Daily Briefing: Stalemate: What’s Next? (September 19,2019)

Table of Contents:

Muddy Results Clearly Show Israelis Unfazed By Prospect Of Life After Netanyahu:  David Horovitz, Times of Israel, Sept. 18, 2019

______________________________________________________

Israel’s Election Has Ended in Deadlock. Here’s What Could Happen Next
Joseph Hincks
Time, Sept. 18, 2019

Israel’s second election in fewer than six months has ended in political deadlock, leaving Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu facing an uncertain future and paving the way for protracted coalition negotiations. As the official count filtered in on Wednesday, no side emerged with a clear path to government.

“The era of Netanyahu is over,” claimed one opposition lawmaker as exit polls emerged Tuesday night. But while the prime minister is down, he’s not yet out. As pre-election polls had predicted, Netanyahu’s right-wing Likud party together with allied right-wing nationalist and religious parties fell well short of securing the 61 seats required for a parliamentary majority. But so did his principal opponent Benny Gantz, who leads the nominally centrist party Blue and White. With 91% of the votes counted, Blue and White had 32 seats, with Likud on 31. It remains to be seen which of the two leaders Israel’s President Reuven Rivlin, who occupies a largely ceremonial role, will ask to form a coalition.

Both, predictably, claimed they could. “In the next few days, we will begin negotiations to form a strong, Zionist government and in order to avert a dangerous, anti-Zionist government,” a weary-looking Netanyahu told supporters in the Likud headquarters late Tuesday night. In Tel Aviv, Gantz said his party would “act to form a broad unity government that will express the will of the people.”
With Israel now set for coalition negotiations, all options are on the table, including a third election. Here are some of the scenarios that might emerge in the coming weeks.

A “National Unity” Government

The most likely outcome, although it’s far from assured would be a so-called government of national unity, bringing together the two largest parties, and possibly others across the political spectrum. Gantz and secular nationalist party leader Avigdor Lieberman — who, as polls predicted, has emerged as a kingmaker — have both expressed their preference for a liberal national unity government. It would revolve around a partnership between Likud and centrist Blue and White, with or without Lieberman’s party, Yisrael Beiteinu.

There are several obstacles: the largest being Gantz’s vow not to sit in a government with Netanyahu, citing three looming corruption charges on which Israel’s attorney general has said he would indict Netanyahu, pending a hearing. Over the coming weeks, Netanyahu is expected to pull out all the stops to persuade Gantz to rescind on his promise. On Wednesday evening, a senior member of Likud said the door was open for negotiations with Gantz, provided he drop his demand for the party to abandon Netanyahu.
Likud jettisoning Netanyahu is a remote possibility but there is unlikely to be any talk of a putsch until the implications of the election results are clearer. For now, the party Netanyahu has molded in his image has vowed to stick with its leader.
Political deadlock and a third election.

Israel’s President Reuven Rivlin will soon decide whether to give Gantz or Netanyahu the first shot at forming a government. Given the latter’s failure to do so in May, and Blue and White’s marginal lead at the latest count, Gantz seems the likelier bet, Israel’s Haaretz suggests. Whoever is given the mandate would have 28 days to form a government, with the option to ask for a short extension. … [To read the full article, click the following LINK – Ed.]
______________________________________________________

A Framework For European-Russian Cooperation In Syria
Julien Barnes-Dacey 
European Council on Foreign Relations, June 17, 2019

After more than eight years of conflict in Syria, it is now clear that there won’t be a near-term political transition away from Bashar al-Assad. This is a reality that Europeans, by and large, now accept. This does not mean, however, that Europeans are prepared to re-engage with Syria’s new landscape without conditions. On the contrary, European policy remains focused on the need to secure still meaningful gains and European tools, including sanctions, reconstruction funding and any political legitimation remain tied to this end. Key European governments continue to hope that these cards can be used to extract compromises out of Damascus.

For some European governments the path to possible progress also depends on Russia, which is seen as being the only player that can force Assad to shift position. But while European officials are encouraged by recent US-Russian re-engagement on Syria, they remain cautious about what Moscow is willing to deliver. Until Europeans see some movement from Moscow towards delivering tangible progress on the ground, they will continue to believe that there is no justifiable reason to soften their position. There is some belief that Russia will only act once the costly burden of the longer-term management of Syria becomes more apparent, increasing Russia’s desire to lock in European financial and political support.

To this backdrop, it remains hard to envisage space to forge a middle ground position which could still shape more constructive European-Russian cooperation in Syria. But while hope for progress is slim, it may be possible to outline the contours of an arrangement that could still prove mutually beneficial, delivering both ground improvements sought by Europeans and the European engagement sought by Russia. Ultimately, though, this pathway can only move forward if both sides shift position, accepting an outcome that delivers less than they currently seek.

Shared European-Russian interests in Syria?
Europeans believe that they share a number of key interests with Russia in Syria. Most fundamentally, the two are seen as wanting to secure stability, one that ensures that Syria is not a source of ongoing regional instability and terrorism threats that could impact both Europe and Russia. This necessitates the sustained defeat of ISIS and the closing down of space for other similar groups to emerge. For Europeans, the desire to secure a stable Syria is linked to the possibility of seeing Syrian refugees return home, from both within the region but also European states (though there is less domestic political pressure on this issue within Europe than Russia appears to believe). This is an outcome that Russia claims to support. Finally, there seems to be some shared desire to decrease Iranian influence in Syria, albeit in a more managed, diplomatically engaged and less zero-sum fashion that is now being advanced by the US administration.

If these broad principles are shared, there are nonetheless deep and critical differences over the mutual interpretation of meaningful stability. Europeans have no confidence that the Assad order – as it is currently being reconstituted – can secure real stability able to guarantee European interests. Whereas Russia appears to be betting on the Assad-led Syrian government to recement stability, Europeans see the current system as the fundamental source of ongoing instability. Assad’s ruthless ongoing policies towards detainees and returnees are seen as prime examples, with current government policies likely to feed ongoing polarisation and block any pathway to national reconciliation.

While most Europeans have given up on insisting on Assad’s departure, they broadly share the belief that the Syrian government has to change approach and establish a new national contract capable of holding the population together. This process could conceivably be led by Damascus, though few have any confidence in Assad, needs to be meaningful and institutionalized in a fashion that has hitherto wholly not been the case. … [To read the full article, click the following LINK – Ed.]

Netanyahu Calls on Rival Gantz to Form National Unity Government:  Ariel Kahana, Yori Yalon,  et al., Israel Hayom, Sept. 19, 2019 —

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Thursday morning there was no chance he could form a right-wing government after Israel’s deadlocked election and called on his main rival, Blue and White Leader Benny Gantz, to join him in a broad, unity coalition.

Who Is Benny Gantz, Israel’s Potential Next Prime Minister?:  Aiden Pink, The Forward, Sept. 18, 2019 —

Gantz was marked for greatness at a young age, but was an unexpected choice to be IDF chief of staff, much less run the country.

IsraelVotes2019 (2) | What Should be the Priorities for the New Government?:  Yossi Kupperwasser, Fathom Journal, Sept 2019 ––

Governing is first and foremost about prioritising, so when Israelis go to the polls again they are in fact choosing between priorities – a product of ideology, values, capabilities, challenges, political constraints and leadership.