Quite frequently, Israel’s opposition parties are criticized for concentrating too heavily on the “Just Not Bibi” (JNB) slogan, rather than on specific policy issues on which they believe that the current government is fundamentally wrong or ineffective.
The problem seems to be that since the opposition is made up of a medley of groups – from various Arab parties to Jewish parties from the conservative to liberal right, through the liberal center to the social-democratic and social-liberal left – there is much more that unites them around the JNB slogan than around a programmatic agenda.
Most of the opinion polls show that if elections were held today, the current Jewish opposition parties would receive more votes than the current coalition parties.
This coalition is made up of the Likud, which has turned into a populist right-wing party; two extreme national-religious parties – one Kahanist and one Messianic – and three haredi (ultra-Orthodox) parties, currently focused on resisting full integration into Israeli society, particularly regarding their military duties, education systems, and participation in the workforce.
However, the Jewish opposition seems unable to garner a clear governing majority of at least 61 MKs, which would enable it to form a government without relying on the Arab parties.
There are those who suggest that in order to change this reality, today’s Jewish opposition parties will have to do more than just repeat the JNB slogan.
This slogan is based on several premises.
The first is that Netanyahu has been in power for far too long and is assuming too many authoritarian characteristics in his general attitude and modus operandi. Altogether, he has been in power for over 17 years between 1996 and today.
However, over the years, Netanyahu has acted as if the premiership is his natural and rightful place.
Especially during his current term in office, staying in power appears to be his main motivating force, which has made him willing to tolerate most of the whims and demands of his coalition partners, even if they do not tally with what he might believe is the good of the state or are sometimes inconsistent with legitimate right-wing policies.
In recent years it has also become apparent that Netanyahu is unwilling to take responsibility as prime minister for any failures that occurred during his premiership.
This includes the October 7 massacre and not doing everything possible to hasten the return of the live hostages in the months that followed.
He has also failed to set up an unbiased commission of inquiry to thoroughly investigate what went wrong before these events took place and who is responsible.
Instead, he places full blame on the various defense and security forces, all of whose former leaders have since retired.
Netanyahu not the same man he once was
There is no doubt that Netanyahu today is not the same man he once was. He has various ailments that are kept under wraps. He has aged and looks grey and tired most of the time.
Occasionally, he has been caught confusing facts (he even once referred to his son Avner as Avraham), adding to his age-long inclination of not being accurate and meticulous with his facts (to put things mildly).
All this relates to the justification of JNB sentiments. What must be added is the fact that the current government is probably the worst one Israel has ever had. It cannot be denied that it is made up of ministries, many of which are dysfunctional or functioning badly, and others that are simply superfluous.
Why does Israel need a Diaspora Affairs and Combating Antisemitism Ministry or a Regional Cooperation Ministry, side by side with a Foreign Affairs Ministry?
Why do we need a Settlements and National Missions Ministry (in territories that are not under Israeli sovereignty), a Heritage Ministry, and another of Jerusalem Affairs and Heritage?
Why are three ministries involved in unsuccessfully fighting against rising prices in the Israeli economy – the Finance Ministry, the Economy and Industry Ministry, and the Agriculture and Food Security Ministry – without there being a single agreed policy on how this should be done effectively and without collateral damage?
Who is responsible for Israel unilaterally changing the status quo between Jews and Muslims on the Temple Mount, which, since the Six Day War has been officially regulated by the Israeli government and the Muslim Waqf under the auspices of the Kingdom of Jordan?
It appears that the Israeli police, under the irregular (some would say illegal) tutelage of National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir from Otzma Yehudit, is responsible.
And who is responsible for the attacks by the so-called “Hilltop Youth,” in which Palestinian property in Judea and Samaria is destroyed, olive trees are chopped down, livestock is stolen or butchered, and Palestinian villagers are beaten and occasionally shot dead, all under the watchful eyes of the IDF, which does nothing to stop them?
Is perhaps Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, who also serves as “additional minister in the Defense Ministry,” responsible for Judea and Samaria? The purpose of this activity seems to be to transfer innocent Palestinians from their homes and lands, which is not a legitimate, official policy.
Part of the objectionable policies are not carried out underground but openly, such as Justice Minister Yariv Levin’s official policy to reshape Israel’s legal system by refusing to recognize the legally elected president of the Supreme Court, Justice Yitzhak Amit.
This prevents the election of new Supreme Court justices and judges of district and magistrates' courts and breaks down the system of effective government legal advisors, including the position of attorney-general.
It is not that Israel’s legal system does not need revamping, but the question is what should be changed and how?
The problem is that the opposition parties mention all these faults, and endless others, but fail to suggest alternative policies.
However, as they proved during the 2021- 2022 Government of Change, these parties – despite the ideological differences – are capable of establishing rules for making effective decisions under the circumstances.
The question remains whether they can reach such decisions today, while still in opposition.
The writer has written journalistic and academic articles, as well as several books, on international relations, Zionism, Israeli politics, and parliamentarism. From 1994 to 2010, she worked at the Knesset Library and the Knesset Research and Information Center.