The assassination of Yitzhak Rabin exposed a series of fundamental flaws in this country's democracy that have scarcely been diagnosed - let alone rectified - since that terrible Saturday night 14 years ago. Democratic societies are based on self-restraint, on their capacity to internalize the essential principle that freedom is all about setting boundaries which recognize diversity and enable disagreement within commonly accepted rules of the game. These limits have never been clearly defined here in the past; they are even more ambiguous today. Unless a concerted effort is made to demarcate these normative frontiers, Israelis will find themselves irretrievably caught between various forms of anarchy and centralized control.

Police Chief Inspector General David Cohen.
Photo: Ariel Jerozolimski

The events leading up to the slaying of the prime minister on November 4, 1995 highlighted three critical areas of ongoing democratic malfunctioning. The first - and most obvious - has been the persistent inability to distinguish between freedom of speech and incitement. The former is the bedrock of democratic life; it acknowledges the validity of differences of opinion and assures their free expression. The latter wreaks havoc and disorder by directly attacking either specific individuals or groups and encouraging their delegitimation.

ISRAELI POLITICS has always been contentious. Since 1967 - and most decidedly after 1973 - it has been defined by deep divisions, especially on issues of peace and security. The Oslo Accords undoubtedly magnified these schisms. But opposition turned into incitement when Rabin was repeatedly targeted as a criminal and a traitor, when it was suggested that such betrayal could not go unpunished and when these messages were reiterated through a variety of means (including demonstrations, vigils, petitions, sit-ins, religious excommunication and continuous harangues). It was only a matter of time before a Yigal Amir (cultivated by this ugly climate and not its wild weed) would surface to take things into his own hands. Rabin paid for this relentless incitement with his life.

The dangers of incitement, however, have not diminished since. Not only has little effort been made to deal with obvious instances of personalized political assaults or to contain even the most blatant verbal lashings of particular groups, but these have been given official sanction. The most notable example is the continuous, now vicious, denunciation of the Arab citizens of Israel as a collective and of their elected leaders in particular. When an entire group is branded as a fifth column, it is hardly surprising that Arab businesses are shunned or that non-Jewish citizens are discriminated against with abandon. When Avigdor Lieberman and his party, a key member of the governing coalition, hammer away at their loyalty, it is inevitable that hotheads will translate this message into action by engaging in harassment and sporadic acts of violence.

Once such a pattern of incitement is left unchecked, it spills over to other groups as well. Peace movements and activists have been a favorite target: The bombing of Prof. Ze'ev Sternhell's home, Moshe Ya'alon's depiction of Peace Now as a virus and Ambassador Michael Oren's innuendo that J Street is promoting positions that are not in Israel's interest are just three recent examples. Lately, Jews from Ethiopia have been the object of similar slurs. And Interior Minister Eli Yishai's statements about foreign workers fuel that kind of xenophobia which can engender untold harm.

Unharnessed incitement breeds counter-incitement as well. Sheikh Ra'ed Salah's call against Israeli activities in Jerusalem has the very same characteristics as that meted out to his followers: It is directed against a specific group (Jews), it implies the need for action and it is repeated interminably.

Although incitement - of whatever sort - often goes untreated, freedom of speech has been increasing muzzled. Voices of dissent, again with government backing, have not only been denounced (totally legitimate in Israel's rough and tumble politics), but attempts have been made to quell them entirely. This was the case with Breaking the Silence and is now the lot of many other human rights groups as well. Thus, because no boundaries have been drawn, incitement has grown and free expression is being curtailed.

THE SECOND major element of democratic dysfunction accentuated by the Rabin assassination has been the incapacity to navigate the lines of separation between freedom of association and insurrection. The right of citizens to organize and pursue their joint interests is the cornerstone of democratic politics; when this collective action undermines the common good, it yields rebellion. Most of the groups that rallied to protest the Oslo 2 agreements were exercising their civil rights; some crossed the line to openly defy the government's authority by calling for disobedience while refusing to accept the legal consequences of their actions.

The seeds of insurrection laid down in the 1990s have gained traction in recent years. The soft-pedaling of the defiance campaign against the Gaza disengagement was the precursor to the indulgence of the settler bands who roam the West Bank and create chaos at will. Here too, an ethic of frequently violent noncompliance on matters related to the conflict spill over to domestic matters as well. The outbursts of haredi rioting in Jerusalem in the past few months constitute, by any measure, organized acts of rebellion which defy the rule of law and make a mockery of its enforcers. Governmental reluctance to rein in these manifestations of insurrection for political reasons merely reinforces the phenomenon and exacerbates its ramifications.

Ironically, while serious challenges to state legitimacy are condoned, freedom of association is often denied under the guise of protecting the public order. Thus, the protests around the separation wall - especially in Bil'in and Naal'in - have turned into foci of violent confrontation on a weekly basis. Without a precise demarcation between freedom of association and insurrection, the one suffers while the other is getting out of hand.