Opinion
Who really rules Israel?
Gabriel Sheffer
Published: 28.09.07, 19:04
Comment Comment
Print comment Print comment
Back to article
47 Talkbacks for this article
1. Well we sure know the people don't rule.!
(09.28.07)
2. not only israel.
(09.28.07)
every country i can think of is ruled much or less by the same groups
3. Wow! And they all answer to...
Jeff ,   Cherry Hill, NJ USA   (09.28.07)
Yoda.
4. Junior high project
Elly ,   New York   (09.28.07)
I can say one thing. Peres is for the money. a few americans gave him many thousands of dollars to make him happy. Barak already made a lot of money by bringing intifada into Israel. Bibi is not even allowed to voice his view in the newspapers. As to Olmert, he is making a lot of money from several deals so that in a few months (if he is not in jail) he will be able to settle with his family on a nice island.
5. Don't forget the fifth network: Paranoid media and academia
Daniel ,   Formerly Israel   (09.28.07)
6. No different from the US and a few other countries
Israel & USA   (09.28.07)
Israel just hides less from its citizens.
7. The professor does not use sources and is a fool as well.
sk ,   USA   (09.28.07)
I'm beginning to think that Israeli social science is a complete waste of time, as this essay doesn't deserve even a "C." First, it is regurgitated C. Wright Mills (_The Power Elite_), which is not attributed. Second, if there is anything that has been studied, particularly in the US, it is the whole "who governs?" issue. It is unacceptable that a professor of political science shows no familiarity with any of this voluminous literature. Third, his omission of any mention of the courts in Israel is staggering. If this fellow really knew anything, I would have some fun discussing whether this omission pointed to a uniquely Israeli second face of power.
8. postscript
sk ,   USA   (09.28.07)
Interesting. This guy is an international relations type, which means that he knows as much about domestic politics of Israel as Mearsheimer and Walt know about the domestic politics of the US. Curiously, though, his recently published book, _Who Leads?_ alludes (perhaps by accident?) to Robert Dahl's famous book _Who Governs?_, which is in part a criticism of ... wait for it ... C. Wright Mills's _Power Elite_.
9. # 6: Right, but in the US, there are more different networks
Gideon   (09.28.07)
hence more pluralitiy of networks and groups that influence politics.
10. The US
Igor ,   Munich, Germany   (09.28.07)
rules the Israeli foreign and defense policy....for sure!
11. Don't Minimize the US and AIPAC
Dave Levy ,   Burbank. CAUSA   (09.29.07)
It should be relatively easy to determine which groups influence Israeli society, the country being so miniscule. Sounds to me like the military-industrial complex, mixed in with the modern and ultra-Orthodox have the real power...represented by the current crop (or crap) of leaders. But listen, these leaders do represent different points of view..from left to right, secular to religious. AND, should not this be the best of democracy. As far as the other 5.3m Jews and 1.4m Arabs, does Israel want 6.7 opinions and policies? The problem with Israel is simple: no constitution defining the country and where the gov't power should be (as in the US), and 56 too many parties., 4 would suffice., 1 Arab, 1 for labor, 1 for business and the military-industrial, and 1 for the immigrants. Then let each fight it out internally, as we do here (Democrats vs Republican vs Independends). Both left and right can absorb the religious. Here in Calif. we have propositions, designed to circumvent the power elites. Sometimes they don't get off the ground however (witness: move to change our electoral system away from winner take all-it failed). If approved, the US Presidency would change dramtically, with Calif.'s votes also going to the Republicans. Israel is doing just fine..it's a litlte broken. So fix it where it needs an adjustment. Don't begrudge those who are sincerely interested. As far as foreign policy, blame the US's attitude and strings...more than any media or academics., and don't deny AIPACs and the ZOAs impact on Israeli policy., albeit minimal. AND, our charity of 2.4b a year to Israel, also has strings attached..like discussing a 2 state solution.
12. hmm, that explains alot
rami   (09.29.07)
that explains since each of these groups maybe for the exception of some of the capitalists have a vested interest in the conflict....why when polls indicate a majority of israelis want peace, yet the policies of this state certainly are hostile....granted they define peace different than the other side or the UN, still the policies are pretty hostile nontheless... hmm so in effect, israel is controlled by elitists who are running it like a dictatorship ..so the "oasis of democracy" thing is a hoax even among jews...
13. Potentially a good topic
Zuza the Hedgehog   (09.29.07)
Which of these networks protected Sharon like an etrog as long as he gave away Gaza? Which of these networks is now protecting Olmert in the same way as he tries to give away Judea and Samaria? Which of these networks determines appointments to the judiciary? Which of these networks is responsible for the arrest of Nadia Matar? This column had the potential to be a good topic, but the outcome is useless.
