Cameron and Netanyahu move both new governments further to the right

On 6 May, just hours before the constitutional deadline, Benjamin Netanyahu assembled a shaky coalition government after heated negotiations with potential partners. The final agreement put together a cabinet dominated by hard-line figures hailing from a right-wing coalition of Likud, United Tora Judaism, Shas, Kulanu and Jewish Home parties.

On 7 May the British general election also brought David Cameron back, like Netanyahu, for another term as prime minister. The Conservative Party’s narrow majority allowed Cameron to appoint an all-Tory cabinet in which he too has ensured the support of right-wing factions within the party, as embodied, for example, by Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne and Justice Secretary Michael Gove.

In the ministries in charge of planning and construction in the West Bank – defence, housing, interior and economy – Netanyahu has appointed individuals from the far right, many of whom rely on political support among Jewish settlers. The Israeli prime minister has hinted at a renewed effort to expand settlements and deepen the creeping annexation of the West Bank, both likely to thwart any peace process. His deputy foreign minister, Tzipi Hotovely, is one such figure among the extreme right in the new cabinet. Likud member Hotovely supports West Bank settlements and the annexation of the occupied Palestinian territories, and opposes the creation of a Palestinian state. In her inaugural speech to Israeli diplomats, Hotovely said that Israel has tried too hard to appease the world and must “return to the basic truth of our right to this country”, expressing her belief that “this land is ours. All of it is ours.” In the same speech, she claimed that she would try to achieve global recognition for Israel’s illegal West Bank settlements.

Hotovely is just one example of the influence of hardliners who have become stronger in the new government. Negotiations between Netanyahu and the Jewish Home Party leader, Naftali Bennett, brought about the appointment of another controversial minister, new Minister of Justice Ayelet Shaked. She has no legal training, has been vocal about her contempt for the liberal-leaning Supreme Court and has pledged to instigate radical legal reforms. Shaked is uncompromising in her rhetoric when it comes to African asylum-seekers. Last year, in a landmark ruling, the High Court knocked down the Knesset’s “infiltrator law” declaring that the practice of holding African migrants in detention facilities for up to a year was illegal. The decision was opposed bitterly by Netanyahu’s former interior minister Gideon Sa’ar, who believed that this would prevent “a Jewish democratic state because our borders will be overrun with illegal infiltrators.”

Shaked has pledged to continue Sa’ar’s attempts to pass legislation preventing the Supreme Court from intervening on such issues. She has maintained an uncompromising line on the issue of immigration, suggesting that the court ruling “harmed the security of the state… and trampled on the legislative branch”, declaring that, “today the lives of hundreds of thousands of Israelis were destroyed.”

Since her appointment as Justice Minister, Shaked has pledged reforms to the legal system that include giving the Knesset the power to overrule decisions of the High Court of Justice, thereby increasing the strength of the often hard-line legislature at the expense of the judiciary. Her appointment and controversial political programme has caused a stir amongst opponents who claim that her party’s polices will further harm democratic procedures.

In his new cabinet, David Cameron has also recruited the support of right-wing and neoconservative factions within the Conservative Party. The two most important of this powerful neoconservative clique are Osborne and Gove.

The latter was sacked as education secretary last year due to fears that his combative style and unpopular reforms were damaging the Conservatives’ reputation in the run-up to the election. Like Shaked, Gove has no legal experience and has made some contentious statements on justice policy, including a call in the late 1990s to bring back capital punishment. Cameron is enlisting the support of neocons like Gove, known for his ideological stance and radical reform, to drive through policy changes that may prove controversial.

One such policy is the scrapping of the Human Rights Act to be replaced by a British bill of rights. The assault on the human rights legislation, like Shaked’s reforms, will strengthen Britain’s legislative authority, claim the Tories, by ensuring that the European Court of Human Rights will no longer be able to overrule judgements made in British courts.

As with Israel’s new justice minister, Gove’s planned reforms will be justified in part by immigration concerns. The Tories argue that foreign nationals who have committed serious crimes are able to use the freedoms guaranteed under the Human Rights Act to justify remaining in Britain.

Gove has drawn much of his inspiration from neoconservative principles. In his 2006 book Celsius 7/7, he voiced doubts about the usefulness of current laws in tackling Islamist jihadis and in defending “western civilisation”. The book sought to divide the world between benign western liberal democracies and barbaric Islamic movements waging war against the west, not because of imperialism but because of their rejection of “western values”.

Beyond the pursuit of a neoconservative foreign policy and counter-extremism doctrines within the Conservative Party, in the run up to the election it exhibited a troubling attitude towards minorities. Cameron failed consistently to reach out to British Muslims while doing so to other minorities. In a recent article, political commentator Peter Oborne noted that Conservative Friends of Israel events are almost always attended by cabinet ministers and MPs; such senior figures have failed to do the same for events organised by British Muslims. The prime minister also gave a pre-election interview to the Jewish Chronicle in which he strongly defended Benjamin Netanyahu’s invasion of Gaza last summer.

Indeed, Cameron visited a Sikh temple and Gove went to a synagogue during the election campaign but there was no equivalent high-profile visit to a mosque. On the contrary, the Tories’ attitude towards Muslims has been largely negative. Re-appointed Home Secretary Theresa May made a speech on the eve of the election which attacked the “hatred, bigotry and ignorance” of Muslim “extremists”. She pledged that a Conservative government would target Sharia courts, change the rules on granting citizenship to ensure people embrace British values, and introduce controversial “banning orders”.

May has also revealed a controversial plan to introduce counter-extremism powers to censor in advance programmes broadcast on British television and radio. Opponents have expressed concerns that such measures erode fundamental civil liberties and may remove crucial limitations on the government’s power.

Attitudes within Netanyahu’s new government are much the same as before, as he continues to pursue apartheid policies within a state that proclaims itself to be exclusively for Jews. Justice Minister Shaked has expressed support for this exclusivity, which will see Palestinian Israelis remaining as second-class citizens. Shaked proclaimed that the main thing is “to strengthen the Jewish identity” of Israel; “to have a democratic, Jewish, strong state.” She has also expressed concern about the social, economic, cultural and demographic implications of immigration. Netanyahu himself has claimed that African migrants who he deems to be “infiltrators” are threatening Israel’s Jewish social fabric.

With the inclusion of extremely hawkish elements in Netanyahu’s cabinet it is likely that Israel will continue with the de facto annexation of the West Bank and exclusionary policies based on ethno-nationalist separation. The prime minister has at best only been ambiguous about an attempt to “advance the diplomatic process and strive for a peace agreement.”

David Cameron has also enlisted the support of his hard-line cabinet members in seeking policy reforms. Today it seems, he too is a neoconservative, a trend strengthened by his hawkish foreign policy, his uncritical support for Netanyahu’s Israel and his criticism of the European Union.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.