A good friend drew my attention to the article by the Palestinian publicist Dr. Ibrahim Abrash. A resident of the al-Breij refugee camp in the Gaza Strip, formerly the Minister of Culture in the Palestinian government.
Abrash has an education in law and lectures on law and political science. He is a veteran Fatah member, who lives and operates in the ruling districts of Hamas, and despite this, he is known for his independent views and his critical writing.
On Sunday, he published on one of the Palestinian news sites his take on the election results for the 25th Knesset. "You can talk at length about Israel as an imperialist, racist and terrorist entity. You can also talk about the right-wing tendency of Israeli society, and say that the election contest is mainly conducted within the extreme right. Benjamin Netanyahu's return to the prime ministership, in a coalition with extremists like him, portends difficult times."
"But we must recognize that in everything related to the organization of internal politics and the management of the affairs of the regime and the government, a positive thing happened that must be credited to them: the insistence on returning to the public five times over the course of four years to decide who will rule the country, and this without Netanyahu or another political leader, not even the army, contemplating a coup or casting doubt on the election results," Dr. Abrash continued.
In the opinion of the Gazan writer, democracy is one of the reasons for Israel's strength and advantage over others in the region. "This is a card they use to promote themselves in the world," Dr. Abrash explained.
"But we must recognize that in everything related to the organization of internal politics and the management of the affairs of the regime and the government, a positive thing happened that must be credited to them: the insistence on returning to the public five times over the course of four years to decide who will rule the country, and this without Netanyahu or another political leader, not even the army, contemplating a coup or casting doubt on the election results,"
Dr. Ibrahim Abrash
On the other hand, he said that "in our Arab world, the complete opposite exists. The regimes do not respect their people and do not believe in democracy and elections as a mechanism for appointing rulers and legislators."
Although they are our enemies, he continued in his reference to Israel, this should not prevent us from learning from their experience in everything related to making democracy among themselves, and how they manage their political affairs without resorting to violence or breaking the law.
"In the Zionist entity," he continued, "no one is above the law, and the people are the source of all authority. This is true, even if many will not like it."
While reading his words, I remembered a scene from the night of the elections in Shafaram. The estimates that evening spoke of the collapse of the leftist parties, partly because of a low voter turnout in Arab society. Hadash led by Ayman Odeh and its partner Ta'al led by Ahmed Tibi united into one list.
Only an hour and ten minutes before the polls closed, Hadash-Ta'al head Ayman Odeh entered the election headquarters. He stood in the center of the hall, behind him a huge election sign with the words "equality," and took a picture of himself urging the voters to rush to the polls.
For four minutes he repeated and warned his voters, in the Arabic language, that "these criminals, Ben-Gvir and Smotrich" are going to sweep 15 seats and form a stable coalition for four years.
"It doesn't make sense," he said critically of his voters, "because the turnout rate for the oppressors will be higher than the rate for the oppressors." To those who have not yet voted, he urged to hurry and go to the polls. Whoever voted, will take others. We must show responsibility towards our children, he said.
The operation was successful, but the patient is still dying.
As Orna Barbiei said this week - we will march with our heads held high to the opposition. Hadash-Ta'al remains in the Knesset, but Smotrich and Ben-Gvir, at least as it appears for now, will form a stable coalition.
The dozens of journalists in the hall recorded Odeh speaking passionately while recording his video, even if, within minutes, he uploaded the video to his Facebook page.
Although he acted as required in those moments of pressure, this should not be taken for granted. Only in democratic regimes will the candidate get down on his knees begging the people to do them a favor.
With our neighbors, for example, the opposite usually happens: the citizen depends on the kindness of the ruler, and even if he wants to, he does not have the power to overthrow him. Odeh, then, should be doubly pleased, because he lives in a democratic regime, and that his party passed the electoral threshold.
Addressing the Palestinian issue
After patting ourselves on the back, it's worth discussing the other side of the coin as well. Israeli democracy, which allows all public representatives to compete for representation in the Knesset, is less generous when it comes to the Palestinian issue. True, safety comes first, but reality has proven that anti-Palestinian policy does not always result from an immediate danger to life.
Preventing a 16-year-old musician from performing in front of a supportive audience, as happened a few years ago in Gaza, cannot, morally and logically, be explained in the fight against terrorism. The same goes for banning a cancer patient from going to a third country for treatment, or preventing farmers from exporting their goods abroad.
About two years ago, the Palestinian Authority, following pressures placed on it, asked to hold elections for the first time after 15 years. Chairman of the Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas set a date when the public will go to choose the composition of the Legislative Council (the name of the Palestinian parliament), and after a few weeks, another date when they will choose a new president. The political arena was already organized for the vote.
Parties were formed, campaigns began in the streets and on social networks, and it seemed that the Palestinians were once again on the threshold of an electoral experience.
In Israel they were a little horrified, and even prepared for the moment when the Hamas list would defeat all the others, as happened in 2006. It was clear to everyone that in free elections, Abbas and Fatah are at a disadvantage compared to the others, especially if they fail to unite.
It was estimated that the head of the authority would not allow a vote to take place on his chair, but he might, under public pressure, give the green light to parliamentary elections.
Abbas decided to cancel the entire initiative. Not a vote to elect a new president for the authority, nor a legislative council.
The excuse was Jerusalem, Israel vetoed holding a vote in the eastern part of the city, on the grounds that sovereignty over it is reserved only for Israel and not for the PA. Abbas jumped on this occurrence as a source of great gain, and found in it a reason to cancel the entire procedure.
He of course stated that without Jerusalem, beloved of our hears, elections cannot take place, because then the entire procedure will be considered incomplete and flawed.
It was a joint maneuver for Jerusalem and Ramallah, designed to preserve Abbas's control. It can of course be explained in realpolitik. Why give power to Hamas on a silver platter? Many Palestinians wondered following this case how Israel claims to be the only democracy in the Middle East, and at the same time, denies the democratic right of others.
They could find the answer this week with Ibrahim Abrash. Britain, he wrote, behaved exactly like this during the era of colonialism, and with it other European countries. In foreign policy they took an imperialist and racist approach, and internally they were a democratic fortress. But they, he commented, withdrew one clear day from the occupation policy, which Israel insists on continuing .