“Schlaglicht Israel” offers an insight into internal Israeli debates and reflects selected, political events that affect daily life in Israel. It appears every two weeks and summarizes articles that appeared in the Israeli daily press.
Main topics covered in this Publication:
- Jewish Terror
- Iran Agreement
- Attack on Orthodox Monopoly
- Selection of Articles
- Jewish Terror – Will the Israeli right finally come to its senses?
I cannot get this baby, Ali Dawabsheh, out of my mind. Nor can I stop thinking of that image: the hand of a human being opening a window in the middle of the night, and throwing a Molotov cocktail into a room where parents and their children are sleeping. (…) Who is the person or persons capable of doing this? (…) Benjamin Netanyahu, and several ministers from the right wing, rushed to harshly condemn the murder. (…) What is difficult to understand is how the prime minister and his cabinet ministers are (…) capable of not seeing the connection between the occupation regime that has been continuing for 48 years, and the dark, fanatic reality that has been forged at the frontiers of the Israeli consciousness (…). both acts of violence (…) – the murder and stabbings at the Pride event in Jerusalem and the murder of the baby – are interrelated, and derive from a similar worldview. In both, hatred itself (…) constitutes (…) a legitimate, ample reason to commit murder, to annihilate the hated human being. (…) the process that has been underway in recent years within Israel, its malevolent intensity and its malignant branches, are dangerous and destructive in a new and deceptive manner. There is a sense that even now, Israel’s leadership doesn’t yet understand – or perhaps refuses to admit to itself a fact that it finds intolerable – that the Jewish terror faction within Israel has declared war on the state. (…) No compromise is possible with these people. The government of Israel must fight them just as it fights Palestinian terror. (…)
David Grossman, HAA, 04.08.15
We’re no better than our enemies
It’s over. If we thought it couldn’t happen among us, that we’re not like that, that Jews don’t do such things, that only they can murder children, go into houses and shoot a baby point blank, burn families, execute murderous terror – that’s it, it’s over. We are, we can and we do. Burn children alive, execute murderous, inhuman, incomprehensible terror. (…) imagine what we would say if it were the other way around: If Palestinians had thrown Molotov cocktails at a house and burned a Jewish family; if a Jewish baby had been burned alive. (…) We are talking about terrorists. And it’s not enough to say “terror is terror,” as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said over the weekend. You must also treat these terrorists like you treat non-Jewish terror organizations. (…) There is a well-oiled system of incitement behind these murderers. (…) Don’t condemn the criminal acts after they happen. Prevent them. But first of all, catch them. And punish them the exact way they should be punished: Like members of a terror organization. The massacre of the family from the village of Duma must be a turning point in our attitude towards the murderers among us, as well as towards those who legitimize them through their words. (…)
Sima Kadmon, JED, 03.18.15
Tipping the balance
(…) Terrible things have happened here, red lines have been crossed, and innocents have been murdered. (…) Our people, who have always been a minority, know too well the pain and suffering of being targeted for being different, for being the other. (…) In the promised land of today, we have murdered those strangers. Our land is out of balance, bad things have happened to good people and we need to tip back the scales. (…) In our country today, we see and feel the evil, the godlessness and the ignorance and now we need to work together to increase justice, faith and wisdom. Little kindnesses to one another will be the shards of light that will shatter this darkness that weighs heavily upon us. (…) small kindnesses are infectious, they play forward, the light will return. (…) only like this, by joining together and being kind to one another, will we succeed in tipping the balance back into place.
Rachael Risby-Raz, TOI, 03.08.15
Let the Shin Bet work
(…) Dozens of terrorist attacks against Palestinians (and on mosques and churches) have been perpetrated in recent years. In some cases, in which the result was damage to property, it was only by luck that there were no casualties. And yet — many of these cases were never solved, and when they were the punishments were absurd. (…) A few hundred youngsters currently comprise, according to Shin Bet assessments, the radical terrorist core of the nationalist Right. The Shin Bet’s Jewish division has struggled to infiltrate this core, and when it succeeds — the result is often a soft hand from the prosecution or courts, not to mention a supportive ideological environment. (…) Politicians are also responsible. The necessary treatment of the problem, however, must go even deeper, down to the rabbis who incite to violence and the environment that legitimizes criminal behavior such as harming soldiers and police officers. It must confront a public atmosphere in which the country’s president is taunted for expressing shock and remorse over a murdered toddler. (…) we must let the Shin Bet work and pre-empt, investigate and shake things up; otherwise we could wake up tomorrow and discover that the apocalypse is already upon us.
