There’s no doubt that this is an unusual Israeli election. There are no real fights going on about how to deal with the Palestinians, nor about social welfare, and no one is even mentioning Iran.

The general consensus in Israel is that the outgoing government had us on the right track and was a good government, and this election is about whether the next government should focus either slightly more on this, or slightly more on that – issues it was already dealing with.

For now, the traditional Left-Right debate is irrelevant, simply because the majority of the nation understands the Left is as wrong about the Palestinians as they are about socialism.

And that’s why instead of the Left-Right debate, we have this massive infighting between political parties who are supposed to be on the same side.

This election is also significantly dirtier than any other I can recall in recent times, because it’s essentially internecine, with the parties not fighting over the undecided Center, but over their own existing shared voter base.

At JewishPress.com we’ve spent countless hours discussing the pros and cons of voting for each particular party, and for the purpose of transparency, we need to disclose that all the members of the staff have a relationship with one party or another, starting from our Likud Central Committee members, down to being friends, acquaintances and neighbors with the candidates and staff of HaBayit HaYehudi and Otmza L’Yisrael.

With Election Day tomorrow, in the office we face another unusual event, with the exception of our Likud Central Committee members, most of us are still undecided as to whom we plan to vote for. And the wavering is interesting, either Likud-Beytenu – HaBayit HaYehudi, HaBayit Hayehudi – Otzma L’Yisrael, and even Likud-Beytenu – Otzma L’Yisrael.

The success of each party carries with it, its own risks and benefits, and I hope to share with you some of the discussions that have made this election decision such a difficult one.

Likud-Beytenu

There’s almost no doubt that the Likud will be the largest individual party.

For the most part, it has an excellent list of prospective MKs. It is prepared to deal with the important national issues that this country faces such as Chareidi integration, electoral reform, and Iran.

With the exception (we’ll get to that) of the settlements, Netanyahu has been an excellent Prime Minister, he’s protected Israel’s interests, and there’s no doubt he’s qualified to continue leading the country.

A large Likud would give them the mandate to do what they want, and what needs to be done.

But there’s a definite downside.

First of all the Settlements.

We certainly can’t ignore that Netanyahu heavily invested in settlement infrastructure such as schools and roads, as well as upgrading Ariel University. And no established Jewish towns were evacuated in this last term.

But he’s had the settlements on a starvation diet when it comes to additional housing – something that would have also helped the country’s center too, by releasing a lot of the housing pressure.

Then there was the Settlement Freeze, and letting Ehud Barak have a free and violent hand in Judea and Samaria, and there is the still purposely unadopted Edmond Levy report. Netanyahu had political reasons to use the Jews of Judea and Samaria as pawns in the larger political game, but it’s still unpleasant to be a pawn.

There’s no reason to assume that under a new Netanyahu-led government it won’t be more of the same, especially if things change and the Palestinian issue becomes important again.

The threats and intimidation coming out of the Likud, that there will be negative ramifications if a significant number of Settler don’t vote Likud, aren’t helping them win over friends and voters either.

The second issue comes down to who will also be sitting in the coalition.

There’s little doubt that Yair Lapid’s Yesh Atid will be in, despite his left-wing, secularist views, or perhaps even because of them. He’s a comfortable partner for Netanyahu.

Kadima is likely to be there if they pass the threshold, and possibly even Tzipi Livni.

Numerically there won’t be a choice, particularly if Netanyahu doesn’t want the Chareidi parties in – which it seems he doesn’t.

