Amir Levy/Getty Images Libraries of political theory contain many volumes on the morality and usefulness of draft dodging and civil disobedience. But Israel does not have the luxury to engage in a scholarly discussion. Israel must deal with a concrete challenge: an attempt to sabotage government policies by using the threat of disobedience. Many hundreds of reserve officers warn — again — that passing a judicial overhaul that will severely reduce the courts’ ability to curb ministerial power will be a cause for them to no longer report for duty. Under these circumstances, we’ll try a few cautionary notes that might help clarify a complex issue.
The key angle: A country without rules cannot exist. Israel must have rules. On the other hand, in certain moments, there is justification to oppose the rules, and also break them. In a dictatorship it is fitting to oppose the government and the rules. It is not always practical (because the government has power), but it is certainly morally appropriate. In what other circumstances is it appropriate to disobey? This is the current debate. It’s not theoretical; it’s about Israel’s current reality. Is what we see in the judicial overhaul a slide to dictatorship (in such case it would be appropriate to break some rules), or are they merely standard moves, as significant as they might seem, of a legitimate government within the framework of legitimate politics (then disobedience must be condemned).
Subjective difficulty: who even determines when it is appropriate to be in violation of the rules? The answer is: every man and woman. Naturally, the government will never recognize the need to violate its rules. So the fact that the members of the coalition cry foul amid the threat of disobedience is to be expected. But what we are saying here reflects a problematic situation: Disobedience stems from the conscience of those who disobey. Yet everyone has a different conscience, and the result is that everyone can decide when it’s time to break the rules. This is a recipe for anarchy. But this obstacle cannot be removed, because it is at the heart of the discussion about disobedience.
The danger: Disobedience is intended to hinder the government from implementing policies. Once a society becomes used to disobedience, it will not be able to realize any plans of any government. A government that wants to impose taxes will face a threat of disobedience. A government that wants to reduce taxes will also face a threat of disobedience. Those who currently use disobedience as a tool act on one of three assumptions: They assume that they will never be in power, and therefore will always be in a position of having to stop someone else from doing things and never in the position of wanting to do things; they assume that only they, and not the other camp, can effectively use disobedience; or they assume that when they have the power to rule, their opponents will decide to follow the rules even though they did not follow the rules. The first assumption is defeatist, the second is arrogant, the third is naive.
Moral argument: Let’s say you’re an intelligence officer, and let’s say you believe that the country is already on its way to becoming a dictatorship, and let’s say that because of this you believe that you must dodge a call of duty. And let’s assume that your position is important, and that you contribute to Israel’s security. What are you actually saying? You’re saying, “I will not serve, but I will continue to be secure thanks to others who serve.” They will volunteer and sacrifice, and you will have security. This is an immoral act.
Moral rebuttal: The moral argument against disobedience would have been a good argument, had the State of Israel insisted that all citizens serve. But it doesn’t. While The PM demanded that we “all stand together,” his government was moving forward with a plan that would exempt a very large group — the ultra-Orthodox — from the obligation to stand.
The story of disobedience in 2023 Israel is not a theoretical seminar. It’s a dangerous clash of power and will.
What do we do: the answer could seem outrageous but it still holds true. The Israeli government has a duty to soberly assess the situation. If it can overcome the challenge of disobedience without having to pay a very heavy price – then the government should disregard the threat. But if the government thinks that the price of disobedience will be more than the benefit of implementing its plans – then it needs to yield. The question of who is right, or what is fair, is not important. The story of disobedience in 2023 Israel is not a theoretical seminar. It’s a dangerous clash of power and will.
Something I wrote in Hebrew
Israeli novelists decided to boycott the literary prizes that the Ministry of Culture because they disprove of the prize committee in which the three new members are vocal supporters of the Netanyahu government. I was not convinced that their argument was valid.
It is impossible to enjoy the patronage of a government, without politics being involved. If you want the Minister of Culture to hand out grants and prizes to support literature (I’m not convinced this is desirable, but that’s another debate), you have to take into account that the minister is a politician … had he appointed his horse to a committee, Caligula style, it could have been argued that the appointment is improper, and therefore the prize should be boycotted. But that’s not what happened. The minister appointed reasonable candidates to the committee.
A week’s numbers
Municipal elections are coming to your neighborhood in the fall (if you’re an Israeli), and a fascinating battle is shaping up between Tel Aviv Mayor Ron Huldai (who has held the job for 24 years) and former Yesh Atid Minister Orna Barbibai (Ch.12 poll).
A reader’s response:
Alex Rubin asks: “Is it true that Bibi is going to China before coming to Washington? That would be a disgrace”. My response: Mr. Netanyahu would gladly come to Washington, but he cannot hold himself hostage and postpone all other plans until an invitation to Washington is extended.
Shmuel Rosner is senior political editor. For more analysis of Israeli and international politics, visit Rosner’s Domain at jewishjournal.com/rosnersdomain.
More news and opinions than at a Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.