Yoav Limor, IHY, 02.08.15
The murder of 16-year-old Shira Banki at the Jerusalem Gay Pride Parade on Thursday was a terrible tragedy – for her family and friends, and for those who envision an Israel that protects the freedom of all. (…) Shira represented the very finest of Israeli society. (…) By marching in the parade, she was embodying the belief that these promises are not just fancy notions empty of content. Rather, these values have very practical ramifications. (…) Schlissel, the fanatic who stabbed Shira and five others, was a lone wolf representing no one but himself. However, there are many others who, like Schlissel, would like this year’s gay pride parade to be Jerusalem’s last. People such as Bayit Yehudi MK Bezalel Smotrich, who represents a large swathe of the religious Zionist community, have referred to the gay pride as “a blasphemy” that defiles the holy city. (…) Such fanatics must not be allowed to exploit democratic process to curtail the rights of others, whether homosexuals or other minority groups in Israeli society. (…) We owe it to Shira Banki, (…) to stand up courageously for the values articulated in our Declaration of Independence which she espoused. (…)
Editorial, JPO, 03.08.15
The Left’s condemnation problem
(…) The Left has eagerly exploited the vicious attack on a Palestinian family in Duma last week. (…) Assigning collective guilt over and over again is just too much fun. The Left has always preached against making broad generalizations, but it has made several exceptions to that rule: the Right, the ultra-Orthodox and the national religious. (…) Left finally condemned the attack, if you call a drizzle of weak statements a condemnation. Whenever Jewish terrorists take action, the Left spares no time in condemning the attack as one cohesive body. But if Palestinian perpetrators carry out an attack, this chorus scatters and its members turn silent. (…) Unlike the Left’s politicians and mouthpieces, the public has shown it has much more common sense when it comes to terrorism. The results from a recent Israel Hayom poll show that an overwhelming majority of Israelis consider Jewish and Arab terrorism as one and the same. The respondents said both should be condemned unequivocally. (…) The poll shows that Israeli are much smarter and have more integrity that the Left’s leaders. (…) Those who claim that there are two kinds of terrorism are making a superficial distinction.
Haim Shine, IHY, 07.08.15
Detainment without trial is a slippery slope
Administrative detention has returned once again, but the current muscle-flexing by the Shin Bet security service will cost us dearly. (…) Now, settlers have to decide whose side they are on: that of the law or the hooligans. They can’t make up their minds, because ultimately they belong to the same camp as the unruly ones – outside the law. (…) Let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that these detentions remove three or four of these “royalist” Jewish extremists from the scene. However, once their cells are vacated, we’ll be left with the public legitimization to similarly arrest, with the help of questionable evidence, activists from the Islamic Movement, for example. (,,,) It’s more important to examine what the Shin Bet means when it talks about the difficulties it is encountering. According to its own words, it is able to arrest people based on evidence that would not be admissible in a court of law. (…) those referred to as “hilltop youth” are illegal residents in the territories who must be evacuated. There is no need to bend democratic principles in order to make this political demand. They are there because the settlers assist them, because the government supports their presence there, because the army needs them. (…) the Jewish extremists must become the focus of demands for political justice. This is not a call for disobeying the law, merely for its enforcement. This is not a call for violation of human rights, only for their enactment. (…)
Yitzhak Laor, HAA, 08.08.15
Rivlin is diregarding threats on his life – just like Rabin
(…) Like and unlike Yitzhak Rabin, Rubi Rivlin is taking the harsh words written and said against him lightly. Although he hasn’t added Rabin’s disregarding hand gesture, everything else is similar – the words, the tone and the music, the disregard. (…) Mr. President, that it takes only one crazy Jew out of eight million Israeli citizens to hurt and kill or injure. Last week, in Jerusalem, we found out there is already one. As a person with bitter experience, 20-year-old experience, my suggestion is: Don’t downplay the threats. There was a large writing on the wall in the Air Force’s squadron bases several years ago: “Look around you very carefully – the one you can’t see is the one who will bring you down.”
