Whoever heads Israel’s next government will preside over a new Middle East far more dangerous than the one we know and have coped with

What a difference a week makes.

In the first week of May, both Binyamin Netanyahu and those endeavoring to unseat him vied mightily for the allegiance of Ra’am MK Mansour Abbas, who wears two hats: He heads the southern branch of the Islamic Movement in Israel, and he leads an Arab party that holds four Knesset seats.

In the second week of May, any aspirations of formulating a domestic Abraham Accord between Jewish and Arab Israelis had vanished like a desert mirage. Israel and Hamas were mired in their sixth major military conflagration since the August 2005 disengagement from Gaza. This time, Hamas upped the ante by firing rockets on an array of cities in central Israel and fomenting violence in Jerusalem. Arab thugs joined the disturbances by desecrating synagogues in Lod.

Whoever heads Israel’s next government, with whatever coalition they can contrive, will preside over a new Middle East far more dangerous than the one we know and have coped with.

Many reasons have been advanced to explain the sudden eruptions. The month of Ramadan, when Muslims flock to the Temple Mount every day, coincided with Jerusalem Day — when Israelis of all stripes commemorate the capture of Jerusalem’s Old City during the 1967 Six Day War — leading to friction and clashes.

A century-old property dispute between Jewish landowners and Arab squatters in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood of Jerusalem, near the kever of Shimon Hatzaddik and Yeshivas Ohr Somayach, flared as Israel’s High Court neared a final decision. Hamas issued an ultimatum, threatening rocket attacks on Jerusalem unless Israelis ceded their property rights.

Simultaneously, Hamas leadership felt the need to assert itself after Palestinian Authority chairman Abu Mazen canceled an election scheduled for this month when it became obvious that Hamas was headed for victory.

Of course, Abu Mazen couldn’t reconcile himself to a poll by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research showing that just 7 percent of PA residents support his continued rule. He needed a pretext, so why not blame Israel for preventing Jerusalem Arabs from voting in PA elections? This, despite the fact that most Jerusalem Arabs enjoy Jordanian citizenship and Israeli residency status and want nothing to do with the PA — not to mention the fact that the same poll giving Abu Mazen 7 percent support also showed that 65 percent of PA Arabs want elections to go forward, even if Israel won’t allow voting in Jerusalem.

Perhaps if Bibi Netanyahu were smart enough to pull the plug on elections he couldn’t win, he might be in a stronger position today, but the caretaker Israeli government has caved on most counts. The High Court delayed its decision on Sheikh Jarrah. Israeli police substantially curtailed Jerusalem Day parades and celebrations, and the government was tardy with its mobilization of police and border guards in Lod.

The government should know by now that concessions and weakness embolden Israel’s enemies. In this case, Israeli concessions were met by more rocket attacks and more internal violence in cities with sizable Arab populations.

The lesson for the next government is that knuckling under to Hamas is an invitation to war. Emboldening Israeli Arabs to think that they can become power brokers and kingmakers only elevates expectations whose fulfillment must come at the expense of Jewish Israelis.

And when it comes to maintaining public security, Israel cannot afford to catch America’s disease of allowing rioters and demonstrators to take control of major cities, especially while Israelis run to their shelters and sealed rooms for cover.

Only Themselves to Blame

Naftali Bennett’s supporters are treating him like Benedict Arnold.

To them, Bennett, is a traitor who crossed all of his red lines in spurning offers from the Likud to form a right-wing coalition, in favor of making a deal that will include leftist parties like Labor and Meretz.

In my view, Bennett’s voters only have themselves to blame. Bezalel Smotrich might be too strong of a brand for Bennett voters, but if they really wanted a right-winger, they should have voted for him and not Bennett.

First of all, Bennett has long since abandoned any pretense he had of being the leader of the national-religious movement when he broke with Smotrich in 2018 to form Yamina.

If Bennett voters had paid heed to his campaign proclamations instead of wishing he could be something he isn’t, they might not be so mortified now.

Bennett said straightaway he viewed himself as a candidate for prime minister and wasn’t looking to play second fiddle to anyone. He first said that in the heady days when polls showed him capturing close to 20 seats, but he maintained his stance even when his support shrank to single digits.

As to claims that Bennett abandoned all of his right-wing positions, including support for West Bank annexation and curbing the powers of the High Court, Bennett also declared — when he was defense minister at the peak of the coronavirus outbreak — that the next government should set aside any controversial issues for its first year and concentrate on eradicating COVID-19 and recovering from the virus’s economic fallout.

Bennett has kept his word, at least on those counts, and pursuing a coalition with the left is also something he never ruled out.

Taking a politician at his word is always dangerous, but not taking him at his word can also be perilous. We don’t know yet how high Bennett might climb or how hard he may fall, but voters who feel betrayed by Bennett should take a hard look at themselves in the mirror.

(Originally featured in Mishpacha, Issue 861)