Another reason for term limits: Fixing problematic diplomatic ties

There is the argument that term limits reduce corruption, since if incumbents know their time in office is limited, there is less temptation for them in their last term to erode rival branches of government or manipulate the system to be elected yet again.

Term limits also reduce corruption because there is less of a chance that a leader in power for eight years will feel the same sense of entitlement as a leader in power for 12 years or more.

Serving without any limit creates a sense among leaders that “If I’m in power for so long, I deserve certain privileges.”

There is the argument that term limits are good for effective government, because if leaders know their tenure is limited to a finite number of years, they will feel pressure to perform well within that time frame in order to leave a positive legacy.

There is also the argument that term limits fend against a perception that one man is irreplaceable, something that erodes the important distinction in democracies between the leader and the state.

In democracies, the leader is not the state; the leader serves the state, and term limits ensure that this all-important message is not only internalized but is also implemented on a regular basis.

There is the argument that term limits are important to cultivate new leadership, and that the lack of term limits ensures that the leader will never groom a successor, because that successor would ultimately pose a challenge. If you are prime minister and want a term without an expiration date, then why groom someone from within your own party who may one day pose a challenge and replace you?

And, finally, there is the argument that term limits ensure transitions, and that transitions – the regular, normal, predictable transfer of power – are healthy, and that there is something positive about new leaders coming into office not wedded to the policies of their predecessors and who can take a fresh look at an existing set of problems.

Prime Minister Naftali Bennett’s first three weeks in office have provided an additional argument for term limits: A new prime minister allows the country to hit the reset button with certain countries, or elements within certain countries that may have soured for various reasons under the previous administration. It is beneficial to have that ability to turn the page on relations at regular intervals and not have to wait for more than two terms.

A new prime minister has the ability to start a new chapter in ties with other countries. Sometimes – as is the case with Israel’s current relations with India and Russia – there is no need to start a new chapter. But with other countries, such as Jordan, the ability for a new prime minister to wipe the slate clean and start afresh is a positive development.

Bennett wisely took advantage of this new beginning by giving his initial agreement last week to the sale of 50 million cubic meters of water to parched Jordan. This gesture could go a long way in improving critical ties with the Hashemite Kingdom that deteriorated badly under prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

How bad did those ties deteriorate?

Jordan’s King Abdullah felt that Netanyahu had conspired with US president Donald Trump and Saudi Arabia to weaken his standing, guaranteed under the 1994 peace treaty, as the custodian of the Temple Mount and other Muslim sites in Jerusalem’s Old City, Washington Post columnist David Ignatius wrote last month.

But that was only the latest in a litany of problems that hurt Jordan-Israel relations during the Netanyahu years.

For instance, in March, Netanyahu’s trip to the UAE was scuttled when the Jordanians refused to allow his plane to enter Jordanian airspace. This was in retaliation for an Israeli decision a day early to cancel the Jordanian crown prince’s visit to the Temple Mount because of a disagreement over security arrangements at the site.

And that was just this year. In 2020, Abdullah reportedly refused to take calls from Netanyahu. In 2019, relations between the two countries became strained because of Jordan’s demand for the return of Naharayim and Tzofar to full Jordanian sovereignty – opting out of an annex in the 1994 peace accord that allowed Israelis to work the land there – and also because of the administrative detention of two Jordanians in Israel for two months on security grounds.

In 2018, Jordan was angered over the US Embassy move to Jerusalem. In 2017, ties were strained when an Israeli security guard who killed a Jordanian assailant and a bystander near the Israeli Embassy compound in Amman that year was welcomed back to Israel by Netanyahu.

While Israel’s ties with the UAE and Bahrain are blossoming, and relations with Egypt remain solid, though centered almost exclusively on the security aspect of the relationship, the ties with Jordan have plummeted in recent years.

Bennett’s water gesture is an effort to change the tone. This gesture needs to be reciprocated by Abdullah, for just as Netanyahu was not solely responsible for the deterioration of ties, Abdullah also bore a great deal of responsibility; so, too, will he need to show a willingness to start afresh.

Bennett’s new government is also on course to improve relations with the US Democratic Party, something that would have been extremely difficult to do had Netanyahu remained in power.

Foreign Minister Yair Lapid has made improving ties with the Democrats one of his top priorities. At Lapid’s first speech at the Foreign Ministry the day after being sworn into office last month, he said Israel needs to change the way it works with the Democratic Party.

A week later, he spoke to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat, who tweeted a picture of her talking to Lapid. A senior Democratic official tweeting a picture of a phone call with an Israeli foreign minister is not something that has been commonplace in recent years. A new government in Israel, and a new tone, is what enabled that.

Neither Bennett’s willingness to sell water to Jordan nor the overtures to Democratic Party leaders means that from now on there will only be smooth sailing in those relationships. But a new administration allows a reboot, and term limits would mean that the possibility of pushing the restart button on key relationships would happen at regular, predetermined intervals.