Eitan Haber, JED, 05.08.15
- The Iran Agreement – What are Israel’s options regarding Iran
(…) It makes no difference what the US Congress does or does not do. The trade and investment sanctions are gone through a unanimous vote of the UN Security Council and hotel rooms are already in short supply in Tehran due to the massive influx of Western businessmen and government officials looking to pick up some of the newly-released billions. (…) Israel (…) can adopt a wait and see attitude while continuing to perfect its defensive missile shields. That would, however (…) do nothing to protect Israel from eventual miniaturized nuclear weapons in the hands of Iranian proxies. (…) Israel could actively prepare for a military attack on Iran following the announcement by that country of a nuclear capability as well as the possibility of a new administration in Washington more favorable to Israel and more hostile to Iran. The success of such an attack would be more than problematical, given the present level of armaments available to Israel. Israel could, alternatively, attack the Iranian physical infrastructure instead of its nuclear facilities, which would, however, invite massive international condemnation, as well as retaliation by Iranian proxies. (…) Israel could continue to develop and perfect its capacity to conduct cyber-attacks on the Iranian nuclear facilities, even more devastating than the Stuxnet episode. No reason not to do this, but eventual success is not guaranteed and in any case, the Iranians are no slouches at cyber-warfare themselves. (…)
Norman A. Bailey, GLO, 04.08.15
US can’t defend Israel against a nuclear attack
(…) If Iran decides to attack Israel with a nuclear weapon – or even not with a nuclear weapon – it is completely reasonable to assume that it will be a surprise attack. There is no chance that the US will be able to defend us against such an attack, especially a nuclear attack, unless the Americans deploy a significant amount of forces on Israeli territory – tens of thousands of soldiers with missile batteries, radars and other measures, who will be on constant alert and ready to intercept ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and planes arriving with a deadly cargo from Iran or from Iraq, Syria and Lebanon, Iran’s allies. (…) Israel doesn’t share a border with Iran and is being threatened with a nuclear weapon, so the only thing that could deter the ayatollahs would be the physical presence of many American soldiers who may be hurt by the Iranian attack, as any attack on Israel would be considered a direct attack on the US as well. (…) The US holds 40,000 soldiers in South Korea on a permanent basis in order to deter North Korea’s leader from even trying to attack the South, and keeps a nuclear weapon both in South Korea and in Japan for the same purpose. (…) Let’s hope that after the American Congress completes the saga of approving the removal of the sanctions on Iran, the Israeli government will finally sit down with the Americans to discuss the fulfillment of the promises that the Obama administration is now throwing around so generously.
Ron Ben-Yishai, JED, 04.08.15
For Zion’s Sake: Congress, do your duty to stop a nuclear Iran!
(…) In 10 or 15 years when many of the accord’s restrictions are to expire, the world will be a different place. (…) Today (…) the United States is still by far the strongest world power. (…) Now is the time to use the sanctions to their full effect, instead of giving Iran a breather for a number of years before triggering so-called “snap back” sanctions. (…) Now is the time to tighten the sanctions, to threaten to send Iran to an “economic stone age” and if necessary to strike it – to convince it that its drive to nuclear power is futile. Make them suspend all enrichment. Remove all centrifuges. Put the nuclear scientists in retirement. Demolish Fordow and all the other sites. Meet “sanction-lifting” milestones and good-behavior milestones. Allow inspectors anywhere, anytime. (…) Nuclear power is not a right. It is a privilege as well as a danger to humanity that must be strictly controlled. We don’t have to expect the Iranian regime to change. But we can determine that calling for the destruction of the United States and Israel, sponsoring terrorists and attacks on US soldiers, seeking to create a new world order and oppressing your citizens makes the regime unfit for such a privilege. (…)
Daniel Tauber, JPO, 11.08.15
Netanyahu versus Obama: Who will win?
(…) Netanyahu is fighting a duel with the strongest man in the world, right in front of the rest of the world (…) During all the years that Israel has shared a unique relationship with the United States of America, nothing remotely similar to this has ever happened before. (…) We should all be concerned. (…) Netanyahu’s gamble is huge. He is going for the grand prize, in full knowledge that he doesn’t stand a chance of getting it. He doesn’t consider the repercussions, and he ignores the dangers. (…) It’s like he’s in a trance. Is it good? (…) It is definitely frightening. Very. (…) Netanyahu knows that his actions unite the nation around him. He has managed to turn Obama into a punching bag as well as a political asset. (…) Obama’s administration is very eager to compensate us, but Netanyahu is not listening. He (…) did not enter this confrontation with clean hands. Let’s not forget that not so long ago, in the 2012 presidential campaign, Netanyahu acted, directly and indirectly, on behalf of Obama’s Republican adversary, Mitt Romney. This, too, was unprecedented (…). Netanyahu is jeopardizing Israel’s most important asset (…) in return for an obscure, messianic, unclear objective. (…) The chances have almost run out, but Bibi isn’t letting go. (…) No good can come of it. Even if we win, it will be a Pyrrhic victory.
