 |
| What are the chances that Olmert is unable form a government and Peretz becomes prime minister? Go Amir!!!! |
Lois
Cambridge, England |
|
| Jerrold Kessel and Pierre Klochendler: |
| To you, as a Labour supporter, the only words of encouragement we can offer is that perhaps you are TWO elections ahead. True enough, though Peretz has done well to survive to fight another election day. Two things can't be taken away from him -- he's instilled a new self-belief in a party which for the past five years has been like a dead man walking, and he's managed to help hoist the social flag high on the national agenda -- something which Labour has not been able to do since '67. |
|
 |
|
|
| Considering Yisrael Beiteinu's showing, do you think Likud has become completely irrelevant as the mainstream rightist party? |
Moti
New York, USA |
|
| Jerrold Kessel and Pierre Klochendler: |
| Yes -- in its present constellation, absolutely. Kadima has replaced the Likud, though a big question remains what does Lieberman with his votes. If he doesn?t use them wisely (either in government or in opposition) he too will become a passing phenomenon. Shinui, after all, also won a handsome 14 seats only three years ago. After imploding, they have entirely disappeared from the political firmament. |
|
|
|
|
| Does Kadima's less than promising showing in the exit polls mean there is more chance that Lieberman will join the coalition? |
Susie Malone
Birmingham, United Kingdom |
|
| Jerrold Kessel and Pierre Klochendler: |
| Only as a very last resort for Olmert, unless Lieberman is prepared to come cap in hand to Kadima. Pointedly, however, that is not his style. |
|
|
|
|
| Do you think that the results - as reflected in the exit polls - are an endorsement of Ehud Olmert's West Bank withdrawal plan? |
Harry
Jerusalem, Israel |
|
| Jerrold Kessel and Pierre Klochendler: |
| Yes and No. You would have thought -- as many pundits posited it -- that it would be a referendum post withdrawal from Gaza and pre further withdrawals on the West Bank. But it seems that for the voters themselves -- disengagement, at least as a philosophy, had been accepted as a fait accompli. They were both behind the separation idea and already an "election ahead" ? already addressing social and economic issues and taking literally already now the meaning that Olmert has attached to further withdrawals -- namely that Israel will turn inward (behind "secure borders") to grapple with the agenda of "what kind of Israel do we want?" |
|
|
|
|
| Assuming a center/left coalition is formed with Kadima, Labor, Shas, and the retired folks, how strong a government do you predict? What points can create fissures over the next four years which may see yet another, almost predictable, early elections? |
David Baird
Haifa, Israel |
|
| Jerrold Kessel and Pierre Klochendler: |
A reasonably stable and cohesive coalition, built as it will be around fundamental social and economic principles. The election result holds out the promise that, for the first time, an Israeli government may be able to do what Moshe Dayan called the impossible task of hoisting both "the security flag" and the "social flag" at one and the same time.
Some difficulties may emerge in implementing the disengagement from parts of the West Bank but if this is a coalition which has already won popular backing by its social programme, it's conceivable that Olmert could lead Israel down the separation path as well. In point of fact, separation and stabilizing the conflict with the Palestinians could become a necessary ingredient in being able to carry out those social and economic policies which the junior coalition partners will demand. |
|
|
|
|
| Does the Pensioners Party have a platform? Is it only concerned with domestic/economic/welfare issues? What position does it hold with respect to the "Peace Process" and unilateral withdrawal of parts of the the West Bank? |
Rabbi James A. Gibson
Pittsburgh, PA, USA |
|
| Jerrold Kessel and Pierre Klochendler: |
Its primary concern is for the rights and social status of senior citizens, people who were perhaps hardest hit of all by the economic "reforms" of recent years and who want to see reversed the erosion of their often parlous economic condition caused by the ultra-liberal economic policies of Bibi Netanyahu.
But in broader terms they look for the restoration of compassion into Israeli life -- a major past element in Israeli life, but one which has seemed to go increasingly by the board in recent years. Which perhaps explains why most people -- across the board-- seem to be rejoicing in their unprecedented success. After all, doesn't everyone wants their parents to be well looked after?
