Palestinians will pay the price for Israel's early election

In most countries, elections are purely internal affairs. In Israel, though, things are different; elections often have horrible consequences for the Palestinians living under the brutal Israeli occupation. The election in early 2013 will be no different.

Reacting to Benjamin Netanyahu’s announcement of an early election, veteran Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat admitted that they may have to pay the price. This, he explained, will probably entail an escalation of settler attacks, further expansion of settlements and another full-scale onslaught on the Gaza Strip. Israeli politicians thrive on malevolence toward the Palestinians.

In reality, such escalation has already started. In Jerusalem, settler incursions into Al-Aqsa Mosque have now become a daily spectacle. Their calls to divide Islam’s third holiest mosque have become increasingly loud and audacious. Equally, with the onset of the olive harvest, Palestinians across the occupied West Bank are confronted with the systematic theft of their crops and destruction of ancient trees. As for Gaza, the worst is yet to come.

Despite efforts by the Hamas administration to keep the peace, Israel has in recent days carried out a number of bombing raids on the territory. To many they appear to be a dress rehearsal for the type of aggression carried out in December 2008, weeks before Israel’s previous general election.
There is nothing extraordinary about an early poll in Israel. Although the law allows for a four-year term, the average life of an Israeli government is just two years. The current parliament is due to end in October 2013.

While making the announcement, the Prime Minister accused his coalition partners of putting party interests before that of the country, a clear reference to the opposition he encountered to his proposed budget. In fact, each party is trying to feather its own nest. Thus, rather than allow the budget to be brought before the Knesset and defeated, Netanyahu decided on an early election.

Given the tensions within the ruling coalition, the Prime Minister is taking a gamble not only on remaining in office, but also on tightening his grip on power. This would give him greater freedom to make decisions consistent with his right-wing, pro-settler agenda.

If there is any credit to be given to Benjamin Netanyahu, it is the fact that he has lasted this long in office. As a result, he is confident that his Likud Party will gain more seats. Opinion polls in Israel suggest he is in a fairly unassailable position. Although there are reports that former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is considering a comeback, his chances are slim. His wars in Lebanon (2006) and Gaza two years later, both failed to achieve their military and political objectives. Israelis usually elect those who have a record of military success.

In the absence of a powerful challenger, as most Israeli media analysts assert, the incumbent believes his is the best course of action. The main opposition, Labour and Kadima, it seems, will not be ready to face the electorate in a month or two.

Thus, even with his dismally poor record Netanyahu remains the front-runner. After taking office in 2009, the Prime Minister espoused a culture of profligacy, lavishing state funds on the settlers in the occupied Palestinian territories and ignoring demands for affordable housing within Israel. His failure to engage in negotiations with the Palestinians was largely attributed to the settlement expansion campaign, which ultimately reinforced Israel’s international isolation. Netanyahu’s catalogue of political blundering was compounded further by his failure to persuade Barack Obama to launch a joint US-Israel attack on Iran after years of sabre rattling.

As things stand, Netanyahu will try to provoke a crisis to highlight the “security threat” to Israel and then respond in a manner sufficiently robust to convince voters that he is the best man to protect the nation’s interests. Since he is evidently afraid to launch a unilateral attack on Iran, the nearest and softest alternative has to be Gaza.

Israeli officials believe that they can get away with such an operation. Of late, they have been warning that an attack on Gaza of the ferocity of Operation Cast Lead is inevitable. They contend that the new Egyptian administration is sympathetic to the Hamas-led administration in the beleaguered territory and that it has reneged on agreements signed with the Mubarak regime to protect Israel’s interests. Thus, while the Egyptians are still preoccupied with their own internal security, especially in the Sinai, this is presumably the best time to launch a full-scale assault on Gaza to restore Israel’s “deterrent” status.

For their part, the resistance groups in Gaza have, during this past week, shown that they are prepared to respond, with or without the support and approval of Egypt. That in itself makes the current situation extremely volatile.

According to retired Egyptian General Ta’alat Musallam the Israelis would like to test the missile capability of the Palestinian resistance and find out whether they have the ability to reach every major city in Israel and not just targets in the south of the country. While they admit that they cannot eradicate the resistance, the Israelis would at least try to destroy their missile storage facilities, launch pads and production lines.

The gradual and calculated escalation that will precede the Israeli election could all go terribly wrong and extend well beyond the Gaza Strip. The region is heading for a long, hot winter.