Netanyahu brings Israel to the brink

Opinion editor's note: Editorials represent the opinions of the Star Tribune Editorial Board, which operates independently from the newsroom.

•••

Israel's Parliament has approved the first portion of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's highly controversial plan to curb the influence of Israel's Supreme Court.

Among the initial changes are limits on the Supreme Court's ability to overturn government decisions that the court might find "unreasonable in the extreme" — a designation that many in Netanyahu's governing coalition believe has been used to thwart an increasingly ideological constituency. Eventually, Netanyahu wants to pass legislation that would give elected lawmakers more say in selecting judges.

The Monday vote was 64-0. Not because there's unanimity in Israel, but because of the opposite: The nation is so riven over Netanyahu's proposal — as well as his unprecedentedly right-wing, nationalistic, religious governing coalition — that all 56 opposition lawmakers boycotted the vote.

The approval came after months of unprecedented protests in Israel against the judicial proposition, which could have far-reaching domestic and international implications. It could further complicate the already fraught — and lately, deadly — relations with Palestinians, as well as potentially creating a way for Netanyahu to avoid prosecution on charges of fraud, bribery and breach of trust.

Among the throngs taking to the streets are some who take to the skies: military reservists crucial to Israel's flying corps. More than 10,000 recruits have threatened to resign if the judicial plan passed. Some in security leadership positions have spoken out, too, reflecting the fact that this isn't just a left/right debate. Many consider it core, even existential, to maintaining Israel's democracy. On Saturday, for instance, 15 former army chiefs, police commissioners and intelligence agency chiefs accused Netanyahu of creating "serious damage" to national security.

The U.S. president has been prudent and diplomatic in expressing his concern with the Israeli prime minister, offering "judicious but straightforward counsel," national security adviser Jake Sullivan told reporters last week. It's not about the U.S. "dictating or lecturing," Sullivan continued. "It's about us believing deeply that the bedrock of our relationship is our common democratic values."

That's to be expected among allies, Israeli President Isaac Herzog said in an address to Congress last week. "I respect criticism, especially among friends, although one does not always have to accept it," he said. "But criticism of Israel must not cross the line into negation of the state of Israel's right to exist."

Criticism from a few Democratic representatives didn't negate Israel's existence, but wrongly labeled the entire country. Congressional Progressive Caucus leader Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., who called Israel a "racist state," later apologized, clarified her statement, and voted for a House resolution stating that, "Israel is not a racist or apartheid state; Congress rejects all forms of antisemitism and xenophobia; and the United States will always be a staunch partner and supporter of Israel."

Straightforward. At least for 412 representatives. Nine, however, voted "no," including Rep. Ilhan Omar, who represents Minnesota's Fifth District. Omar also had announced that there was "no way in hell" she'd attend Herzog's address. One of her Democratic colleagues, Rep. Betty McCollum of Minnesota's Fourth District, voted "present" to the resolution. (McCollum also skipped Herzog's appearance but said she would be "reading the transcript of the speech in its entirety to stay apprised of the issues raised.")

Both McCollum and Omar, as well as those casting the other eight "no" votes, were wrong about the resolution. It didn't preclude them from protesting Israel's policies or advocating for fairer treatment of Palestinians or rejecting Netanyahu's power grab. The resolution simply stated the shared democratic values Sullivan rightly identified as the "bedrock" of the U.S.-Israel relationship. Indeed, as Herzog himself said, criticism is respected, especially among friends, and despite the tensions in the bilateral relationship the U.S. and Israel are and should remain friends.

A better approach was deftly displayed by another Minnesota Democrat, Third District Rep. Dean Phillips. The congressman, who is Jewish, told KARE-11 that "it is not anti-Semitic to criticize the Israeli government's policies and in the case of Israel, I'm not pleased with the current government." However, he added, "There's a very big difference though in condemning the leader of a party of a government and an entire country and people. And that I think is the distinction."