The Morning

: Israel’s internal turmoil

《早晨》：以色列的內(nèi)部動蕩

March 15, 2023

By David Leonhardt and Claire Moses

2023年3月15日

作者：戴維?萊昂哈特 和 克萊爾?摩西

Good morning. Why is Israel descending into political turmoil so far into Netanyahu’s career?

早上好。內(nèi)塔尼亞胡執(zhí)政至今，以色列為何陷入政治動蕩?

Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister.

Pool photo by Maya Alleruzzo

以色列總理本杰明·內(nèi)塔尼亞胡。

攝影:Maya Alleruzzo ‘At fever pitch’

“處于狂熱狀態(tài)”

Political leaders who have already been in office for more than 15 years — which is how long Benjamin Netanyahu has been Israel’s prime minister — do not typically upend their country’s politics. Yet that’s what Netanyahu has done in recent weeks. 已經(jīng)執(zhí)政超過15年的政治領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人——也就是本雅明·內(nèi)塔尼亞胡（Benjamin Netanyahu）擔(dān)任以色列總理的時間——通常不會顛覆他們國家的政治。然而，這正是內(nèi)塔尼亞胡最近幾周所做的。 His government’s proposal to reduce the power of Israel’s Supreme Court has created what our Opinion colleague Thomas Friedman calls the nation’s “biggest internal clash since its founding.” Hundreds of thousands of Israelis — approaching 5 percent of the population — participated in protests last weekend. Ehud Barak, a former prime minister, has encouraged Israelis to engage in civil disobedience if the proposal becomes law. And many military officers have said they would refuse to report for duty. 他的政府提議減少以色列最高法院的權(quán)力，這造成了我們寫觀點專欄的同事托馬斯·弗里德曼所說的國家“自建國以來最大的內(nèi)部沖突”。上個周末，數(shù)十萬以色列人——接近該國人口的5%——參加了抗議活動。 以色列前總理埃胡德?巴拉克（Ehud Barak）鼓勵，如果該提議成為法律，以色列人將進(jìn)行公民不服從。 許多軍官表示，他們將拒絕報到。 Bret Stephens, another Times Opinion columnist — who has often been sympathetic to Netanyahu’s policies — has criticized the judicial plan as a threat to Israel’s moral standing. “Hyper-personalized, populist rule achieved by gutting institutional checks and balances is how democracies devolve into mobocracies,” Bret wrote. 另一位時報的觀點專欄作者布雷特·斯蒂芬斯（Bret Stephens），他曾經(jīng)常贊同內(nèi)塔尼亞胡的政策，也批評這項司法計劃是對以色列道德地位的威脅。 布雷特寫道：“通過破壞制度制衡來實現(xiàn)的高度個性化的民粹主義統(tǒng)治，是民主國家淪為暴民政治的原因。” In today’s newsletter, we’ll explain why the later stages of Netanyahu’s political career are turning out to be more chaotic than anything that came before. 在今天的時事通訊中，我們將解釋為什么內(nèi)塔尼亞胡政治生涯的后期比以往任何時候都更加混亂。 What changed?

