Eisenkot, Realize Jabotinsky’s Dream!

In his final book, The Jewish War Front (London: George Allen and Unwin, 1940), Vladimir Jabotinsky described the constitution of a future Jewish State in Israel:

In every Cabinet where the Prime Minister is a Jew, the vice-premiership shall be offered to an Arab, and vice-versa. Proportional sharing by Jews and Arabs both in the charges and in the benefits of the State shall be the rule with regard to Parliamentary elections, civil and military service, and budgetary grants.

In his own account, this vision of Jewish-Arab power sharing in the Jewish State was not that of moderates, but of the “extremist wing of Zionism.” Jabotinsky, indeed, was so far to the right that David Ben-Gurion, with a proto-Trumpian penchant for nicknames, termed him “Vladimir Hitler.” Yet, even after his famous “Iron Wall” speech, Jabotinsky believed in power-sharing by Jews and Arabs, at least by those who recognized the State’s existence as an unshakeable iron wall.

The time has come to realize Jabotinsky’s dream and Eisenkot, the meanest, toughest general of perhaps all Israel’s history is the man to do it. History will not long remember an Eisenkot who gave into Netanyahu’s demand to exclude Arab voters (though not, apparently Qatari funders). But it will remember an audacious decision to bring Arab parties into the fold. The Arab Israeli populace has spoken resoundingly after October 7: they are Israelis and want a larger role in government. Jabotinsky’s iron wall has landed. Now it is time to realize Jabotinsky’s democratic ideals.

Jabotinsky’s democratic ideals focused on Supremacy of Law, promoted an independent judiciary, and sought to keep in check the overreach of an elected parliament. All of these have come under attack in the last four years. Many supporters of the erosion of democracy spent the election day chanting, “Bibi, King of Israel,” a not-so-subtle indication of which direction they thought we should head.

It was Don Isaac Abarbanel, so beloved to Benzion Netanyahu, who noticed the seeming incongruity of Deuteronomy 17:14. There, the Bible says, “When thou art come unto the land,” you, i.e., the people of Israel, ask for a king to rule over you. Abarbanel saw republic governance as the ideal and suggested repeatedly that Biblical Israel resembled the Republic of Venice or Genoa at the time. In his view, the request for a king is a request for a worse and weaker form of governance. According to his reading of Deuteronomy 17:14, the request for a king comes after the Israelites enter Israel, conquer the land, and realize their state. That is, it comes after their shows of strength and success, of the kind realizable by republics, that the Israelites become deluded into thinking that they will be stronger under a king. In appointing a king, the Israelites become weaker and, in his view, end up destroying the very nation they sought to make stronger.

Perhaps prophetically, modern Israel’s greatest days were with the strength (and wealth) of a democracy. Modern democracy, with its more robust system of checks and balances, has brought greater wealth and strength to Israel than Israel’s founders ever thought imaginable. To turn away from that now, would be disastrous. Now is the time to be more democratic!

It is time for Eisenkot to act – to act for Jabotinsky, for Abarbanel, for Benzion Netanyahu, and, most importantly, for Israel!