Israel at war – and the highlighting of anti-Semitism

There will be debates at the Battle of Ideas festival on the Israel-Hamas conflict and what the reaction to it tells us about anti-Semitism today. PLUS: a special online debate on Thursday 2 November.

The Battle of Ideas festival in London is hosting two debates in response to the Hamas attacks on Israel. On Saturday 28 October, there will be a discussion on ISRAEL: ANTI-SEMITISM TODAY. On Sunday 29 October, we have a discussion on ISRAEL AT WAR. For those unable to come to the festival in London, there will be a special Academy of Ideas International Salon event, via Zoom, on Thursday 2 November.

To join us for the Battle of Ideas festival in London, you can buy tickets here. Free subscribers to this Substack can get 10% off regular rates with promo code SUBSTACK-BOIF23. Paid subscribers can get even better discounts by using our Associates rates.

To register for the online event on 2 November, which is free, please register at Eventbrite.

Before the recent escalation of events, Simon McKeon, who will be chairing the Israel at War session at the festival, reported on his visit to Israel in September and the mass anti-government demonstrations there. These internal tensions, which only weeks ago were the key focus of debates about the country,  may seem a million miles away from the horrors of today. But it is important to understand the broader picture of the political situation in Israel prior to the attack. Understanding the roots of present events is essential. In that context, see also Daniel Ben Ami’s Letters on Liberty: Rethinking Anti-Semitism, which we published last year.

---

ISRAEL AT WAR

The first weekend of October was the darkest in Israel’s history. A murderous Hamas attack on southern Israel killed at least 1,400 and wounded about 3,000. Around 200 were captured and taken to Gaza. How is it possible to begin to make sense of such a terrible event? Is this the return of pogroms of Jews? Clearly Israel is having to contend with a force that can truly be described as evil.

One issue is why and how Hamas felt so emboldened to launch this murderous assault. There seems to be a broad consensus that the success of Hamas’s brutal assault represented a devastating failure for Israel’s famed intelligence services and military. Some are wondering if this year’s bitter conflict over judicial reform in Israel proved to be a distraction from the deadly external threat. The country has been sharply divided, and military reservists in elite units, including intelligence, were encouraged by the protest movement to refuse to serve.

Perhaps a proper review of what happened will have to wait. Israel has enough to deal with and faces many other imminent challenges. There is the possibility of it becoming embroiled in a ground war in Gaza, which could bring with it a heavy human cost for both Israelis and Palestinians. Israel faces judgement internationally on the scale of its response and the dangers posed to civilians in Gaza. The violent conflict could also spread to the West Bank and even within Israel itself. It is no exaggeration to say that Israel is facing the greatest challenge in its 75-year history.

The conflict has also highlighted the continuing scourge of anti-Semitism, and its changing nature. Hamas has never made its intention to slaughter Jews secret. On the contrary, it is openly stated in its 1988 charter. Yet all too many in the West, particularly among the left and anti-Israel activists, seem blind to this fact. Either they do not care, or they find it acceptable.

Inevitably, there has been controversy about the media coverage. Despite pressure from multiple sources, the BBC has steadfastly refused to describe Hamas as ‘terrorists’, pleading impartiality. Despite the old adages about the ‘fog of war’ and the dangers of leaping to conclusions, many major news outlets reported as fact that an Israeli air strike had severely damaged a hospital, horrendously killing hundreds of people, on the word of ‘Palestinian officials’. Yet evidence quickly came to light that it was more likely to be a misfiring missile from within Gaza that had caused the carnage. Regardless, Hamas’s murderous assault on Israel has led to a new crisis in the region.

How should Israel deal with the horrors it is enduring? What are the roots of these challenges and how can Israel best deal with them? Why was Israel so vulnerable in the first place? Will the unity of a country now under attack render recent divisions irrelevant? How can Israel deal with the strains of a war that may have to be fought on multiple fronts?

These are just some of the questions we will be discussing at the Battle of Ideas festival.

---

You can support the work of Academy of Ideas by becoming a paid subscriber to this Substack - and get cut-price tickets for this year’s Battle of Ideas festival and other Academy of Ideas events.

