In the Knesset, who is left-wing? Who is right-wing? Are these terms even useful?

Investigative journalist, David Sheen, gave a series of lectures for an international audience; he threw out the traditional breakdown of Israeli politics in favor of a new alignment that lines up surprisingly well with Israeli political polling on one issue: How do you feel about Palestinians and non-Jews?

Using this framework, Sheen described a vision of Israeli legislative politics that allows outsiders to better understand the political calculus of Israeli politicians and why, despite leadership changing parties, no policy change toward Palestine has occurred in decades.

Israeli Politics and Public Opinion

In 2017, Tel Aviv University conducted a study, asking Israeli Jews “How many states and what kinds of states do you support” within the area comprising Israel and Palestine.

A plurality chose a 2-state solution. While around 10% each chose an integrated 1-state solution, a 1-state solution with Jews having more rights than non-jews, and a 1-state solution where non-Jews (Arabs) were expelled.

Sheen criticizes this. He says that when you probe the 2-state solution, asking about specific details such as “Palestinian sovereignty over land, air, and water” or annexing certain settlements while ceding others, support for the 2-state solution dwindles to below 20% — not much higher than any of the other options.

As a follow-up, Tel Aviv University conducted another study, where the 2-state solution was excluded. In this theoretical framework, one-fourth of respondents chose a democratic, integrated option, while two-thirds chose either an apartheid framework or an eliminationist one – where non-Jewish Arabs are expelled or otherwise eliminated.

SIDE Framework

David Sheen takes this poll and reframes it into what he calls the “SIDE” framework.

• Secessionist (2-state solution)
• Integrationist (Democratic 1-state)
• Dominationist (Apartheid state)
• Eliminationist (Expel or eliminate Arabs)

Through this SIDE framework, outsiders can examine the results of Israeli elections with more clarity. Sheen organizes the major Israeli political parties into one of four SIDE factions.

Pre-SIDE sorting, the politics of Israel look quite jumbled; it’s unclear which Israeli political party has a mandate, and the political party with a plurality in the Knesset changes frequently.

Post-SIDE sorting, the results are static. Dominationist parties continually pull about 75% of votes/apportionment in the Knesset, while the next largest group is the Eliminationists.

In 2022, Sheen gave an update on this model, noting that the political system within Israel continued to match this model, with dominationist parties still pulling about 75% of the vote. The main two Israeli political parties in power, Likud (represented by Netanyahu) and Blue and White (the anti-Netanyahu opposition), both push dominationist policies. Sheen sums it up: “the political discourse doesn’t change.” According to Sheen, the question that Israeli voters continue to answer at the polls is really, “Do the people hate Arabs more or Netanyahu more?”

How Dominationist Politics and Orthodox Religion Are Related

As of 2018, David Sheen noted that all recent Ministers of Education in Israel had come from one specific vein of Judaism: Orthodox Judaism.

He explains that this is important because Orthodox Jewish teachings have been increasingly cropping up in Israeli textbooks. In one chilling example, a young Jewish child playing “soldiers and terrorists” cites the “beautiful woman law” as an excuse to have sex with an ‘infidel.”

The beautiful captive woman law is a concept from the Torah that explains the circumstances under which a Jewish soldier can have sex with a non-Jewish woman during wartime. The text is unclear, and scholars debate whether it is a law that permits wartime rape, or if it is instead a law intended to prevent wartime sexual violence.

However, several prominent orthodox rabbis, in particular Rabbi Eyal Krim, have given public statements that used this passage to support wartime rape. In 2012, Rabbi Karim stated, “Although intercourse with a female gentile is very grave, it was permitted during wartime…the torah permitted soldiers to satisfy the evil urge.”

Rabbi Krim has now served as the chief Rabbi of the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) since 2016.

Rabbi Krim is not alone in voicing these controversial statements. In 2018, convicted terrorist Moshe Zar was given a lifetime achievement award from the Ministry of Education – where he stated, “Building a house equals 100 dead Arabs. Building a community equals eliminating 10,000 gentiles.” He ultimately walked back these comments, saying, saying “My remarks referred to Arab terrorists who murdered my son Gilad, Rabbi Raziel Shevah, and thousands of other Jews. I’ve been coexisting with Arabs since the day I was born, believing that mutually living in peace is possible.”

David Sheen drives home that the Ministry of Education actively supports both dominionist and eliminationist ideologies. He concludes that their support helps cement these policies’ dominance in Israeli political discourse.

Chief Rabbi Says “Non-Jews Should Not Live in Israel.”

The Sephardic Chief Rabbi of Israel explicitly said, “Gentiles should not live in the land of Israel.” He went further, stating that the only reason non-Jews remain in the country is because the Jewish population is not strong enough to expel them.

Taking all of these statements together, journalist David Sheen shows that the fusion of Orthodox Judaism, state education, and the Israeli government structure has become a self-reinforcing system that pushes dominationist and eliminationist positions in union. This marriage of government policy and religious nationalism results in political actions (such as settlements) that ultimately make a 2-state solution untenable.

American Jews: Markedly Different Beliefs

David Sheen concludes his talk by examining the beliefs of American Jews. He explains that American Jews were asked, “What is Judaism to you?” The majority of respondents, 56%, said, “Working toward justice and equality.” David Sheen postulates that the lack of state-sponsored orthodoxy results in a marketplace of religious ideas. With a free market of religion, the preference for justice and equality increases. He speculates that without state-sponsored orthodoxy and nationalism. Israel itself could see marked increases in support for justice and equality.

Don’t Reduce Israeli Politics to a Binary

Sheen concludes his talk by urging viewers to see the full, complex portrait of Israeli politics – not to simply view it as pro/anti – Netanyahu.

“The last word I’m going to leave you with: When you reduce to binary dynamic, you delete that a very large population of Israel is eliminationist, and that the contenders are part of the same dominationist camp. And that the Israeli left is now a tiny fraction, 5% of the Israeli populace, and you completely obscure the voice of the Palestinian people.”

It’s a messy paradigm: very few political parties in Israel support policies that provide democratic representation for Arabs. Similarly, few parties champion real policies that would result in a fair, 2-state solution. By viewing Israeli politics through the SIDE framework, outside observers can more accurately grasp how a supermajority of Israeli politicians are actively impeding a lasting and fair peace between Israel and Palestine.

Coexistence Is Still Possible Even if Politics Is Messy

To be clear, this framework is the perspective of a single lecturer. While he is very transparent about his sources and methodology, this is still one reference frame, not an all-encompassing theory. As an example, 59% of Israelis oppose expanding settlements into Gaza, and 52% view West Bank settlements as a major impediment to the peace process.

At the same time, when asked which is the most preferable, 41% of Israeli Jews said annexing the West Bank, while only 27% said reaching a two-state solution. This question, critically, did not ask about the legal status of Arabs who would be annexed along with the land to Israel, so it is unclear whether the respondents were for a one-state, democratic solution, or rather an apartheid one.

It is through these percentages in favor of peace that we can see the shoots of coexistence growing again. Israeli and Palestinian peace organizations like Standing Together are working to harness the desire for progressive change and an end to the occupation. Just as David Sheen showed that Israeli politics is not a simple binary, peace groups such as Standing Together show that there is still real demand for peace, political change, and equal rights within the state of Israel and Palestine.

Standing Together, in particular, bills itself as both part of the New Left, due to the admission that the traditional Israeli left can no longer mobilize the country, and as a challenge to the traditional right-left divide. Using the depoliticalized color purple, they aim to defy the political dichotomy to create a lasting peace.

Our politics aren’t set in stone.

Urge your congressperson to demand a just peace for all.