The average of last week’s nine polls ( Dec 30 2012 – Jan 5 2012) (Channel 2/Yediot Achronot, Knesset Channel, Maariv, Yisrael Hayom, Haaretz, Walla, Reshet Bet, Jerusalem Post/Globes, Yisrael Post/Sof Shavua), with current Knesset seats in [brackets], and the average of the polls from two weeks ago in (brackets):

34.0 (34.8) [42] Likud Beitenu

17.1 (17.1) [08] Labor

14.5 (13.5) [05] Bayit Yehudi (Jewish Home/National Union)

10.5 (11.2) [10] Shas

9.5 (9.2) [07] Movement (Livni)

9.4 (9.5) [---] Yesh Atid

5.7 (6.1) [05] Yahadut Hatorah/UTJ

4.4 (4.3) [03] Meretz

4.0 (4.0) [04] Hadash

3.8 (4.1) [04] Ra’am-Ta’al

3.3 (2.6) [03] Balad

1.6 (1.4) [02] Strong Israel

1.1 (0.4) [21] Kadima

0.6 (1.0) [01] Am Shalem

—- (0.0) [05] Independence (No longer running)

67.1 (68.1) [65] Right-Religious 52.8 (51.8) [55] Center-Left-Arab Changes from week 12 to week 13: Movement passes Yesh Atid for 5th place.

Hadash passes Ra’am-Ta’al for 9th place.

Kadima passes Am Shalem for 13th place.

Largest Gains: Bayit Yehudi gained 1 seats and Kadima gained 0.7 of a seat. Biggest Losses: Likud Beitenu lost .8 of a seat and Shas lost 0.7 of a seat.

Visit Knesset Jeremy.

MK Aryeh Eldad (Strength to Israel) and Knesset candidate Moshe Feiglin (Likud) traded barbs today over ideological purity and compromise in politics.

Arutz Sheva reported Eldad as saying that Feiglin was “stuck in the Likud.”

“Feiglin is sentenced to a true moral dilemma, if he betrays his true principles and supports the Netanyahu government in ideological no-confidence votes he will lose all credit,” but if he votes for a no-confidence vote after the destruction of an outpost – which Eldad himself will submit – “he’ll be ejected from the Likud faction and become a faction of one.”

Feiglin responded on his facebook page slamming Eldad for not having popular support and implying that he lacks the influence that comes with being part of a larger, governing party.

“My friend Aryeh Eldad claims that I am stuck in by the Likud,” Feiglin wrote, “he has the freedom that a rabbit in a cage has, to do everything that it pleases and not to be concerned about anything. He is right – in the real Israeli arena it’s going to be very hard – but the public interest testifies to who here is stuck.”

Eldad recently broke away from the National Union before it merged with the Jewish Home party. He and his National Union colleague Michal Ben Ari formed the Strength to Israel party.

It is not clear whether the Strength to Israel party will get enough votes to break the vote threshold to get into the Knesset.

Feiglin recently won the 14th spot on the Likud’s Knesset list (prior to the merger with Yisrael Beitenu and is practically assured a spot in the Knesset.

His Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership) movement aims to to take over the Likud and lead the State of Israel.

As of late, however, Feiglin has taken on a much more conciliatory tone towards Likud chairman and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, saying that he supports Netanyahu for the leadership of the country.

MKs Aryeh Eldad and Michael Ben Ari are leaving the National Union party to set up “Power to Israel,” with a slogan that translates, roughly, “No Duties – No Rights.”

In third place in the list is right-wing activist Baruch Marzel, and in fourth place right-wing activist Aryeh King, known for his efforts to enhance Jewish settlement in East Jerusalem. In fifth place you’ll find Itamar Ben-Gvir, MK Ben-Ari’s media consultant.

Eldad and Ben-Ari announced their new party at a press conference in Jerusalem Tuesday morning.

MK Eldad, a renowned plastic surgeon who decided to devote his life to preventing the establishment of a Palestinian state, said at the conference: “We announce the establishment of a new Knesset faction, but you can’t talk politics without talking about southern Israel. At this hour, a million civilians are in shelters under the threat of missiles, while a government I can only describe as crazy continues to provide water and electricity to the Gaza Strip. This is one of the things we want to change as we stand as a new faction in the political arena. The lack of security in the south also reflects a picture of insecurity in central Israel. Terrorism threatens us from the outside, and the terror of illegal infiltrators threatens us from inside, and we will deal with both.”