If Kadima is willing to respond positively to this national demand as advanced by the seniors party, then they could become a most amenable coalition partner -- and perhaps cause few problems for Olmert, and indeed match his cause of carrying through a broader strategic objective-- for Israel to turn in on itself and to re-shape the priorities of the society behind "secure borders". A place, one might be tempted to say, as Olmert said only a couple of weeks ago, which it will be "fun" to live in. Even if you are of advanced years...
Come to think of it -- who more naturally would answer the Olmert call for a re-ordering of priorities and a re-focusing of Israel on itself than people who were perfectly aware of what Israel was like before the start of the occupation in 1967, the people who built an Israel where compassion was a byword. In short, what a wonderful protest vote! |
|
|
|
|
What is the ideology of the pensioners' party. Is it leaning to the left or to the right?
Also, do you think the settler movement has suffered a defeat? |
Khalid Amayreh
Hebron, Palestine |
|
| Jerrold Kessel and Pierre Klochendler: |
The ideology of the Pensioners Party, its political positions on such core issues as Olmert's disengagement from the Palestinians
are a big mystery -- to say the least. Having said that, they will surely be a comfortable coalition partner both for Kadima and for Labor. Neither Left nor Right, they are first and foremost "social".
The pensioners are indeed waving the social flag. In a country which finds it difficult, if not impossible, to wave both the security and the social flag, the Pensioners might be the harbingers of Israeli politics of the future, the avant-garde of what the next elections will be fought about -- once the Kadima "way" has been implemented. If Kadima's policy preceded the election result, the Pensioners are a step ahead of Kadima's policy.
Indications are that many youngsters in fact voted for the party of their elders. Where pundits are wrong is in contending that Israeli democracy is facing an unprecedented crisis, a loss of "the way." Gradually, there was a growing sense that Israel had lost its compassion for the weaker elements of its society.
The party of the Pensioners is establishing compassion as an incremental element of Israeli politics -- something which Amir Peretz has also tried to instill. The seniors have succeeded --dramatically.
The settler movement had already suffered a major defeat with the ending of the 38-year Gaza occupation and this is indeed a second blow. |
|
|
|
|
| Based on the exit polls, what coalition do you expect? |
Jon
Petah Tikva, israel |
|
| Jerrold Kessel and Pierre Klochendler: |
| Kadima joined by in this order : Pensioners, Labor, United Torah Front and perhaps (but only at a later stage) Shas. |
|
|
|
|
| Do you think a "Right" (Likud, NU-NRP, Shas, UTJ, and Israel Our Home) block would be workable even if it got 61 seats? |
Dan Aronowitz
Berlin, Germany |
|
| Jerrold Kessel and Pierre Klochendler: |
| According to the exit poll on Israeli public television and according to the phone polls on israeli other TV channels, it seems a rightwing coalition composed of the bloc which you mention is not a practical political option. |
|
|
|
|
| What parties do you expect to get seats outside of the big three? Which will likely be invited into a coalition? |
Dave
Dayton, United States |
|
| Jerrold Kessel and Pierre Klochendler: |
| Now that exit polls are out, we know which of the parties are "the big three" - that is the three main parties which can join forces in a coalition with Ehud Olmert's Kadima: Labor, possibly both ultra-Orthodox parties (Shas and United Torah Judaism), the Pensioners (the great surprise of those exit polls which got 8 potential seats according to Israeli public TV - a first in Israel's annals) backed up by a Meretz safety net outside the coalition. But this coalition is not made of natural allies. The ultra-Orthodox parties could balk at any disengagement from the West Bank which is at the core of the Kadima political programme. And the Pensioners are a huge political enigma since they are basically a-political. Now regarding the big third --Avigdor Lieberman's Israel Beitenu - Olmert said last week that a prospective coalition under his command would not include parties which oppose Kadima's disengagement programme. Now with a thinner Kadima than predicted, who knows? |
|
|
|
|
When do polls close, and when will preliminary results be announced?
Thanks |
Alain
US, US |
|
| Jerrold Kessel and Pierre Klochendler: |
In 75 minutes from now at 10 p.m. Israeli time. Immediately, there will be an exit poll (conducted by israeli public television) which is normally a fairly reliable pointer. There are also two other regular phone polls conducted for the other major TV stations so we will, at that time, have an inkling of where things are going. The actual results start coming in two hours later and the pollsters say they can provide a good comparison between their projections and real partial results by around 2.30- 3.a.m.