Ben Caspit, JPO, 13.08.15
- Attack on Orthodox Monopoly – This is Halachah, what’s not clear?
(…) According to Halachah (….), converting a gentile into a Jew is done only through the converting person’s commitment to observe the Torah and be religious. However, the Israeli public considers Zionist endeavors like making a home in the country, serving in the IDF, and contributing to society as sufficient and worthy enough of being considered a Jew. It is on this scale that the mighty clash between religious schools is taking place, between the more lenient and the stricter rabbis, and it is this scale that many are also trying to protect. (…) It must be said that the dramatic announcement by the “rebelling rabbis” is engaging. It sparks discourse and puts the complex conversion issue on the national agenda, but nothing more than this. Anyone who seeks to register as married at the Interior Ministry but is not recognized as Jewish by the Rabbinate will have to explore other solutions, like getting married in Cyprus. He or she will not receive recognition of marriage from the Chief Rabbinate. They can have a wedding ceremony in Israel, but it will only be symbolic.(…)
Yehuda Shlezinger, IHY, 11.08.15
Chief Rabbinate finally getting its just deserts
The Chief Rabbinate, the current and former chief rabbis, the rabbinical court judges and conversion court judges, the Religious Services Ministry, and also the religious parties (…) have all richly earned the subversive activity that has been gathering steam against them for years, and more so recently. Long years of obtuse, rigid behavior toward both Jewish citizens of Israel and Jews from abroad who need its services, abuse of women and decisions made via patently unacceptable processes, have all done their bit to bring about the wave of independent activity that is destroying the Chief Rabbinate’s monopoly and de facto privatizing some of Israel’s religious services. (…) Israel needs its religious services to be privatized and separated from the state. (…) Still, there’s no reason to rejoice that religious Zionist rabbis have now seized the steering wheel – and not for the first time – because they, too, perpetuate and bolster Orthodox control over Israel, while some hold ultra-nationalist and even racist views. (…) the state ought to equalize the rights of all its citizens and immediately stop discriminating against more than 350,000 Israelis who are shamefully defined as having “no religion” and aren’t entitled to marry within Israel’s borders. (…) Nevertheless, the establishment of this alternative conversion court should be welcomed, because it represents a different outlook than that of the rigid establishment, and therefore shows everyone the true state of the Chief Rabbinate. The day is drawing near when the rabbinate will either have to change from top to bottom or be abolished.
Editorial, HAA, 12.08.15
Israel’s independent conversion court won’t hit target audience
(…)The Chief Rabbinate has made conversion to Judaism in Israel beyond reach for anyone who does not promise to become observant according to the strictest interpretation of Jewish law. (…) But the new court won’t make much of a difference. Not many people will bother to make use of its services. The reason is that its primary target audience, immigrants from the former Soviet Union who arrived in Israel in the early 1990s and who are not Jewish according to halakha (…) just don’t care. (…) Many had always considered themselves as Jews, were considered to be Jews by their neighbors, and were surprised to arrive in Israel and discover that, according to the standards of the Chief Rabbinate, they were not Jewish at all. (…) Adopt the strictest possible interpretation of a tradition that was entirely foreign to them. Furthermore, they were expected to send their children to schools where strict observance was required and to live in communities where such observance was the norm. This often meant severing ties with fellow immigrants and isolating themselves from the mainstream of Israeli life. Not surprisingly, most were perplexed and astounded, and many were furious. And their answer was simple: No, thank you. (…) Being Jewish meant seeing themselves as part of the Jewish state and the Jewish people, and that was enough. It is not enough, of course. No rabbi can be happy about these developments. (…) The process of becoming part of the Jewish people has always had a religious dimension, and that must be so even in the State of Israel. But if this is to be, it will require a new reality. (…)And this will require a dynamic, diverse, and pluralistic Jewish community to come into being and do the job. (…)The new Independent conversion court is welcome, but it is not even close to being enough.