Eldad described a vacuum on the right: “Liberman has joined Netanyahu and is now sitting in one list with Dan Meridor. Deri is dragging Shas to the left, to the Oslo days, and therefore there is a need for an ideological right-wing that will say things that have been forgotten: Without duties you cannot have Rights. The Land of Israel belongs to the people of Israel. The National Union is collapsing, this is no way to run a political system. We bless our colleagues, Ketzele and Uri Ariel, who are returning home to the NRP. We have no doubt that they will take care of the national-religious sector, but we have a different agenda.”

Eldad was referring to MKs Yaakov Katz and Uri Ariel, his partners in the now abandoned National Union faction, who will be running to the 19th Knesset on the Jewish Home list.

MK Uri Ariel attacked Eldad and Ben Ari’s decision in an interview on Arutz-7 (owned by his partner, Katz). “I’m very upset about this move,” he said. “We approached them and offered in writing to go together and lead the National Union to winning a lot of seats and to serve as an anchor for the Netanyahu government, but, unfortunately, they chose to split.”

MK Ariel warned that Eldad and Ben-Ari will not pass the threshold vote (about 2%) and end up causing great damage to the right and to Israel.

Michael Ben-Ari explained that his new party “means what it says, it’s not just talking, it’s doing. We will join the coalition not for positions or budgets, but only for the implementation of the principles that will add power to the State of Israel. We represent loyalty to the people of Israel.”

As an example of wrongdoing, Ben-Ari added: “MK Benny Begin just boasted of transferring funds to the Arab municipal authorities. Are they paying municipal taxes over there? Are they paying income taxes? First do your duty, then receive your Rights, this is our message.”

Incidentally, a recent poll predicted that a new party headed by Eldad and Ben-Ari should pas the vote threshold and receive two Knesset seats.

National Union MKs Aryeh Eldad and Michael Ben-Ari toured eastern Jerusalem’s A-Tur neighborhood on Sunday afternoon in an attempt to highlight the need for security in the area, famous for housing the millennia-old Mount of Olives cemetery.

Ben Ari and Eldad called on police to provide better protection for Jews in the area, which is part of the municipality of Israel’s capital.

The Mount of Olives has been the site of several recent rock attacks against Jews by Arab residents.  Attacks have been launched against young children, as well as US congressmen in the area on tour.

No violence was reported during the National Union MKs’ tour.  However, 50 police officers were positioned along their travel route, to thwart attacks.

(((CLICK BELOW TO HEAR AUDIO)))

To get an update on the current situation in the Israeli Knesset, Yishaiis joined by MK Dr. Aryeh Eldad, chairman of the Hatikva Party. Yishai and Eldad begin by Eldad talking about the core values of Hatikva and how they fit into the overall view of the party. The discussion moves on to talk about Jordan’s role in a solution between Israel and the Arabs and also the fate of Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria. The segment ends with a discussion about African refugees flowing into Israel and potential solutions for the issue.

To download, right-click, and “Save Target As” HERE.

Follow Yishai Fleisher on Twitter! @yishaifleisher
and on Facebook at www.facebook.com/YishaiFleisher

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

The absence of the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron and the Tomb of Rachel in Bethlehem from a list of sites to receive funding as part of Israel’s National Heritage program has raised the ire of MKs in support of Jewish rights in Judea and Samaria.

MK Aryeh Eldad (National Union) and MK Ze’ev Elkin (Likud) expressed disapproval that the two sites – the burial places of the Jewish foreparents Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Sarah, Rebecca, and Leah in Hebron, and Rachel in Bethlehem – were absent from a renovation funding list presented at a ministerial committee meeting on Tuesday.

Eldad defended the importance of the sites, and warned that withholding funding from the sites is equivalent to removing them from the National Heritage Program.

In February 2010, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu announced a NIS 500 million investment plan aimed at rejuvenating sites of importance to the Jewish People and the State of Israel.  Israel was criticized by the US and the UN body UNESCO for including the two sites on the list.