[But let's not forget in the dramatic Netanyahu-Peres race of 1996 it went right down to the wire through the night and only at noon the next day was it clear that Bibi had won by just 29,000 votes. So always exercise caution -- and don't let the pollsters, and even us pundits, convince you that they're giving you "the gospel truth".] |
|
|
|
|
| do u think the "russian" vote may seriously influence tonite's results , considering rumors about unexpected success of mr Liberman's party ? |
Henri
Hod Hasharon, IL |
|
| Jerrold Kessel and Pierre Klochendler: |
You were right in your predictions (as it seems you posed your question before the exit polls came out). Avigdor Lieberman's Israel Beitenu - a party assumed to have attracted many immigrants from Russia - will have between 12 and 14 seats in the new Knesset, according to the exit polls. Together with the Pensioners, Lieberman's party constitutes the after shock of the Big Bang ignited by the creation of Kadima. The party of Lieberman is also a party of disenchanted Israelis who would have voted for Sharon - would he still be at the helm - more than for the party he created. Tonight is the proof that the "Kadima way" does not appeal to Lieberman's voters.
On one hand, Israel Beitenu attracted people who would have voted for Kadima led by Sharon; on the other, it attracted disgruntled traditional Likud voters. |
|
|
|
|
| In all of this there is no mention of the one coalition partner that Kadima will need to pull off the task of setting a border on the basis of the separation barrier i.e. The United States. Is this omission by accident or design ? |
Albert Gregorio
rochester, new york, United States |
|
| Jerrold Kessel and Pierre Klochendler: |
| You've got a point but this is post-election business. Still, Olmert is clearly aware of the need to coordinate his intended strategy with Washington; he made a point of saying only a few days ago that the fixing, unilaterally, of Israel's "borders" would come after consultation with the US. This was perhaps Sharon's strongest strategic asset as he pushed on with the Gaza disengagement -- that he had managed to convince the US of the merit of his approach. His alliance with the US was actually strengthened before he spelt out his strategy in December 2004. |
|
|
|
|
| Will an eventual coalition of Kadimah, Avodah and Likud finally bring the civil marriage to Israel? I believe Israel is the last Western country without a civil marriage and it causes problems to so many people, especially to women who do not receive a "get". |
Paul Henzen
Rhenen, The Netherlands |
|
| Jerrold Kessel and Pierre Klochendler: |
| The chance of the Likud joining a Kadima-led coalition with Labour is only slightly less of a prospect than civil marriage being introduced any time soon in Israel. That being said, there is a growing recognition among non-religious parties for some sort of "civil contract" arrangement between partners and this, given certain coalition constellations, may become a reality. MAY! |
|
|
|
|
| According to a report in today's Globe and Mail, only 600,000 of Israel's Arab citizens are eligible to vote. Is this number correct? How many Israeli Arabs are NOT allowed to vote, and why? |
Emma Jo
Toronto, Canada |
|
| Jerrold Kessel and Pierre Klochendler: |
All Israeli Arab citizens are eligible to vote. They constitute about 17% of voters. Perhaps the confusion is over east Jerusalem Palestinians who may hold an Israeli identity card but who have not opted for Israeli citizenship and can thus only vote in municipal elections, something which they have generally been loathe to do.
This being said, with regard to the Arab Israeli community, there is an ongoing internal debate within the community whether they should in fact participate in Knesset elections. The majority says yes, but this time it could be that the national disenchantment (for other reasons) with the political scene has also affected the traditional strong turn-out of Arab voters. |
|
|
|
|
| Is it still possible that Kadima could lose? |
rachel
nyc, us |
|
| Jerrold Kessel and Pierre Klochendler: |
You know what Alice said behind The Looking Glass -- "Curiouser and Curiouser". Apart from being one of the most fateful elections in Israel's annals, this has also been the most curious election ever. But "Kadima losing" would really be "Ehud in Wonderland". Losing in practical terms can be a relative matter. Any result which does not enable Olmert to put together a workable "disengagement" coalition would be tantamout to losing.