---

WHAT’S THE CURRENT STATE OF ISRAEL?
Simon McKeon, September 2023

For the first time in history, all 15 Supreme Court justices met at Israel’s High Court of Justice (HCJ) on 12 September to hear a petition challenging the constitutionality of a basic law amendment. It concerned the doctrine of ‘reasonableness’ in relation to court oversight over government decisions. The petition against the right-wing coalition government’s reform was brought by a number of organisations and individuals. These included the Israeli Bar Association and Nadav Argaman, a former head of Israel’s Shin Bet internal security service. Like the UK, Israel does not have a codified constitution, but instead has a set of basic laws that act as a quasi-constitution.  

Active Supreme Court

Israel’s sweeping definition of reasonableness gave the judiciary power to strike down legislation even if it did not breach an existing law. If the justices decide to strike down the reasonableness limitation law, it would be the first time in the history of the state that an amendment to a basic law was nullified by the Supreme Court. Removing the reasonableness clause was the first part of a proposed package of judicial reforms that also includes changing the way all judges in Israel are appointed. It could also allow government ministers to employ political appointees as legal advisers in their ministries.  

Judicial reforms

The chief architect of the judicial reform package, Simcha Rothman, is a member of the Knesset (Israel’s parliament) for the right-wing Religious Zionist Party. He is also the chair of the Knesset's Constitution, Law and Justice Committee. During the heated hearing, Rothman argued that the HCJ has no right to review amendments to Basic Laws, as they form the foundations of Israel’s constitutional order. Further, he said, the members of the Supreme Court are a privileged elite who should not have the authority to overturn the will of the majority. Rothman reminded the court that the vote to remove the reasonableness clause was passed in the Knesset with 64 votes and zero against (the 56 members of the opposition boycotted the vote).

Rothman’s arguments were challenged by one justice, who argued that rule by the majority needed to be checked in order to protect the rights of minorities. Both sides in the courtroom have their own definitions of democracy. To those who argue against the judicial reforms, democracy means a liberal democracy with its system of checks and balances. For those who support the reforms, democracy is guided by the principle that those who get the most votes have the final say in political decisions.

Anti-judicial reform demonstration

However, as I discovered on my visit to Israel earlier this month, there is much more to the debate on the judicial overhaul than a dry legal discussion on the merits of Israel’s basic laws. This was apparent when I attended one of the massive anti-judicial reform demonstrations in central Tel Aviv, which have been taking place every week since January. It soon became clear that the fight over the government’s judicial reforms was being fought as much on Israeli city streets as in the HCJ in Jerusalem.  

I was struck by the number of different groups and causes represented on the demonstration. To reflect this fact, protesters against judicial reform have even named the central location, Kaplan Square as Democracy Square. One protester told me that this was a fight over the soul of the nation. To many of those on the left of Israeli politics, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – frequently referred to as Bibi - is a monster who is out to destroy Israel’s liberal democracy.

The protesters included Israel Defense Forces (IDF) veterans selling anti-judicial reform t-shirts and feminists distributing leaflets. I saw a couple of pro-trans protesters dressed in army uniforms and wearing false beards. They seemed to be suggesting that Bibi was acting just like a Middle East dictator. There were also protest singers warbling a Simon and Garfunkel ballad.

I asked one veteran of the protests what she thought of the group of young people nearby who were waving Palestinian flags. To me these flags that symbolise rebellion looked incongruous amongst the thousands of blue and white Israeli flags. She replied that on these anti-overhaul protests, the individual issues promoted by the various groups did not really matter. For her, the important thing was that all those on the protest were united in their opposition to Bibi’s judicial reform measures.

Israeli society

I left the demonstration thinking that people have serious concerns about the political direction that Israel is taking under Bibi’s right-wing coalition government. The left does not trust the prime minister and argues that he is paying too high a price to stay in power. Several people I spoke to pointed to Bibi’s willingness to enter an agreement to pass what is known as the Haredi draft law. This proposed legislation would make it even easier for members of the ultra-orthodox Haredi community to gain exemption from military service. This is in contrast to most secular Jews as well as male members of the national religious community who generally serve in the military (female members of the national religious community often do non-military national service such as working in hospitals and schools). For many Israelis, the widespread exemptions to conscription granted to the Haredim damages Israel’s social fabric.

What next?

Esther Hayut, the chief justice of the Supreme Court, is due to retire on her seventieth birthday on 16 October. As with all retiring justices, she will be allowed an additional 90 days to publish the Court’s deliberations by December at the latest. At least until then, the fight over democracy in Israel during the state’s seventy-fifth anniversary year will continue in the streets, synagogues and social clubs.