The Prime Minister’s Office responded to concerns by saying the renovations necessary at the sites were not critical at this time, and that not receiving funding was no indication that the sites had been removed from the National Heritage list.

“Hebron wasn’t funded this time around, but we’ve been assured at the highest levels that in the near future, we will be”, said David Wilder, Spokesman of the Jewish Community of Hebron in an interview with The Jewish Press.  “It wasn’t taken off the list.”

Tel Shiloh, the site which housed the Mishkan (Tabernacle) prior to its installation in the Holy Temple in Jerusalem, will likely be picked for immediate renovation by the committee.  It is located north of Jerusalem in the community of Shilo in Samaria.

If asked, “Who created the modern state of Israel?” most Jews would offer such names and institutions as David Ben-Gurion, Chaim Weizmann, the Jewish Agency, and the United Nations. A newly translated memoir, however, completely upends this popular perception.

In The First Tithe, Israel Eldad, who ran the underground Lehi movement (sometimes known as the Stern Group) together with future Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Shamir and Nathan Yellin-Mor, argues that the British would never have left Palestine in 1948 had the Irgun (headed by Menachem Begin) and Lehi not forced them out. He also defends his group’s deadly terrorist tactics and unique Zionist vision, which included the building of the Third Temple.

After Israel’s founding, Eldad – who held a doctorate in philosophy from the University of Vienna – became a high-school teacher, but Ben-Gurion, fearing Eldad’s influence, ordered the Ministry of Education and Culture to fire him. Eldad continued writing ideological books and articles (he also translated most of Friedrich Nietzsche’s works into Hebrew) until his death in 1996. His son, Aryeh Eldad, currently serves in the Knesset.

To mark Yom Ha’atzmaut, The Jewish Press interviewed Zev Golan, who translated The First Tithe into English. Golan has authored three books in his own right and directed the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies in Jerusalem from 1992-2003.

The Jewish Press: Do you agree with Eldad’s take on Israel’s founding – that the Irgun and Lehi, not the Haganah or the Jewish Agency, are responsible for the British leaving Palestine?

Golan: Of course. It would be absurd to claim the British left Eretz Yisrael because of the Jewish Agency, which was cooperating with the British and asking them to stay and help them hunt the Underground.

They left because they were blown out of the country. When they left, they said that 84,000 British soldiers and policemen in the country couldn’t preserve law and order. And it wasn’t the Haganah and Jewish Agency that were blowing up their buildings. It was the Irgun and Lehi.

Very few history books tell the story in this manner.

Well, he who writes history determines what’s in the history books, and there’s no doubt that the Labor Party took control of Israel, wrote the history books, and wrote the Irgun and Lehi out of them.

People also often credit the UN vote of November 29, 1947 as instrumental in creating Israel. However, while many Jews in Palestine danced in the streets the night of November 29, Eldad walked around depressed. Why?

Eldad compares that night to the time when Israel danced around the Golden Calf and said, “This is the god who took you out of Egypt.” Here they were looking to the United Nations and saying, “This is the god who has given us the state,” and it wasn’t.

The people who created Israel were the people who sat in prison and the people who were shot or hanged by the British. The facts on the ground are that the British would have left even if the United Nations had not voted for a Jewish state.

Eldad also felt depressed that night because they were not celebrating the Jewish state that had been dreamt of for thousands of years and that he and others had been fighting for, but rather a truncated, shrunken Jewish state that would not have survived were it not for a miraculous war that followed.

Eldad writes of some fascinating encounters with Menachem Begin. One of them took place in June 1948, the day after the IDF, on Ben-Gurion’s orders, fired on the ammunition-laden Altalena ship, killing 16 Irgun fighters. Eldad and Begin discussed the possibility of the Irgun and Lehi founding an independent state in Jerusalem’s Old City. Can you speak about that meeting?