There's just an hour and 20 minutes to go and who knows, maybe the "absentee" vote may yet throw up a whole lot of surprises. So stay glued to your screen -- this could still be very exciting politics! |
|
|
|
|
| In a small country where each vote counts for relatively so much, and where exisential issues are so intense, and where this election is widely seen as a verdict on the overwhelming past Sharon legacy and future Kadima program, and so an election which could both reshape basic Israeli political party alignments and chart Israel's course in the conflict for many years to come, what were Israelis possibly thinking to make their turnout such so low? |
James Adler
Cambridge, Mass., USA |
|
| Jerrold Kessel and Pierre Klochendler: |
| Indeed, this was a fateful election, an election from which Israeli voters, prodded by the Kadima way of disengaging unilaterally from the Palestinians, literally disengaged from the election itself, as if disengagement was a fait accompli. Israelis may have voted an election ahead of time. Some succumbed to the contention that this election was, as Olmert indeed declared it already 10 days ago, "a done deal". In the past, the choice facing the Israeli voters was easily discernable -- "for" or "against" peace. This time (as it is for the Israeli media, busy puzzling "what, after all, was this election all about?") the essence of theelection was crystal clear -- for or against separation. But Israelis voted for the "normal" things from the normative realm of a western democracy -- the widespread trashing of politicians ("they?re all the same"), the wholesale disengagement...from politics, one-issue parties like the party of the Pensioners garnering surprising support. In a sense, many Israeli voters already turned inward on their social issues, preceding the implementing by Kadima of Israel's big turn inward on policy -- the prospective unilateral separation from the Palestinians. |
|
|
|
|
| What kind of coalition do you foresee being set up should Kadima win the elections? What would it take to hurry along a new election in the near future? |
Hank Schwartzman
Detroit, United States of America |
|
| Jerrold Kessel and Pierre Klochendler: |
| Ideally in Olmert's best of coalition worlds, any party which will not impede on the disengagement plan. He said it bluntly a short while ago: "we had enough with the Likud rebels." So, his "dream team" would include Labor and bolstered perhaps by one or both ultra-Orthodox parties (Torah United Front and/or Shas) backed up from OUTSIDE his coalition -- by Meretz and the Arab parties as safety net. If he cannot muster such a coalition around his policy, then we're back into the ante-Kadima instability and rebellion -- only with a major difference, without the might of Ariel Sharon and mighty popularity with the Israeli people. |
|
|
|
|
| Considering both leftist and rightist opposition to unilateral withdrawal (rightists for a political decision affecting them being made without their consent, leftists for an international decision being made without international negotiations), could the simple action of negotiation be considered an appropriate compromise in appeasing both sides? What would this kind of negotiation look like? |
Liat
Brooklyn, New York, USA |
|
| Jerrold Kessel and Pierre Klochendler: |
| "Simple negotiations?" "Appeasing both sides?" Both Right and Left tried negotiations -- with various levels of sincerity and success. That's precisely why we're in this unilateral ballgame:You don't need a partner, you don't need concessions and you don't need reciprocity. Negotiations translates in Hebrew literally as "give-and-take". Remember, according to the unilateralist approach, the act of giving has always to be balanced with the act of taking and those on the receiving end (in this case the Palestinians) will demand that you give more, just as those on the giving end (on the Israeli side) will demand that you get more. It may a sombre reality for would-be peace-makers and backers of immediate co-existence, but it is the new reality. Actually, it could be said that Israel "gave" the Palestinians more (the dismantling of the Gaza settlements and the end of occupation there) when they ignored them. It may be that Israelis feel more secure (a big component of any future relationship with the Palestinians) when they are the ones deciding. |
|
|
|
|
| Olmert is talking about secure borders. Has he said anything about the status of Hebron and keeping the Temple Mount under Jewish control? |
Martin
Stockholm, Sweden |
|
| Jerrold Kessel and Pierre Klochendler: |
a)Re: Hebron -- Olmert has been deliberately silent. It would be a hot potato saying that it might be excluded from prospective "permanent self-defined borders". It would really galvanize opposition from the Right and from potential religious coalition partners. But notably the Jewish settlement in Hebron and the settlement suburb of Kiryat Arba are beyond the separation wall/security fence/barrier. So, down the line...?
b) Re Temple Mount, what Moslems call the Nobel Sanctuary (Haram el-Sharif) -- not even under the wildest consideration from Olmert (unlike when PM Ehud Barak made his tentative Camp David proposals where various "thoughts" about sharing the holy mountain were being broached. |
|
|
|
|
This question is for Mr Kessel.
