJ and Shas For The Ulpana Bill
When the Disengagement passed, Shas and UTJ took a lot of heat from the more nationalisticly inclined people, as if they should have supported the fight led by the Dati Leumi leadership and other right wing Zionist groups.
They should have supported the anti-Disengagement group more, I am not denying that. However, it the attacks were coming from a political discussion, of not coming to "our" side, not adopting "our" position, as if they had no right to decide on their own what their relationship is with Eretz Yisrael and with the State of Israel. I disagreed with their decision, but I did not like the way they were attacked, both in the way it was made to appear that they were solely to blame for the entire affair as well as if they have no right to make their own decisions.
After Shas and UTJ came out disappointing much of the right wing public again with their [mostly] lack of support for the Ulpana bill after having been threatened by Netanyahu, again the talk is beginning that they are at fault, they weren't there to support us, etc.
I don't want to debate whether the bill was good or bad. I don't know, I dont have a definitive opinion on the matter. On the one hand, 5 homes of 30 families or so is being traded for 300 homes in Beit El and I think 850 overall. So maybe it is not so bad. On the other hand, it's never good to throw people out of their homes, especially when they went there with government support. And if Netanyahu has this ability (from a legal and a diplomatic perspective) to build all this new housing in the settlements, why hasn't he done so until now, or why can't he do so with absolutely no connection to cutting down and moving these other existing homes?
So any party can decide for themselves based on their platform and their members beliefs whether that bill fit their worldview or not.
However, I do find it to be the ultimate chuitzpah for people on the right wing, generally in the National Zionist camp but also others, to demand the haredi parties support their position on this and other land of Israel issues, when for the past 6 months or 2 years (or some would say 64 years) the haredi parties positions have been under attack (sometimes rightfully sometimes wrongfully) and none (that's hyperbole, so maybe let's say "very few") of the Dati Leumi stood by the side of the Haredim in their time of need. Just like in those instances they found it unnecessary to stand by the side of the Haredim but rather to act upon their worldview or upon taking advantage of the current political currents of the time, so now the haredim should be able to make their own decisions on issues like this and not automatically be expected to come to anybody's side.
That being said, it is not helpful when people like Minister of Housing Ariel Attias say things like he said this morning when he blamed Netanyahu for these decisions and deflected blame from Barak and anybody else. Sure, he and his party were under pressure of being fired, so they had to vote against the bill (or abstain), but at least don't throw around blame afterwards. just lay low. As much as Netanyahu is to blame, those who did not oppose it are also to blame. We do not live in a dictatorship. Maybe if enough MKs and Ministers opposed him instead of caving, perhaps he would not have been able to fire them all. You chose to change your position at the last minute, for whatever reason, so you are to blame as much as anybody else.
------------------------------------------------------
Reach thousands of readers with your ad by advertising on Life in Israel
------------------------------------------------------
They should have supported the anti-Disengagement group more, I am not denying that. However, it the attacks were coming from a political discussion, of not coming to "our" side, not adopting "our" position, as if they had no right to decide on their own what their relationship is with Eretz Yisrael and with the State of Israel. I disagreed with their decision, but I did not like the way they were attacked, both in the way it was made to appear that they were solely to blame for the entire affair as well as if they have no right to make their own decisions.
I don't want to debate whether the bill was good or bad. I don't know, I dont have a definitive opinion on the matter. On the one hand, 5 homes of 30 families or so is being traded for 300 homes in Beit El and I think 850 overall. So maybe it is not so bad. On the other hand, it's never good to throw people out of their homes, especially when they went there with government support. And if Netanyahu has this ability (from a legal and a diplomatic perspective) to build all this new housing in the settlements, why hasn't he done so until now, or why can't he do so with absolutely no connection to cutting down and moving these other existing homes?
So any party can decide for themselves based on their platform and their members beliefs whether that bill fit their worldview or not.
However, I do find it to be the ultimate chuitzpah for people on the right wing, generally in the National Zionist camp but also others, to demand the haredi parties support their position on this and other land of Israel issues, when for the past 6 months or 2 years (or some would say 64 years) the haredi parties positions have been under attack (sometimes rightfully sometimes wrongfully) and none (that's hyperbole, so maybe let's say "very few") of the Dati Leumi stood by the side of the Haredim in their time of need. Just like in those instances they found it unnecessary to stand by the side of the Haredim but rather to act upon their worldview or upon taking advantage of the current political currents of the time, so now the haredim should be able to make their own decisions on issues like this and not automatically be expected to come to anybody's side.
That being said, it is not helpful when people like Minister of Housing Ariel Attias say things like he said this morning when he blamed Netanyahu for these decisions and deflected blame from Barak and anybody else. Sure, he and his party were under pressure of being fired, so they had to vote against the bill (or abstain), but at least don't throw around blame afterwards. just lay low. As much as Netanyahu is to blame, those who did not oppose it are also to blame. We do not live in a dictatorship. Maybe if enough MKs and Ministers opposed him instead of caving, perhaps he would not have been able to fire them all. You chose to change your position at the last minute, for whatever reason, so you are to blame as much as anybody else.
------------------------------------------------------
Reach thousands of readers with your ad by advertising on Life in Israel
------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Related Posts
Right on. It's really unfair to expect the haredi parties to have the same priorites and opinions about settlement as the dati leumi parties, when the haredi leadership has made it vary clear that they don't, going back at least as far as Rav Shach. It reminds me of liberals that got outraged because Justice Clarence Thomas has the chutzpah to be a right-winger, even though he's black - a person, party, or movement is entitled to make up his/her/its own mind.