First, Eldad was friendly with Begin before they came to Eretz Yisrael – they escaped from Poland together when the Nazis invaded – and he was friendly with him afterward during the Underground years and later. But they did not view matters 100 percent the same way.

So, in ’48 with the Altalena ship, Begin said, “I won’t allow a civil war. If they shoot at us, we’re not going to shoot back.” And Eldad said, “We need to take power; we can’t let power stay in the hands of people who are shooting at us and killing Jews.”

Well, it’s a different way of looking at things. Eldad was a total and complete revolutionary, willing to go to the very end of that revolution, no matter how cruel or hard, in order to realize the complete Jewish redemption. Menachem Begin was not such a revolutionary; he was a soldier.

So if it had been up to Eldad, the Jews on the Altalena would have shot back?

Without a doubt. He would’ve shot back and made a move elsewhere to take power…

…and create a separate Jewish state in Jerusalem.

Right, that’s what he wanted to do. But at that point, not only was Begin not on his side in terms of strategy but neither really was Lehi, which had moved leftward.

Many would consider the thought of shooting back at fellow Jews to be horrific.

The horrific thought is not that Jews would shoot back at people trying to kill Jews and prevent the salvation of Israel. The horrific thought is that Jews would take that first shot at Jews whose only goal was to help Israel.

And if the Jews who are fighting to save the country announce in advance that they will not fight back if the government comes to kill them, why fight at all? If you announce that in advance, the other side really can get away with anything it wants. So Begin had lost as soon as he made that announcement. He was saying essentially, I don’t care if Ben-Gurion runs the country.

Now, if you believe that the argument over who runs the country is not that important and that both sides more or less want the same thing, then that’s an acceptable way of looking at things. But if you believe, as Eldad did then, that the people shooting at the Jews did not intend to save the country, indeed did not even want to set up the country, then you’re obligated to be willing to fight back. The Chashmonaim didn’t fight the Greeks; they fought the Jews, and we celebrate that victory today as the greatest Jewish victory for freedom in our history.

But why start a civil war when both sides really want the same thing?

If that’s your attitude, indeed you’re obligated not to start a civil war.

Were the Irgun and Lehi that different from the Jewish Agency that a civil war might have been necessary?

Lehi was fighting for a Jewish state from the Nile to the Euphrates and the Irgun was fighting for a Jewish state that included Transjordan. Both of those organizations were fighting for a Jewish state with the capital in Jerusalem. In addition, Lehi was fighting for a Beit Hamikdash in the center of Jerusalem and to bring all the world’s Jews to Israel. In other words, complete redemption.

They both were fighting to prevent the British from staying in Eretz Yisrael, and Ben-Gurion according to them was doing the opposite. If you see Ben-Gurion as doing the opposite, what’s the point of turning power over to him?

What do you mean when you say Ben-Gurion was doing the opposite?

Eldad’s and Begin’s view was that the state as set up and accepted by the Labor movement could not survive. Now you can say in hindsight they were wrong, the state did survive. And since they were wrong, then not shooting back was a good thing because it prevented a civil war. But then you could also argue – there’s no way to answer this question – that had the Irgun and Lehi fought back, the masses would have supported them and the country would look not like it looks today, but a lot larger, more powerful, and not negotiating over whether we should give the Palestinians the cities of our fathers but rather whether they will give us more territory closer to the Nile.

All this is pretty critical of Ben-Gurion.

The First Tithe was written in 1949-1950. Eldad’s view of Ben-Gurion changed over the next four decades. I’m not saying he viewed Ben-Gurion as a hero, but he recognized later that Ben-Gurion did things that no one else did. He set up the Jewish state, built a Jewish army, and led the country. Nobody did that except him.

You mentioned Eldad’s vision of a Jewish state from the Nile to the Euphrates with a Temple in Jerusalem and all the world’s Jews living there. Did he really see this as a practical goal?

Yes.

And if, hypothetically, Eldad had been in charge in 1948 and he received a state with smaller borders?

If he got smaller borders, the borders would have been used to expand.