During your tenure as CNN correspondent in Israel, you enraged people both on the right and the left of the Israeli political spectrum by your biased reporting in favor of the Arabs living in Shomron, Yehuda and Gaza. Was this because you are a self hating Jew or were you just trying to be more Catholic than the Pope? |
Shmuel
Raanana, Israel |
|
| Jerrold Kessel and Pierre Klochendler: |
| Neither really. Then as now, just trying to describe, and to understand, the situation as it appears to be, pretty or ugly. |
|
|
|
|
| I keep hearing about low voter turnout. Why aren't people voting about such an important issue as withdrawal from the West Bank? Don't they care? |
Mary
Connecticut, USA |
|
| Jerrold Kessel and Pierre Klochendler: |
| One of the mysteries of this election! Good question, indeed. One charitable answer might be that the majority of Israelis have already decided that they want disengagement from the Palestinians to happen, yet somehow they haven?t made a connection with their need to entrench this in the political system. Many are simply so disenchanted with past policies which had aroused their hopes and then dashed them. In any event, yes, way too many have simply lost faith in the political system, and that is a disturbing new development for Israel |
|
|
|
|
| Considering what's happening in Iraq, Bush's campaign to help DP World manage 6 U.S ports and the clandestine diplomacy that's taking place b/w Washington and Tehran... can one come to the conclusion that U.S and Israel relationship is at a cross roads? |
Rasheed
columbus, U.S.A |
|
| Jerrold Kessel and Pierre Klochendler: |
Brief response to a complex question.
But, bottom line, no we don't believe Israel and the US are about to part ways (as you seem to suggest might happen). Fundamentally, because Washington (or, at least, the Bush Administration) has since 9/11 signed on whole- heartedly to what was a basic Sharon (Israeli) doctrine -- that pre-emptive action goes a long way to handling difficult security challenges.
Early in 2002 -- a year before the invasion of Iraq -- the US laid down pre-emption as a core principle of its strategy. Again, now in 2006, the US has re-endorsed that strategy --though in truth it may not always translate (as it did in Iraq) to military action. For several years now, under Sharon and Bush, pre-emtption has been the glue of the relationship between the two countries. Olmert will not disrupt this. (You could even posit his disengagement commitment as pre-emptive). |
|
|
|
|
| What will Olmert have to promise prospective coalition partners to get them to join his government? (Should he win of course) |
Helen
Liverpool, U.K. |
|
| Jerrold Kessel and Pierre Klochendler: |
| We?ll be in a better position to know that in just a few hours from now when the exit poll (normally reliable) prediction is made at 22.00 Israel time. As always in Israel, there will be coalition bargaining but it very much depends on what kind of dominance Kadima has over potential partners. The underlying principle which will probably guide Olmert is how much support he can expect from any particular partner to carry through his promises of further unilateral withdrawal. He may certainly have to compromise ? say with the Orthodox parties -- but in his ideal world he?ll first be looking for unconditional support on that issue. |
|
|
|
|
| Can a Kadima which is a virtual political Party, with no history, no members, no apperatus, lead a country as complicated as Israel. |
michael schwartz
mevaseret zion, israel |
|
| Jerrold Kessel and Pierre Klochendler: |
| Absolutely yes! Simply because Kadima is not(or is not yet) so much a political party as a "policy" -a policy of separation, of disengaging Israel from the Palestinians. This is what the majority of Israeli voters in fact want. In the past, would-be Israeli center parties have been about bridging the so-called divide between right and left, between a policy of accomodation or confrontation with the Palestinians. Kadima can survive and even flourish if it indeed goes ahead and implements its pre-election "separation" promise. |
|
|
|
|
