READING THE polls published in the last weekend prior to the elections, I was worried about the swing to the left they augured. While my major concern was for Israel's future, I also didn't want my previous piece in The Jerusalem Report to become an object of ridicule. There I argued that Netanyahu surprisingly remained the man to beat and that his secret weapon was a media so partisanly determined to oust him that it unwittingly aroused empathy for the underdog and maligned standard bearer of Israeli nationalism and traditionalism. So I was doubly relieved when the actual results showed that the analysis had held up quite well. Equally gratifying was the fact that Netanyahu scored his most impressive electoral victory by unabashedly appealing to his core rightist constituency rather than opportunistically packaging himself as a centrist. The nearly total mobilization of the Israeli media to defeat Netanyahu produced professional lows in journalism in terms of fairness, etiquette and accuracy. Let me cite an example of each failing. Netanyahu's speech before both houses of congress was panned as an unmitigated disaster. To drive home this narrative, only US voices critical of Netanyahu were allowed entry by media gatekeepers. For example, Army Radio interviewed two veteran Bibi bashers, Tom Friedman of The New York Times and former ambassador Martin Indyk, when it did not lack for distinguished American journalists who justified Netanyahu's appearance and praised it. The media made a meal of the State Comptroller's report on the housing crisis, whose release was billed as a game changer. It was fair enough to criticize the Netanyahu government's performance, although the issue is complex and also involves a Bank of Israel zero interest policy that spikes demand for real estate investments and a tortuous housing approval process, including objections by environmental groups. But such complexities were considered distractions to the string up Bibi feeding fest. One TV in-house commentator brazenly claimed that Netanyahu by admitting governing failings resembled a convicted felon seeking a plea bargain and the public would pass the appropriate sentence on election day. Perhaps the most disgraceful show of partisanship came at the nationalist rally on the Sunday preceding the elections. Channel 10, the most strident anti-Bibi TV station, estimated the crowd at 10,000 – a quarter of the left's demonstration at the same venue eight days earlier. The Jerusalem Post by contrast put the count at 100,000. There was ample pictorial evidence supporting the Post's assessment. Health issues prevented my attendance but my wife and son were there and they reported a massive demonstration in which observant Jews mingled with the secular, contradicting the prevalent media narrative that only bused settlers showed up. Such credulity straining tactics helped fuel nationalist voter motivation. Some saw the election as a referendum on the peace issue. If so, the nationalist side's victory was even more pronounced. The peace issue was AWOL from the campaign. TV's First Channel documentary program “A Second Look” displayed unfeigned admiration for a group of women doggedly determined to resuscitate it. They frequented the various parties' parlor meetings and exploited question time to push the issue to the forefront. But they encountered reactions ranging from apathy to outright hostility. Yitzhak Herzog, who wrested the Labor chair from Shelly Yachimovich, had attacked her for ignoring the peace issue in the 2013 Knesset elections. But he ended up doing much the same. Meretz, the only party that continued to harp on it, limped back into the Knesset battered and bruised. Netanyahu faced with a glut of centrist parties, with even the hawkish Yisrael Beytenu leader Avigdor Liberman briefly appearing in centrist drag, had no option but to fight this election as a rightist Israeli nationalist. Gone were the ads featuring screeching doves and peace with security of the 1996 election. Netanyahu embraced Bayit Yehudi leader Naftali Bennett's position that the two-state solution was suicidal and rolled back his dovish Bar-Ilan speech. He had photo ops in Judea and Samaria and reestablished himself with his rightist base. It worked. Now we have to wait and see how attached Netanyahu proves to be to his old/new clothes. Contributor Amiel Ungar is also a columnist for the Hebrew weekly Besheva
Right-wing rally in Tel Aviv, March 15, 2015(photo credit: MARC ISRAEL SELLEM/THE JERUSALEM POST)