The bully alliance
Analysis: with the world order changing before our eyes, will big-time bullies the likes Trump and Putin allow their little friend Netanyhau tag along?
For decades, it has been well-known that many global events are hinged on decisions made in the big white house on 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. But as far as the world can remember, never did it have to contend with an American President so capricious and unpredictable, whom as we all know, will hold the nuclear launch button in his hand.
Any attempt to predict the shape of the world in 2017 is as laughable as the commentators who scorned Trump and his bid for the presidency.
Still, one cannot help but wonder whether the president-elect will make good on his campaign pledges once he moves into the White House. Even his own experts seem to be on a wild goose chase after the mountains of promises he dealt out with abandon throughout his erratic campaign. Indeed, a “Trump Policy” is something of an oxymoron.
Yet, there are some assumptions one may cautiously make—if not about Trump, perhaps on “Trumpism.”
Trumpism is bigger and carries more weight than the man himself. This is not some new twist on the good old Reaganomics that swept over the US in the 80s. Far from it; Trumpism is the most blatant, crude and dramatic response since WWII to liberalism in the US and other democracies around the world. It is the manifestation of a deep contempt towards its core values such as equality and human rights; it is deep-seated loathing of blacks, homosexuals, Muslims, Jews; it is xenophobia directed at the Chinese and others who are supposedly plotting to seize America’s wealth.
A melting pot of hatred, contempt and fear, coupled with the ongoing and exasperating economic decline of the middle class, with the threat of Jihadist terrorism that knows no boundaries, bred Trump-like rulers even before “The Donald.” Russian President Vladimir Putin and Recep Tayyip Erdoğan are among the more well-known examples. But the concept of Trumpism has furthered its reach around the world, from Kazakhstan’s President Nursultan Nazarbayev to Hungarian Prime Viktor Orbán. The citizens of the 21st century failed to learn the lessons of their 20th century predecessors—namely, that they choose reactionary rulers over the fading liberal leaders.
Thus, it is safe to proclaim 2017 as the year of the bully, or rather the alliance of bullies, possibly stronger and crueler then what the world has seen the year before. The two icons of global bullying, Putin and Erdoğan, have demonstrated their ruthlessness in the face of the flaccid liberalism on part of Obama and his petrified European allies. Putin sent bombers loaded to the hilt to slaughter tens of thousands of Syrian civilians, uninterrupted. Erdoğan crushed, murdered and locked away his opposition and with them, any semblance of democracy that might have remained in his country, all while sneering in the face of his critics.
The alliance of bullies will celebrate 2017 while towering over the remains of liberalism. It is a contagious sort of alliance—leaders à la Putin or Trump will pop up around the world in the coming years. All the signs show that it will take ages for history’s pendulum to swing liberalism back into fashion.
Which bring us to our little neck of the woods. In the eyes of most of the world—New Zealand and Senegal included—with a seal of approval from the UN Security Council, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is just another bully. A small, neighborhood bully, but a bully all the same, and one who make a lot of noise despite his itty-bitty size.
So here’s an interesting question: will the big bullies of 2017 treat their little friend as one of their own? Will he get to take part in the bully alliance? In light of reports thus far, it seems that Putin and Netanyahu have found a common language in recent years, even on sensitive matters such as Syria’s airspace. So far, Trump seems an ardent supporter of Netanyahu’s line—a little to the right of his own. Trump’s choices for his administration’s defense officials and representative to the Middle East look like a dream come true for the House of Balfour.
Anyone who had hoped—or still does—that the big bullies will turn on Israel and show up with heavy clubs—or aircraft carriers—to force a fast receding two-state solution upon Bibi (who on a couple of occasions was overheard reluctantly mumbling something on the matter) is in for a disappointment. Maybe Trump will not move the American Embassy to Jerusalem in the upcoming year after all, but at the same time—he won’t be slapping Israel with Obama-style decrees.
Despite the Security Council’s resolution, the Netanyahu administration will be able to uphold its ongoing tradition of sitting on its hands, waiting to see what happens. This conclusion might make many Israelis quite happy, namely the settlers in Judea and Samaria and their followers. The UN will prattle away as usual, but the true lords of the globe will not stand in our way to Eretz Yisrael Ha-Shlema, ie greater Israel.
So the picture is getting clearer—for better or worse, no one will save us from ourselves. This requires us to grow up, look squarely into our ourselves in the mirror and admit to ourselves that we are on our own. While trying to neutralize any outside “noise,” we should ask ourselves what it is that we really want.
Indeed, what do we want?
Those who believe that we’ve never been better and that time is on our side are welcome to continue doing nothing and wait for Trump to get reelected, or for the Messiah to arrive. Whichever comes first. Anything can happen. One must admit that those who believe that this is the lesser of two evils is not necessarily wrong. Even Sun Tzu says in “The Art of War” that there are moments when it is better to hold still and not move. We should know—for better or for worse we’ve been famously doing so for decades.
But if there are Israelis who are worried about national stagnation, it is hard to understand their lethargy, indifference, numbness and despair. Why are they not doing something about it? Are they, too, waiting for the 2019 elections in Israel? Or for the election of the next democratic president in the US, in 2020 at the earliest?
Is 2017 a lost year for anxious Israelis even before it has begun? Apparently so—for better or for worse what with the approval of the bi-annual budget, the solution of sorts to the Amona issue, and with Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit sitting on the Netanyahu files like a hen hatching its eggs, it’s difficult to envision any scenario of real change over the next year. Still, it is worthy to engage in an uncompromising debate on our fundamental issues. Whoever seeks change must clearly define the differences between the various approaches, speak frankly and avoid putting off the battle over the mind and heart of Israel until the next elections. This is what could—and should—be done in 2017.
We must as a nation take a good look in the mirror, without blinking: Israel is a country with no recognized and agreed-upon borders. It rules over millions of Palestinians who demand a country of their own. This is the bone of contention underlying a bloody and enduring dispute that tends to boil over from time to time, and by doing so rip apart the very fabric of Israel’s society, exact precipitous moral and social costs and taint our foreign relations and international trade.
It’s farfetched to expect that 2017 will be the year in which we find a solution to our raison d'être but at the very least we could determine what it is that we want to achieve—what kind of country we want, where its borders should be, what are its values, what kind of relationship with our neighbors do we seek, what kind of agreement would be best for us, and above all—who are the leaders worthy of showing us the path.
If we fail to engage in this challenging and straightforward discussion in the upcoming year, I imagine we’ll meet right here next year, at the same place, lamenting over yet another wasted year and praying for a miracle.
The above article was given as a speech at the Calcalist Annual Forecast Conference.