Eric H. Yoffie, HAA, 14.08.15
The awakening of moderate Orthodoxy
(…) It’s not just the issue of conversions. It’s mostly the question of “what is Judaism?” Several sub-movements have been formed within the orthodox movement over the past few years – some moderate, some liberal, some feminist in nature. Pluralism among orthodox Jews. (…) Among the more controversial issues is the “partition” – the separation between men and women at the synagogue. This is one of the more striking differences between conservatives and orthodox. In more moderate orthodox movements, the partition becomes looser, more transparent, and lower. (…) The rabbinical rebellion will not solve the problem of 350,000 immigrants who aren’t Jewish, because the decision about who has the authority to determine who is Jewish is not a religious decision, but a political one. It is the prime minister who too easily surrenders to zealots. He is the one who replaced the moderate Zionist orthodoxy with the ultra-haredim. (…) The crux of the matter is that there is no historical evidence to prove that judges are smarter than politicians, and the claim that lawmakers are dangerous and that judges are needed to protect democracy or human rights is farfetched. It doesn’t mean every High Court decision on controversial public issues should be condemned. F(…) The judges, with all due respect, are not aware of all of the considerations, because some of them are hidden from view. (…)
Ben-Dror Yemini, JED, 15.08.15
- Selection of Articles: A proportional and effective ruling
(…) As long as there was a massive influx of African migrants into Israel, the Anti-Infiltration Law was necessary. But Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wisely decided to have a security fence erected along the Egyptian border. (…) The infiltration problem is not as great as it used to be and the rationale for the law has all but disappeared. The number of illegal migrants in Israel has not grown. Thus, the infiltrators must be convinced, not pressured, to go back to their home countries. The rest will have to be dispersed around the country, to lift some of the burden off the shoulders of Tel Aviv’s southern neighborhoods. (…) With those two observations in mind, I can say that the High Court’s decision on Monday — despite the justices’ various disagreements over how far to go — was reasonable, proportionate, fair and effective. By telling the government to reduce the incarceration period for illegal migrants, it exercised the required amount of compassion without rewarding those who had broken the law. Unlike a certain British cabinet secretary, Israeli government officials have not used derogatory and provocative language against the Africans. But Israel must use every means available to protect its border. The severity of the measures should be a function of what happens along its borders.
The High Court of Justice is a national treasure. Its successive rulings have been consistently reasonable. The overwhelming majority of them helped human beings, the citizenry and the nation. Shaked-Friedmann and her operatives should stop lashing out at this bastion of justice. To paraphrase a famous verse in Psalms: “You shall not touch my anointed and you shall not harm my judges.”
Dan Margalit, IHY, 12.08.15
Feminism and Zionism
Over the years, I have found many parallels between feminism and Zionism. Both movements are daughters of the Enlightenment. Through emancipation, empowerment and self-determination, both movements have revolutionized the lives of two of the world’s longest and most oppressed peoples.(…) Nowhere has the backlash been more apparent than the words that denote these two revolutions. These words have become so “stained” that even those who support their underlying political purpose – whether it be equal rights and opportunities for women and men or political self-determination for the Jewish people in their ancient homeland – feel at times uncomfortable to publicly identify as a feminists or Zionists. (…) Feminism has been painted as an affront to womanhood, an ideology of hatred toward men, and as the main barrier to a nice woman finding a man (…). The outcome has been to deprive both revolutions of vital support. (…) nothing could be more dangerous to the cause of the empowerment of women and Jews than subscribing to the friendly advice of those who suggest that we abstain from using the words “feminism” and “Zionism” to identify themselves. To give up the use of these words is to play into the hands of those who hope to see both revolutions rolled back. To be a woman in power and to shy away from publicly identifying as a feminist is both ungrateful and a betrayal of the women who still hope that the revolution of feminism will one day improve their lives. To be a supporter of the rights of the Jewish people to self-determination in their homeland, and to try to defend this cause without using the word “Zionism” is to betray the spirit of the revolution and deny the cause of a true peace of equals between Jews and Arabs. (…)
Einat Wilf, JPO, 03.08.15
For the culture minister, whoever undermines her undermines the state