In terms of aliyah, at least, it seems Eldad’s vision was no different from Ben-Gurion’s.

That’s completely wrong. When Ben-Gurion started negotiating with American Jews and taking their money, he stopped believing that all the Jews had to come to Israel. Eldad did not. The Bible says clearly that exile is a punishment and anywhere we go in the Diaspora we will suffer. Ultimately, according to Eldad, exile and Diaspora lead to one of two things: shmad or hashmada, assimilation or extermination.

You write in the introduction to The First Tithe that Eldad was instrumental in your own aliyah to Israel. Can you elaborate?

I read a booklet of his that said something I had never heard before, which was that the goal of Zionism was not the creation of a Jewish state but that the state was a tool to realize Zionism. As soon as I understood that we were not yet where we have to be and we have a road to travel to redemption, I moved to Israel.

And then when you met Eldad in Israel, you told him you were thinking of moving back to the States because of difficulties in finding a job and a home.

That’s true and that’s the wrong answer. Eldad told me that I’m here because I’m a Jew who’s come home and just like any person in his own country, you look for a job and a place to live and you move around until you find one. You don’t get up and leave the country.

In Eldad’s conception, after world Jewry makes aliyah and the Third Temple is rebuilt, what then?

The Temple is the place where we unite heaven and earth, and that’s almost a metaphysical point. To what exactly it leads I don’t know, but it’s the reunification of heaven and earth, the ladder in Jacob’s dream that unites heaven and earth, the kingdom of God on earth.

Was Eldad’s vision, then, essentially a religious one?

I’m not sure if Eldad would use that term. It wasn’t in fulfillment of commandment number two hundred and fifty something or other. But there’s no doubt that his vision of redemption is the biblical, prophetic and traditional view of redemption. Avraham Stern [Lehi's founder] put the building of the Temple into the principles of the Stern Group and called it a recognition, a symbol, of redemption.

In The First Tithe Eldad criticizes Palestine’s chief rabbis, Isaac Herzog and Benzion Uziel, but highly praises – almost idolizes – Reb Aryeh Levin (subject of the book A Tzaddik in Our Time). Can you explain why?

I’d rather not make specific references. But I will say that a lot of the underground leaders and fighters were very disappointed at the apathy of religious leaders who left the field of Jewish redemption to others.

And that’s one of the reasons why Israel today has such a non-religious character: because religious Jews spent a lot of time fighting over soccer fields being open on Shabbos and how women should dress – which are both important – but then ignored the questions of how to get Jews out of Europe on the eve of World War II and how to get the British out of Eretz Yisrael who were locking the gates to the country.

There were rabbis of course who did concern themselves with what we could call “ultimacies,” matters of ultimate importance. One was Rabbi Kook and one was Rabbi Aryeh Levin. And there were many others. Eldad, as many of the other freedom fighters, had an incredible regard for these rabbis.

Was Eldad religious?

He was from a traditional home. I cannot testify as to whether he kept all the mitzvot; I was not in a position to see or know that. He didn’t wear a yarmulke, but his son, MK Aryeh Eldad, told a story in Jerusalem a couple of weeks ago of how his father would walk with him every Nissan to kasher all of the pots and pans in the house for Pesach. Well, if you want to say he’s not religious, what’s he doing kashering his pots and pans?

Can you translate Eldad’s philosophy into contemporary Israeli politics?

If the Jewish people are going to deal in small politics, negotiating with the non-Jews for our right to live, then we’re back in the shtetl. In order for us to survive, it’s not only useful but necessary that we have a strong, large Jewish state that does not shrink but rather gets larger, and the place for all the Jews in the world is in that state.

Another application concerns the Iranian threat. Many hope the world will take care of this threat. Eldad would say that the purpose of the Jewish state is that we take our destiny in our own hands. If we cannot resolve the Iranian nuclear threat on our own then perhaps this entire experiment of the Jewish state was pointless.

Elliot Resnick is a Jewish Press staff reporter.