Someone who can lash out at Air Force pilots, who fly together, fight together and sometimes are even killed together regardless of their political views, doesn’t understand the meaning of unity. The vast majority of Israelis understand that the judicial system is in need of reform but they reject the way the government is advancing these measures.
A terrible rift threatens the future of the state and it cannot be ignored any longer. Compromise is not a dirty word. As a former justice minister and the wife of a combat pilot, I have a story that should be told.
My phone rang at midnight. It was my husband Ofir, who had left a few hours earlier for an operational nighttime practice flight. “Ayelet, there was an accident. I’m okay, we’ll talk later,” he said and hung up. It happened on the night of November 10, 2010, before I entered politics. The leading aircraft in their formation had crashed into the Ramon Crater. Both pilots, Major Amichai Itkis and Major Emanuel Levi, Ofir’s friends, were killed before his eyes.
Six years went by. The phone rang again. Ofir was on the line. This time, I was the justice minister and was coming out of a security meeting. “Ayelet, there was an accident. I can’t say what happened, just that I am okay.” Ofir and his friend were returning from a military operation. The other plane malfunctioned while landing and crashed. Its pilot, Ohad Cohen-Nov, a deputy commander of an F-16 squadron and Ofir’s close friend, was killed. The full details of their flight cannot be disclosed to this day.
Both of these stories were on my mind this past week as I witnessed the mutual attacks on both sides of the political divide of Israeli society and the unprecedented attempt to drag the IDF into it all.
I am opposed to army insubordination and I always have been, even during the difficult days of the disengagement from the Gaza Strip. I protested against the disengagement, working against the plan as a junior member of the Likud. However, it never crossed my mind that insubordination could be a viable option, not even when basic civil rights, such as the freedom of speech, were grossly trampled upon with the approval of the judicial system.
At the same time, people who thoughtlessly lash out at pilots, including certain Israeli ministers, do not understand what it really means to be a combat pilot on active reserve duty, how it feels to leave your house at 5:00 a.m. every week for a full day and sometimes, even for the night or to put on overalls and a g-suit and fly a machine full of fuel and explosives.
ON DAYS like these, I don’t know if my husband is flying Israel’s skies or crossing into one of the neighboring countries. I have a son and a daughter and I need to make sure they get up in the morning, eat and get to school on time. I suppress the thoughts of Ofir’s well-being because otherwise, I would not be able to function anytime Ofir is on reserve duty. I just pray that he comes back okay every week, once a week.
This week, I realized that I have no clue about the political views of any of the pilots killed in action. They set out together for a military exercise or an operation as one body, one united fighting force. Such unity of our nation has always been a decisive factor in all of the wars, in our existence as a country and in our willingness to sacrifice our lives for the Israeli people.
Judicial change
I believe that changing the judicial system is imperative. Former chief justice Moshe Landau predicted today’s events even before Aharon Barak’s constitutional revolution. Landau warned that “a vital condition for the proper operation of the courts in a country like the State of Israel is that the courts refrain from engaging in topics related to policy and from choosing between worldviews on controversial matters of society, economy and politics.
“Any nullification of a law by the court on matters such as these will transform the court into a senior partner in the legislative process and the judges will become opponents in public disputes, with part of the population applauding them and the other part rejecting their decisions as one-sided and fundamentally wrong. Inevitably, not only will the court clash with the majority in the Knesset but it will also lose the faith of the general public, which is an essential condition for its status.” The proper balance in a democratic country has been violated and it seems that on this point, most Israelis agree.
As a member of the Knesset and a minister in the government, I worked to introduce changes to the judicial system. I managed to diversify the Supreme Court within the existing limitations and today, it is much more balanced than it was in the past. I introduced new discourse on the need for profound revisions in the judicial system. I also believe that the current right-wing government is not only entitled but obligated to make changes pursuant to its worldview.
At the same time, we are witnessing the beginning of a terrible rift in Israeli society that threatens our country’s future. Whether the rift is caused by the reform itself or by the protests against it is irrelevant. Large swaths of Israeli society support the reform, while others are utterly fearful of it. The ensuing instability can have serious economic repercussions. We cannot ignore this reality.
DIALOGUE AND understandings between the coalition and the opposition are vital for instituting significant, long-term changes to the judicial system, without creating a constitutional crisis that would harm the country. Compromise is not a dirty word but part of our private and public lives and everything we do.
The vast majority of Israelis understand that the judicial system is in need of reform but they reject the way the government is advancing these measures. They want reform on the condition that there is broad consensus. This would require concessions on both sides. That is the essence of compromise.
One proposal has been put forward by a team led by former justice minister Professor Daniel Friedman, Professor Yuval Elbashan, Major General (res.) Giora Eiland and businessman Giora Yaron. It is not a perfect solution; however, it is an impressive attempt, which has the potential to serve as a basis for reaching understandings and agreements between all parties.
No party will leave with everything it wants. The government would give up 100% control over the appointment of judges but retain 50%. Government ministers would not be able to appoint legal advisers as positions of trust but would receive a logical alternative. If the State Attorney’s Office refuses to represent the position of the government or of a minister, it will be possible to hire a private-sector attorney as counsel.
The proposal gives the right-wing camp important advantages but at the same time, it is balanced and more conservative than the government’s proposal. Looking at this outline, nobody can claim that Israeli democracy is dead.
A mutually accepted reform in the spirit of this proposal and with the support of Israel’s President has the power to calm the winds of harsh criticism and tension in the country. Such a plan would allow the Israeli political system to get back to business and address the complex challenges at hand.
While Iran’s uranium reserves are bringing it closer to possessing a nuclear bomb, we simply do not have the luxury of sparring against each other and weakening our own immune systems. The flourishing Israeli economy is in danger and our sense of mutual responsibility is crumbling.
I sincerely hope that my fellow friends in the coalition and the opposition will stop reading tweets on Twitter and instead go back to being leaders and start walking together side by side. Otherwise, we may find ourselves hanging together side by side.
The writer is a former justice minister, interior minister and MK.