Attorney General Yehuda Weinstein surprised everyone and caused something of a storm when he “clarified” to Culture and Sports Minister Miri Regev that she has no authority to set content criteria for allocating funding to cultural institutions. What joy erupted among the artists and actors! An incredible victory had come their way from a totally unexpected source. (…) Weinstein and Regev are digging themselves into two opposing trenches, one the symbol of enlightenment and liberalism, and the other adhering to narrow conservatism and nationalist tyranny. But herein lies the deception. After all, both of them will stand to attention when confronted with a threat of “subverting the state” through artistic means, propaganda or political activity, but neither defines what kind of “subversion” requires legal or administrative intervention. Do they mean inciting posters, cartoons, opinion pieces, photomontages of the president and prime minister with Palestinian symbols, derisive songs or slanderous videos? Can’t all these be defined as artistic creations that qualify for freedom of expression protection, even if some of them are “subversive?” Is there any difference between these and a play or a film? (…) Perhaps (…) what Regev meant when she spoke about the difference between freedom of expression and freedom of funding. The rich will be able to “subvert the state,” while the poor will have to toe the line. (…) The fence she uses to delineate freedom of expression is clear and adorned with large warning signs. Nor are the penalties for crossing them being hidden. Regev is the state, and whoever undermines Regev undermines the state, or vice versa. (…)
Zvi Bar´el, HAA, 12.08.14
Gas roadmap is Knesset nightmare for Netanyahu
(…) The power still rests in the hands of Minister of Economy Aryeh Machluf Deri, who is authorized by law to approve bypassing the antitrust regulator and provide the developers with exemptions from a binding arrangement on political and security considerations according to clause 52. Netanyahu (…) will be forced to make his way to the Knesset plenum and hope for a better experience than the humiliation he suffered last time around. (…) The actual agreement (…) shows a significant improvement over the previous version, specifically on the issue of tying gas prices in new contracts to the Public Utilities (Authority) rate and the Consumer Price Index. The linkage will lead to a substantive decrease in gas prices of the new agreements and, in the future, will affect the contract with Tamar, where the pricing may be updated in 2021. (…) The developers agreed in the end to every proposal by the government, as long as it did not cross their red line and demand to reopen signed commitments. (…) Therefore those who claim the state surrendered to a monopolist do not see the full picture. (…)
Amiram Barkat, GLO, 13.08.15
Gaza didn’t have to end this way
(…) the Israeli withdrawal gave Gazans, for the first time in their history, the opportunity to rule themselves and to develop a functioning economy — a harbinger, it was hoped, of a prosperous West Bank- Gaza Palestinian state, at peace with Israel. (…) But the almost immediate looting and destruction of the greenhouses after the Israelis left was the first sign that many Gazans were less interested in building than in tearing down. (…) With Gaza under the thumb of Hamas, terrorists launched missiles and rockets into southern Israel, and dug terror tunnels deep into Israeli territory to be used for kidnapping and murder. Israel countered with a land and sea blockade to prevent arms from getting into Gaza, and there were repeated clashes between Hamas and Israeli forces. Three times, Israel has sought to bring quiet to its border with Gaza through large-scale military operations: “Cast Lead” in 2008, “Pillar of Defense” in 2012, and “Protective Edge” last summer. (…) Hamas has made Gaza into a devastated, impoverished nest of terror, preferring to spend money on tunnels and rockets rather than upgrading the civilian infrastructure. (…) Recalling the circumstances of Israel’s withdrawal ten years ago, it clearly didn’t have to be that way. (…)
Lawrence Grossman, TOI, 13.08.15
Republicans have left Clinton playing in an empty field
(…) Hillary has charged herself with new energies, but her political rivals are doing her job for her anyway. All she has to do now is avoid making mistakes, and mainly make sure that Bill doesn’t steal the show from her or create some kind of juicy scandal, in accordance with his reputation. The Republicans have left her playing on an empty field, and in the meantime they are passionately destroying each other. (…) For a party that seeks to conquer the White House, 17 candidates are an expression of a self-destructive instinct. (…) It wasn’t just Donald Trump’s entry into the race which radicalized the nature of the comments and the sounds of the discourse: He simply stated, with narcissist arrogance, what they all believe in quietly, because they also hate immigrants and support the piggish economy which plays into the wealthy people. (…) the Republican Party leaders have forgotten that their job is to lead as well – which means presenting a team of two or three candidates, not a huge group in which each component has to spread more poison and scorn against the others in order to survive. (…) That doesn’t mean that victory is in her pocket. In order to become the first female president, Clinton must stay away from two strong men, each of whom has had a decisive influence on her career: Barack Obama, and her husband Bill. (…) He is still the best campaigner in America, but she must leave him in the shadow so as not to irritate voters who have had enough of him and his tricks and who will not be so happy to see him in Oval Office again, looking over his wife’s shoulder. (…)
Orly Azoulay, 15.08.15
HAA = Haaretz
JED = JediothAhronoth / Ynetnews
JPO = Jerusalem Post
IHY = Israel HaYom
TOI = Times of Israel
GLO = Globes
Dr. Werner Puschra,
Head of Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung Israel