Israeli Election Campaigns Largely Ignore Economy, Industrial Independence
Translated & summarized from Maariv by baba
With 38 lists competing in Israel's 25th Knesset elections, candidates are largely ignoring the economy and domestic industrial production, focusing instead on security and social issues. The article argues that in a volatile global landscape, manufacturing capability is a critical geopolitical asset, a lesson learned by China and now being acted upon by Western nations. Israel's reliance on foreign manufacturing and its neglect of domestic industry, exacerbated by the "Swords of Iron" war, leave it vulnerable. A national plan is proposed to bolster industry through education, technological incentives, and regulatory reform, emphasizing that industrial independence is essential for national security and sovereignty.
The story in 6 lines · by baba
- 38 Israeli election lists are competing, but almost none are discussing the economy or domestic industrial production.
- The article criticizes Israel's focus on its "startup nation" image over essential manufacturing capabilities.
- Global powers like China and Western nations are prioritizing and investing heavily in domestic industrial production.
- The "Swords of Iron" war highlighted Israel's vulnerability due to reliance on imported defense materials.
- The author calls for a national plan to support industry through education, technology, and regulatory reform.
- Industrial independence is presented as crucial for national security and sovereignty.
As Israel approaches its 25th Knesset elections, a striking silence surrounds the nation's economic future, particularly its industrial and manufacturing sector. While 38 lists are competing, candidates are focusing on security, the military, ultra-Orthodox conscription, Arab parties, education, and the cost of living, neglecting what the author deems the crucial asset for Israel's future: its economy.
The article draws a parallel to the 1992 U.S. presidential campaign, where James Carville's slogan, "It's the economy, stupid," became a defining mantra for Western democracies. Leaders in the West rise and fall based on their economic vision and ability to ensure citizens' futures and national resilience. However, this principle appears absent in Israel's current political discourse.
The neglect is particularly pronounced regarding domestic industry and production. In a world increasingly fragmented into rival blocs, facing wars and supply chain disruptions, manufacturing capability is presented not just as a budgetary item but as a paramount geopolitical asset. China recognized this decades ago, building industrial power that translates to global influence. The West, including the U.S. with its CHIPS Act and the EU with its 20% industrial output target, is now actively investing in domestic production, understanding that advanced manufacturing requires concentrated engineering skills that are difficult to replicate once lost, as noted by Apple CEO Tim Cook.
Israel, conversely, is described as "slumbering," captivated by its "startup nation" image and accustomed to inventing locally while manufacturing abroad. The "Swords of Iron" war served as a stark warning, highlighting the vulnerability of relying on imported ammunition and facing delayed shipments, demonstrating how a lack of independent production capacity exposes a country to coercion, even from allies.
Instead of fostering industry, the article argues, Israel is pushing it away through burdensome regulations and high energy costs. The artificial distinction between "glamorous high-tech" and "low-tech" deters talent, ignoring the intelligence required for manufacturing complex components. The workforce is aging without a successor generation, factories are relocating overseas, and industrial land is being converted to real estate.
The author proposes a national plan centered on a coordinating state body, similar to the National Cyber Directorate, to treat production as a strategic asset. This plan should include significant investment in engineering education, incentives for AI and automation in factories to compete on innovation rather than price, and the removal of regulatory barriers. The piece concludes with a stark warning: without industrial independence, there is no security independence, and without security independence, there is no sovereignty. It is no longer just about the economy; it is about the state itself.
Mentioned