14. sk #7 & 8 makes very valid comments
Yisraeli   (09.29.07)
I to was very suprised he made no mention of the Judicial elite namely the autonomous and the self appointed High Court. It is they that have appointed themselves as rulers for even if the legislature created laws, they simply overtuned them if they didnt like it. The Judiciary do NOT interpret the law as supposed to, they CREATE the laws they deem fit. And should any leader not follow theyre direction they simply set the Attorney General onto them (the AG being theyre lacky) with investigations into their affairs, and when they capitulate suddenly the heat is turned off and theres no investigations. How many times have we all seen this all to familiar pattern?
15. What aboy nonelected court who decides EVERYTHING?
Jim ,   Chicago   (09.29.07)
He forgot to mension the Prez of Supreme court in Israel. They decide everything in Israel, from where to build fence, how much lednd to give to Arabs, which 16 y/o girl must be in jail, when to "disengage", etc. Perhaps, he thinks that Olmert has the Prez of Court in his back pocket.
16. At least democracy allows us to vote for our favorite crook!
Stewart ,   USA   (09.29.07)
Let's see. Politics must come from the following roots: poly, meaning many and tics, meaning blood sucker. That about says it all. The less government the better for the little guy accept for necessities like defense. The US is not a democracy. It is a republic. Pure democracies tend to degenerate into mob rule; or in Israel's case, chaos because it is so hard to get Jews to agree on anything -- two Jews, three opinions. Remember the phrase about everyone sitting under their own fig tree? Well I think that is the one thing that is interpreted literally and fundamentally from the bible. At least with a republic you can throw the bums out, and replace them with better bums. Every once in a while a Truman comes along, does the right thing regards, and is hated by most everyone with their own pecuniary interests. He then gets to go to his grave hoping history will venertate him or her. That is often the case. The only good politician are not politicians. All they get is grief.
17. #7 You Show Your Own Ignorance
David ,   Los Angeles   (09.29.07)
If you're going to try to pretend you have some intellectual prowess, you should at least get it right. Instead, you try to drop C. Wright Mills' name to make yourself seem smart, but you clearly know NOTHING about his writing. That an arrogant ignoramus like you would have the chutzpah to call Sheffer a fool is beyond stupidity. 1. C. Wright Mills did not originate the idea of "elites" ruling a country rather than the obvious political leaders. 2. The elites Prof. Sheffer mentions are not the same as the elites Mills said ruled the U.S. 3. One of the main points of Mills' work is that the elites in the U.S. share a common interest and that members move between them. That is clearly not the case with Sheffer's groups (e.g. members of the Rabbinate do not move in and out of the defense network. Thus there is no need to attribute anything to C. Wright Mills or anyone else. What Sheffer says has nothing whatseover to do with Mills. As for your mention of the courts in Israel as a "uniquely Israeli second face of power" (as if the strictly Orthodox rabbinical network is not a uniquely Israeli second face of power"), you also draw attention to the fact that you are nothing more than the blatant hawker of an idiotic far Right and anti-democratic ideology. You clearly know almost nothing about the Israeli political and legal system beyond some childish propaganda you are regurgitating. How typical.
18. This is not surprising. Samuel the Prophet annointed David
Rivkah   (09.29.07)
to be king when David was a youth. Samuel would represent the religious authority in ancient Israel. Aftr many years, when the kingship was actually going to go into effect, David met with the elders of Israel which would be the wealthy influential people to discuss policies and what would be acceptable to them to back him. The military element were the soldiers and generals who followed David and backed him up as king. Missing were the elected officials since back then the leadership was a monarchy not a republic or democractically elected government. So you see, how things stay the same; and, as Solomon said, there is nothing new under the sun.
19. Who really rules Israel?
Daniel ,   Israel   (09.29.07)
Definitely and decisively not us; may be US!
20. Where is "King of slaves" Mazus???
5 ,   U.S.A.   (09.29.07)
21. I see an ability to count is no longer a pre-requisite
Danny   (09.29.07)
"It is no secret that most Israeli prime ministers...were members of this [defence] network" - really? Ben-Gurion - nope, Sharett - nope, Eshkol - nope, Allon - yes, meir - nope, rabin - yes, begin - nope, shamir - yes, peres - not really but for sake of argument say yes, netanyahu - nope, barak - yes, sharon - yes, olmert - nope. So out of 13 PMs, 5 or 6 were of the defence establisment. I hate to break this news but that is a minority, not majority. If we look at time ruled by someone from this network it is even worse...
22. I'm so relieved; I thought it's the media or the
Uzi ,   Haifa   (09.29.07)
judicial system.
