Author Questions If Israel's Direction Reflects Its People's Desires

Gershon Baskin, an immigrant who arrived in Israel in 1978, expresses deep concern that the nation's current trajectory may not align with the aspirations of the majority of Israelis, questioning if the country he believed in is still the one its citizens desire. He notes that while public discourse often focuses on the upcoming elections and the potential for Benjamin Netanyahu to remain Prime Minister, the fundamental issue might be more profound: whether the Israeli public consciously chooses the nation's current direction.

Baskin, now 70, reflects on his initial idealism upon arriving in Israel, envisioning a vibrant democracy committed to social justice and peace. He acknowledges the country's imperfections, including the occupation and inequality, but believed these were challenges that could be overcome. Today, he grapples with the possibility that the rise of figures like Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich, and the political leverage of ultra-Orthodox parties, are not aberrations but rather reflections of a broader societal choice.

He argues that if Netanyahu and his allies secure a strong mandate in the upcoming elections, it would be disingenuous to view Israel's political direction as an accident. Instead, he suggests, it would indicate that a significant portion of Israeli society consciously desires this path. This prospect, he states, is more troubling than another Netanyahu term.

Baskin observes that certain political stances, once considered fringe, have become mainstream. These include outright opposition to a Palestinian state, advocating for Israeli sovereignty over the entire West Bank, attacks on judicial independence, and the growing acceptance of certain groups enjoying civil rights without fulfilling civic duties. He attributes these shifts to decades of political decisions, demographic changes, educational priorities, religious influences, and the failure of alternative political movements to offer a compelling vision, noting that Netanyahu has exploited and accelerated these trends rather than creating them.

He emphasizes that replacing Netanyahu, while necessary, may not be sufficient to alter Israel's course. Baskin draws on his extensive work with Palestinians, acknowledging the deep trauma and fear in Israeli society following the October 7th attacks. However, he stresses that trauma does not absolve individuals of responsibility for their choices, asserting that a healthy future cannot be built on the perpetual denial of Palestinian freedom or on the notion that military might is the sole answer to security challenges. He also questions the sustainability of calling Israel a democracy while maintaining perpetual control over millions of Palestinians without political rights.

Ultimately, Baskin urges Israelis to look beyond political leaders and consider the societal choices that enable certain politicians to thrive. He believes that true patriotism requires confronting the darker aspects of society and that hope, while important, must be coupled with action. He calls for offering an alternative vision for Israeli identity that addresses why many have lost faith in peace, distrust democratic institutions, and find religious nationalism appealing. He concludes that building a democratic, just, and peace-seeking Israel requires active effort, not passive assumption, and that the struggle for the nation he envisioned continues regardless of election outcomes.