4 ms·

Eh he's pretty similar to Netanyahu with no difference with regard to the Palestinians. In fact he could be more hawkish.

JeremyBanks 5y ago
Even if his policies were identical, a corrupt leader can't be allowed to remain and solidify his corruption even further. He's already been there far too long and done far too much institutional damage.
- Synaesthesia 5y ago
  That's true.
kevin_b_er 5y ago
Except he's in a broad coalition. He can't go jackbooting Palestinians without risking his coalition.
- ayende 5y ago
  He is in a coalition that has 60 votes in favor out of 120. That isn't broad at all
  - Torwald 5y ago
    Broad in this context means that the coalition is build together out of many parties along a broad spectrum, as opposed to, say, two very conservative parties or so.
  - mcintyre1994 5y ago
    It's broad ideologically, it even includes a party made up of Palestinian citizens of Israel.
YZF 5y ago
Bennet is pretty different than Netanyahu. For one thing he is religious. He is probably more hawkish from the perspective of the historical rights of the Jewish people in the region but he is also possibly more pragmatic. The religious zionist parties in the past had no problem sitting in coalition with left wing parties. While the heart of the conflict is probably not something that can be resolved by anyone at this time at least I think he and his coalition will try to steer things in a better direction. This is the first time in Israeli history where we have Israeli Arab (Palestinian) parties in the coalition/government in Israel. That's pretty big step forward. This potentially is the first step towards eventually forming a single state which is in my mind is the only solution that's going to work. For those who think the two state option is a solution this is maybe a step backwards. If you think about a single state then the gap between some of the Israeli right (that considers the lands to be part of that state) and the Israeli left isn't that large. This is sort of what this government is about, that the civil aspects, the day to day life of everyone, can be decoupled from the nationalistic aspect. In a single state the Israeli right gets to "keep" those lands so that problem is solved. The problem of Jerusalem is also solved. That's not to say there aren't a whole bunch of other really difficult questions... Maybe this single state is a federation (so it's two states in the US sense but one country). I'm really hopeful something good will come out of this.
- joelbluminator 5y ago
  > In a single state the Israeli right gets to "keep" those lands In a single state jews become a minority, their army is democratically dismantled and what happens next is anyone's guess...looking at surrounding countries there's no reason to be too optimistic.
  - YZF 5y ago
    I'm not sure the Jewish would be a minority... Unless you're including "The right of return" in you calculations. But that shouldn't be a given. There can also be a constitution that requires special majority to change. But yeah, like I said, this doesn't solve all the problems. It just seems the problems this leaves us with are easier to solve. The reality is that all these people are gonna need to figure out some way to get along. And that's all this is, a bunch of people, Palestinians, Arabs, Jewish, Christian etc. Within the right sort of framework this could work. It could still be a homeland for the Jewish people but it can also be the country for other people as well who enjoy equal (-ish?) rights. Not unlike many other western countries which are Christian but minorities get equal-ish rights this could be a Jewish "western"/democratic country with about half the population not Jewish. Could work. You may say I'm a dreamer ;)

JeremyBanks 5y ago

Even if his policies were identical, a corrupt leader can't be allowed to remain and solidify his corruption even further. He's already been there far too long and done far too much institutional damage.

Synaesthesia 5y ago
That's true.

kevin_b_er 5y ago

Except he's in a broad coalition. He can't go jackbooting Palestinians without risking his coalition.

ayende 5y ago
He is in a coalition that has 60 votes in favor out of 120. That isn't broad at all
- Torwald 5y ago
  Broad in this context means that the coalition is build together out of many parties along a broad spectrum, as opposed to, say, two very conservative parties or so.
- mcintyre1994 5y ago
  It's broad ideologically, it even includes a party made up of Palestinian citizens of Israel.

YZF 5y ago

Bennet is pretty different than Netanyahu. For one thing he is religious. He is probably more hawkish from the perspective of the historical rights of the Jewish people in the region but he is also possibly more pragmatic. The religious zionist parties in the past had no problem sitting in coalition with left wing parties. While the heart of the conflict is probably not something that can be resolved by anyone at this time at least I think he and his coalition will try to steer things in a better direction. This is the first time in Israeli history where we have Israeli Arab (Palestinian) parties in the coalition/government in Israel. That's pretty big step forward. This potentially is the first step towards eventually forming a single state which is in my mind is the only solution that's going to work. For those who think the two state option is a solution this is maybe a step backwards. If you think about a single state then the gap between some of the Israeli right (that considers the lands to be part of that state) and the Israeli left isn't that large. This is sort of what this government is about, that the civil aspects, the day to day life of everyone, can be decoupled from the nationalistic aspect. In a single state the Israeli right gets to "keep" those lands so that problem is solved. The problem of Jerusalem is also solved. That's not to say there aren't a whole bunch of other really difficult questions... Maybe this single state is a federation (so it's two states in the US sense but one country). I'm really hopeful something good will come out of this.

joelbluminator 5y ago
> In a single state the Israeli right gets to "keep" those lands In a single state jews become a minority, their army is democratically dismantled and what happens next is anyone's guess...looking at surrounding countries there's no reason to be too optimistic.
- YZF 5y ago
  I'm not sure the Jewish would be a minority... Unless you're including "The right of return" in you calculations. But that shouldn't be a given. There can also be a constitution that requires special majority to change. But yeah, like I said, this doesn't solve all the problems. It just seems the problems this leaves us with are easier to solve. The reality is that all these people are gonna need to figure out some way to get along. And that's all this is, a bunch of people, Palestinians, Arabs, Jewish, Christian etc. Within the right sort of framework this could work. It could still be a homeland for the Jewish people but it can also be the country for other people as well who enjoy equal (-ish?) rights. Not unlike many other western countries which are Christian but minorities get equal-ish rights this could be a Jewish "western"/democratic country with about half the population not Jewish. Could work. You may say I'm a dreamer ;)