Bennett Had No Choice but To Approve Ministerial Meetings With Mahmoud Abbas
Political considerations are dictating the Israeli prime minister's silence on meetings of his government ministers with the president of the Palestinian Authority
Israeli government ministers Esawi Frej and Nitzan Horowitz met with Mahmoud Abbas, president of the Palestinian Authority, on Sunday evening. This was not the first meeting of a member of Israel’s months-old government with the Palestinian leader. In August, Defense Minister Benny Gantz met with Abbas, the first meeting of a high-ranking Israeli official with Abbas in a decade.
While the meeting between Gantz and the PA president was a practical meeting revolving around Israeli-Palestinian cooperation, the meeting this week with Horowitz and Frej – as part of a delegation of Israel’s left-wing Meretz party – appears to have been political in nature. Horowitz was widely quoted saying that his party’s mission in the government is “to keep the two-state solution alive.”
The meeting of the ministers and the president is noteworthy not only because of the long disconnect between the PA and Israel’s government at the ministerial level but also because the current head of the government is Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, considered more hawkish than former Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. In a recent interview with the Israeli news site Ynet, Bennett stated clearly his opposition to a Palestinian state, further saying that he sees no reason to meet with Abbas.
The Palestinian Authority president took the opportunity to invite all Israeli ministers to meet with him, specifically naming Interior Minister Ayelet Shaked, Bennett’s partner from the Yamina party. Shaked was not long in responding to the invitation, tweeting that she would not meet with “a Holocaust denier who is suing Israeli soldiers at The Hague and paying murderers of Jews.”
As prime minister, Bennett has the right to stop his ministers from meeting with Abbas. Instead, he approved Gantz’s meeting and elected to remain silent earlier this week when two of his ministers visited the president.
Professor Asher Cohen of Bar-Ilan University, an expert on Israeli politics, told The Media Line that “even if he gave his OK, it’s because he doesn’t have a choice. It is all a result of his [political] situation, which is without precedent in Israel.”
Cohen is referring to Bennett’s precarious position at the head of a government relying on a slim 61-seat majority in the 120-member parliament, while the prime minister himself belongs to a relatively small six-seat party.
This holiday season, give to:
Truth and understanding
The Media Line's intrepid correspondents are in Israel, Gaza, Lebanon, Syria and Pakistan providing first-person reporting.
They all said they cover it.
We see it.
We report with just one agenda: the truth.
“We are using terms suitable to a regular government, in which it was clear that the prime minister headed the biggest party, or one of the biggest; he enjoys a position of authority, and then the question of approval arises. … I am not sure that these terms are applicable to the current situation,” Cohen said.
Even if he gave his OK, it’s because he doesn’t have a choice. It is all a result of his [political] situation, which is without precedent in Israel
Cohen believes that Bennett’s hands are tied and that he certainly would have preferred that these meetings not take place.
“I don’t think that these meetings do him good because … you are giving credence to the right’s claims [against the government]. You are resuscitating Abu Mazen [Abbas] and the two-state solution,” he said. Bennett cannot distance himself from the ministers’ actions endlessly, he explained, and “every statement of ‘it isn’t me, it’s them’ is like saying ‘I am not the prime minister.’ Ultimately, they do reflect on him.”
Dr. Gayil Talshir, an expert on Israel’s political arena and a senior lecturer in political science at the Hebrew University, agrees that the political situation has to some degree forced Bennett to accept the meetings. However, other considerations have also entered into his policy, she believes.
Timing is part of the story, Talshir told The Media Line, and “in a month, he needs to have a [state] budget approved. If the budget isn’t approved [by the Knesset] we go to elections, and he doesn’t have a base, he doesn’t have a party, he doesn’t have anything. Seen from this angle, Bennett doesn’t have a choice.”
Yet, Talshir points to Bennett’s recent speech at the UN, where he spoke of the plague of political divisiveness, as indicative of another angle. Bennett sees his role as prime minister as that of a unifier. “If Netanyahu’s story is that of the big divider and so on, then Bennett is basically saying that, as prime minister, his role is to enable reunification, reconnecting, change,” she said.
Allowing these meetings to take place also assists Bennett in Washington, Talshir explains. “Bennett is basically using the left to calm the Americans and ensure they give him more time before they start pressuring him,” she said.
They could also be serving what appears to be his policy vis-à-vis the Palestinians, Talshir said, explaining: Palestinian “economy and humanitarian matters yes, political issues no” since Bennett is interested in furthering Palestinian quality of life but opposed to a Palestinian state or negotiations which could lead to one.
“The name of the game is ‘who is the prime minister,’” she explained. “Bennett says ‘I’m the prime minister, and as long as I am, there will not be an agreement, a return to some kind of agreement or peace negotiations,’” she added. In the meantime, his left-wing partners can go forward with symbolic gestures that play well with their electorate.