什么改變了？

Netanyahu has always been on Israel’s political right, but he was long able to build alliances with the center. The Israeli left, by contrast, has been marginalized and has not led the government since 2001. 內(nèi)塔尼亞胡一直屬于以色列的政治右翼，但他長期以來都能夠與中間派建立聯(lián)盟。相比之下，以色列左翼已經(jīng)被邊緣化，自2001年就從沒有領(lǐng)導(dǎo)過政府。 One important cause was the breakdown of peace talks between Israeli and Palestinian leaders in the early 2000s. The failure of those talks — including the Palestinian leadership’s walking away from the Camp David negotiations in 2000 — led many Israeli voters to give up on the idea of peace and support conservative parties. Netanyahu often led the coalitions that spanned the center and right. 一個重要原因是本世紀(jì)初以色列和巴勒斯坦領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人之間的和平談判破裂。 這些談判的失敗——包括巴勒斯坦領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人在2000年退出戴維營談判——導(dǎo)致許多以色列選民放棄了和平的想法，轉(zhuǎn)而支持保守派政黨。 內(nèi)塔尼亞胡經(jīng)常領(lǐng)導(dǎo)跨越中間和右邊的聯(lián)盟。 But in 2019, while he was prime minister, Netanyahu was indicted on corruption and bribery charges. Many politicians who agree with his Likud party on substantive issues decided that he needed to resign. “Israel’s centrist parties are willing to serve in a coalition with Netanyahu’s right-wing Likud in charge,” Matti Friedman, a journalist who lives in Israel, wrote for The Free Press. “But they will no longer serve under Netanyahu himself: The prime minister, a master of the political maneuver, has simply lied to too many people too many times.” 但在2019年，內(nèi)塔尼亞胡擔(dān)任總理期間，他被指控腐敗和賄賂。 許多在實質(zhì)性問題上，與他的利庫德集團(tuán)意見一致的政客認(rèn)為他需要辭職。 “以色列的中間派政黨愿意在內(nèi)塔尼亞胡的右翼利庫德集團(tuán)掌權(quán)的情況下組成聯(lián)盟，”居住在以色列的記者馬蒂·弗里德曼（Matti Friedman）在為《自由新聞報》(The Free Press)撰文時表示， “但他們將不再為內(nèi)塔尼亞胡本人服務(wù)：這位政治手腕嫻熟的總理，已經(jīng)對太多人撒了太多次謊?！?This refusal, combined with the continued popularity of the political right, has thrown Israeli politics into turmoil. The country has held five elections since 2019. Likud received the largest share of votes — 23 percent — in the most recent election. Even so, Netanyahu was able to put together a governing coalition only by allying with far-right and religious parties. 這種拒絕，再加上政治右翼的持續(xù)流行，使以色列政治陷入混亂。 自2019年以來，該國已經(jīng)舉行了五次選舉。 利庫德集團(tuán)在最近的選舉中獲得了最多的選票——23%。 即便如此，內(nèi)塔尼亞胡也只能通過與極右翼和宗教政黨結(jié)盟來組建一個執(zhí)政聯(lián)盟。 The current government, as a result, is more radical than the previous governments Netanyahu led. 因此，現(xiàn)任政府比內(nèi)塔尼亞胡領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的前幾屆政府更加激進(jìn)。

Israel’s Supreme Court.

Lior Mizrahi / Getty Images

以色列最高法院。

利奧爾·米茲拉希 / 蓋蒂圖片社 Why the Supreme Court?

為什么是最高法院？

Israel’s Supreme Court has something in common with the U.S. version: Both are among the most powerful courts in the world. In many other countries, the top court does not overturn major laws and instead tends to make modest, technocratic changes. In Israel and the U.S., the court often has the last word. (In Israel, the underlying reason is the lack of a constitution.) 以色列最高法院與美國最高法院有一些共同之處：兩者都屬于世界上最有影響力的法院。 在其他許多國家，最高法院不會推翻重大法律，而是傾向于做出適度的、技術(shù)官僚式的改變。 但以色列和美國，法院通常有最后的決定權(quán)。（在以色列，根本原因是缺乏憲法。） The proposed changes by Netanyahu’s government would strengthen the authority of the legislature, which in Israel is known as the Knesset. It is already more powerful than the U.S. Congress, because there is no independently elected president; a majority of legislators choose the prime minister. If the judicial changes go through, the Knesset would also gain the power to override Supreme Court decisions and would have few checks on its power. 內(nèi)塔尼亞胡政府提出的改革將加強(qiáng)立法機(jī)構(gòu)的權(quán)威，這在以色列被稱為“Knesset”。它的權(quán)力已經(jīng)超過了美國國會，因為美國沒有獨立選舉產(chǎn)生的總統(tǒng)；總理由大多數(shù)議員選出。如果司法改革通過，以色列議會也將獲得推翻最高法院裁決的權(quán)力，對其權(quán)力幾乎沒有制約。 Yesterday, the Knesset passed an initial version of some of the changes. Lawmakers will have to vote twice more before the policies becomes law. 昨天，以色列議會通過了一些修改的初步版本。 在這些政策成為法律之前，議員們還必須再進(jìn)行兩次投票。 Some political commentators argue that the changes themselves are reasonable. “What’s at stake here isn’t the death of the nation’s democracy, but straightforward party politics,” Lahav Harkov of The Jerusalem Post wrote. “The discussion is, in fact, about the proper balance between different elements of a democracy.” 一些政治評論人士認(rèn)為，改革本身是合理的。 《耶路撒冷郵報》（