ReplyDeletethe yisrael hayom political commentator said today that the biggest looser in this event may be - the chareidim. bibi has shown that he can control his party and even his coalition. if he chooses to go with a real replacement to the tal law, the chareidi parties won't be able to find allies to stop it, especially now that the DLs might want revenge (justified or not).
ReplyDeleteanyway, these parties will have no one to blame but themselves with their never ending bickering, fighting and even mutal hatred.
For UTJ, it's true that they can bear the blame. After all, they always have made known that their only interrest is their "yeshivot and bochurim).
ReplyDeleteBut Shass really deserve the blame. Firstly because they themselves said they support the bill, and even have received order from their "supreme authority".
Second because unlike UTJ, they have some of the priorities of the DL. Especially because many of those voting for them are DL.
And lastly because most of today's problems result from their backing of oslo 20 years ago, and because they always change their mind when "asked gently" (with threat and/or money).
And Yisrael Beitenu and most of the likud are too to be blamed in this.
btw i remember zvulen orlev flaming the hareidi parties after some vote on gush qatif. this was after he sat in the sharon government that cut child allowances.
ReplyDeletethis is all one long and pathetic story. nothing new under the sun.
Yup, it all depends on whose ox is being gored.
DeleteAnother reason we'd be better off without these "religious" parties.
Please don't equate Charedi (especially Shas) apathy to the plight of the mityashvim with the Dati Leum attitude towards the pressure the Charedim were under. Charedim, especially Shas, supposedly support many of the right-wing ideas of the MO right. But when push comes to shove, they're willing to be bought off. Most Dati Leumi people fundamentally disagree with the Charedim when it comes to working and army service and actually identify with the attitude of the rest of the country.
ReplyDeleteand therefore what? therefore the DL have to fight with the haredim on issues important to the haredim, but demand support on the issues important to DL?
ReplyDeletethe only people the party needs to answer to is its electorate. If the supporters of UTJ find Eretz Yisrael issues important, the party would support those issues. They might find them important, but clearly they find them to be less important than yeshivot issues (be it army service, kollel and yeshiva funding, public chillul shabbos, etc)
All I was saying was that there's a difference between a group that doesn't support another group because they (the first group) have other (warped) priorities and a group that doesn't support another because they completely disagree with them.
DeleteIf UTJ and Shas really don't agree with the mityashvim, then fine. But Eli Yishai always tries to have it both ways. When Shas supported Oslo by abstaining from voting in the Knesset in exchange for payoffs, that was morally repugnant. There's nothing morally repugnant about a member of the Mafdal not defending people who don't work.
UTJ and Shas feel that there is indeed something morally repugant about not defending people who don't work BECAUSE they are learning torah. you don't accept their POV, which is fine. but don't demand that they accept yours.
Deleteat the end of the day, politics is about forming coalitions and getting things done, and swallowing when you do something that you don't want to do. if the dati'im and chareidim can't, so they pay the price.
I didn't demand that they accept mine. I said (or meant to say) that to a large degree, they do claim to accept mine (actually, not really mine, rather that of the mityashvim). Shas in the 90's would abstain from a critical Knesset vote purely to keep the money flowing and then pretend to have been very much against Oslo. They voted against their conscience and constituency. That can hardly be said about a Mafdal MK regarding Charedi army exepmtions, which they are all against.
DeleteShas, like Yisrael Beitanu and the Likud MKs that changed their votes due to the PM's invoking of coalition discipline, chose to give in on this issue so they could stay in the government and continue to work on the issues that are more important to them. You can always take a cynical view that these politicians just want to preserve their own seats, but only they really know what their true motivations are. The dati leumi parties could not give in on this issue because it is a core issue for them, just like the army exemptions are a core issue for the haredi parties. Settlements have never been a core issue for the haredi parties. Maybe Shas deserves extra cynicism because of their track record, and I'm not going to be so simple-minded as to suggest that they had a sudden attack of concern for the rule of law (which I think was the main reason this law was properly voted down), but I don't see why they should be expected to have made this a do or die issue, any more than Lieberman and Yisrael Beitanu, which makes the same right-wing pro-settlement pretensions as Shas.
ReplyDeleteThe DLs did give in, at least MK hershkovitz did. he abstained. he didn't fall on his sword for this one. now he is trying to give his vote a spin saying that he is responsible for obtaining more building permits.
DeleteOh yeah, that's right - thanks, Ben, for setting me straight. So now, though, I really don't get why Shas and Gimmel should be getting any extra heat on this.
DeleteAgreed. This is not a clear-cut issue, even to many on the Right. So there's really no reason the Charedim should be getting heat. I just didn't agree with the quid-pro-quo aspect of Rafi's post since there's no reason in the world for Mafdal members to support Charedim on army exemptions at all.
DeleteWell, on that note, I think we've definitely reached common ground.
Deletethere is one reason for the quid pro quo: does the mafdal want chareidi support or not? what is more important to the mafdal, yishuvim or seeing yeshiva guys drafted? like i said earlier, that is what politics is about. none of the supporters, the voters, who believe in eretz yisrael shlema will NOT vote for the mafdal/ichud leumi if these parties side with the chareidim. but if these parties are unable to form a coalition, if they put the chareidi draft above the yishuvim, than they have betrayed their voters.
Deletethe reason why oslo passed was because meretz was willing to give in on certain issues to shas. that is politics - deciding what is essential and what isn't.
And where the Chraredi parties when the lefties and peaceniks attack Beitar?
ReplyDeleteIt is no less a settlement than the others.