23. #21 Begin - YES
(09.29.07)
24. He's right
C. Wernerhoff ,   Sydney, Australia   (09.29.07)
This is an excellent analysis of the truth behind the facade. I don't know it's taken so long for political scientists to state the obvious, but when they do, it's a sign of an awakening of some kind. Of course, comparable analyses are also required for other countries. There is no sense in which any country is genuinely democratic. If there's to be any truth in public discourse at all, it will depend upon investigation of the informal networks that compete for real power between themselves.
25. France is being governed by the same circles of power
jethan ,   france   (09.29.07)
More or less most of the "democratic" countries are being governed the same way. In France we have : - The 200 hundred families (capitalist power) + the new whealthiest people - The 500 former minister deputy Director (Direceteur de cabinet) - The defense establishment - ENA (the bureaucratic network) - The media - The justice What is rising is France is the civil society with a lot of power. Thanks to the new technology and internet. You need in IL to empower the civil society and create a BOTTOM UP governance.
26. He leaves out the media and the courts
RobertK ,   Jerusalem   (09.29.07)
because he's a LEFTY, not beholden to facts. A lefty loves to feel that he's a brave fighter against the military, the capitalists, and the religious!
27. So who didn't already know that the state serves the rich?
David Turner ,   Richmond, US   (09.29.07)
What the author describes is nothing but the real state of all so-called "liberal democracies.” Marx's Kapital is a good stating point for the analysis. Halliburton, et al; the hidden arabists bureaucrats in the Departments of State, Defense, including those who retire to the so-called “think-tanks, etc. in the US. Who doesn’t know that the wealthy control national political agendas? The author states the obvious. No revelation here. Israel is, according to the author, no different from any so-called "liberal democracy." We are finally fulfilling Herzl's hope for our future, a Jewish state where Jews and their society are "normal."
28. The article shows only who rules...
Ehud ,   TA   (09.29.07)
...the Israeli academia. Traditional die-hard conspirational-theory populists who cannot understand the principles of separation of power, do not fathom that in such a system the military is not "an informal network" but answers and is controlled by the elected government (in addition to being composed pretty much of anyone, since this is a peolpe's army), and that "capitalism" is not an insult, but the economy associated with the highest life expactation and living standard of citizens. The author has never read Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations". There are only 2 issues in the Hebrew University Library's, but dozens of Marx's "Das Kapital" - check it out yourself.
29. Just like the US!
sharpinchitown ,   Chicago US   (09.29.07)
Gee, Israel sounds just like the United States. There is no true individual freedom where there is religion, money and power running the show.
30. David (17) insults me but avoids the issues. part 1
sk ,   USA   (09.29.07)
Let's review. (1) I claimed that there were no sources offered by the professor in this political essay. David responded ... well, he didn't respond, did he? This is egregious because this area is extremely well studied, particularly in the US. I am aware of no good reason (except ignorance) for why a professor of political science would show no familiarity with this material--except for regurgitating Mills, who was not particularly original, but who did summarize and popularize the "power elite" thesis and who was the main source against which many American political scientists targeted their criticism. (2) That this professor has not tailored his analysis to Israel's peculiar situation is evident in his complete silence regarding the court system. David responded with ... silence as well. I should have added the media, by the way. (3) I alluded to "two faces of power" (Bachrach and Baratz). This is another canonical work that the professor should be familiar with. From memory, I would say that it applies to the Israeli case very strongly, as there is indeed a "mobilization of bias" that precludes serious discussion of "Grand Issues," such as, for example, the role of Islam as a political ideology in Israeli domestic politics. (4) David does manage to quibble about my treatment of C. Wright Mills. And here I admit I found Mills's "power elite" thesis so feeble that I certainly didn't spend much time studying his collected works. However, the idea that power is wielded by three kinds of political elites (political, economic, and military) who interlock bears more than a passing similarity to a thesis that power is wielded by bureaucratic, capitalist, religious, and military elites. Three of the four types of elites have analogues to Mills's triumvirate, and two of the four are not merely analogous but the same. Thus, David's point #2 is basically wrong, though of course if one identifies four power networks, there will necessarily be slippage when compared to a work that posits three such networks. His #1 is a straw man: I did not claim that CWM originated anything. But a discussion of power elites (and that is what Sheffer is discussing) is typically (in the voluminous literature) accompanied by a reference to CWM. Regarding David's #3, while Sheffer did not go into any detail regarding movement from one "network" to another, his mention that all of the PM candidates for the next election are connected to two of these "networks" does indeed suggest that these networks interrelate. And frankly, there *is* considerable flow among the bureaucracy, the military, and the capitalist "networks" in Israel. Indeed, the Orthodox have their own bureaucracies, as Sheffer points out. Thus when David claims that it "is clearly not the case" that such interconnection exists in Israel, he is showing his own ignorance of Israeli politics, and even of what Sheffer appears to be saying.
Next talkbacks
Back to article