the Jerusalem Post

）的拉哈夫·哈爾科夫（Lahav Harkov）寫道：“這里的利害關(guān)系不是國家民主的死亡，而是直接的政黨政治?！?“事實上，討論的是民主的不同元素之間的適當(dāng)平衡?！?Many other analysts disagree, arguing that the reforms would allow a prime minister to dismantle democracy, much as Viktor Orban has done in Hungary. “Theoretically, you could end up with a government that decides that elections are going to take place once every 20 years,” our colleague Isabel Kershner said. 許多其他分析人士不同意這種觀點，他們認(rèn)為，改革將允許總理廢除民主，就像維克托·歐爾班（Viktor Orban）在匈牙利所做的那樣。 我們的同事伊莎貝爾·克什納說：“從理論上講，你可能會得到一個決定每20年舉行一次選舉的政府。” Either way, the changes have inspired intense anger because they would give Netanyahu’s government sweeping power to implement its preferred policies. 無論如何，這些改革都引發(fā)了強(qiáng)烈的憤怒，因為它們將賦予內(nèi)塔尼亞胡政府實施其首選政策的廣泛權(quán)力。 “Underlying this technical debate about the judiciary is a much broader conflict about what kind of society Israel should be,” Patrick Kingsley, The Times’s Jerusalem bureau chief, told us. “Ultra-Orthodox Jews and settler activists are taking advantage of the fact that they wield unprecedented power in Israeli society and government to try to unravel the influence of the court.” “在這場關(guān)于司法的技術(shù)性辯論背后，是一場更廣泛的沖突，即以色列應(yīng)該擁有什么樣的社會，”時報駐耶路撒冷分社社長帕特里克·金斯利（Patrick Kingsley）告訴我們，“極端正統(tǒng)派猶太人和移民活動家正在利用他們在以色列社會和政府中擁有前所未有的權(quán)力這一事實，試圖瓦解法院的影響力?！? The stakes

賭注

Netanyahu and his far-right allies have different incentives to neutralize the court. 內(nèi)塔尼亞胡和他的極右翼盟友有不同的動機(jī)來中和法院。 For Netanyahu, a court that was subservient to Israeli’s legislature would allow him to end his own corruption trial, which is still taking place. Netanyahu has denied he would do so. 對內(nèi)塔尼亞胡來說，一個服從于以色列立法機(jī)構(gòu)的法院將允許他結(jié)束對自己腐敗的審判，這一審判仍在進(jìn)行中。 內(nèi)塔尼亞胡否認(rèn)他會這樣做。 For far-right parties, a neutered court would help the Knesset to enact major policy priorities — such as making it easier for settlers to seize land in the West Bank; protecting government subsidies for religious schools; and helping ultra-Orthodox Israelis avoid mandatory military service. 對于極右翼政黨，一個中立的法院將有助于以色列議會制定主要的優(yōu)先政策——比如讓移民者更容易在約旦河西岸奪取土地；保護(hù)政府對宗教學(xué)校的補(bǔ)貼；幫助極端正統(tǒng)派以色列人避免義務(wù)兵役。 One reason for the intensity of the debate is the polarization between Israelis who are part of Netanyahu’s coalition and who are outside of it. He has appointed ultranationalist figures to major posts, including Itamar Ben-Gvir, the leader of the far-right Jewish Power party, who threatened Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin weeks before his 1995 assassination and publicly thanked a rabbi who justified Rabin’s murder. Ben-Gvir is now the national security minister. 辯論如此激烈的一個原因是內(nèi)塔尼亞胡聯(lián)盟內(nèi)的以色列人和聯(lián)盟外以色列人之間的兩極分化。他任命了一些極端民族主義者擔(dān)任要職，包括極右翼猶太權(quán)力黨（Jewish Power party）領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人伊塔馬爾·本-格維爾（Itamar Ben-Gvir）。他曾在1995年拉賓（Yitzhak Rabin）總理遇刺前幾周威脅拉賓，并公開感謝一名為謀殺拉賓正名的拉比。本-格維爾現(xiàn)在是國家安全部長。 “Israeli society is at fever pitch,” Patrick said. “以色列社會正處于狂熱狀態(tài)，”帕特里克說。

Thanks for spending part of your morning with The Times. See you tomorrow.

謝謝你早上花時間看《紐約時報》。明天見。

Matthew Cullen, Lauren Hard, Lauren Jackson, Brent Lewis, Claire Moses, Ian Prasad Philbrick, Tom Wright-Piersanti and Ashley Wu contributed to The Morning. You can reach the team at themorning@nytimes.com.

馬修·卡倫、勞倫·哈德、勞倫·杰克遜、布倫特·劉易斯、克萊爾·摩西、伊恩·普拉薩德·菲爾布里克、湯姆·賴特-皮爾桑蒂和阿什利·吳為《早晨》雜志撰稿。您可以通過themorning@nytimes.com與團(tuán)隊聯(lián)系。

THE END