"As soon as Netanyahu had a new bride, he kicked off" • "In retrospect, he had to sign a declaration of loyalty" • "I really wanted to be an education minister" The world "Ayelet Shaked has a lot to say

• "Need an ideological party to the right of Likud." Ayelet Shaked

  Photo: 

  Eric Sultan

Three months and a half have passed since Ayelet Shaked's previous interview for "Sitting," and they look more like three years. Since then, there have been turbulent elections, political turmoil, a deadly corona epidemic and a huge unity government. Almighty, to her credit, predicted in February what would happen to her and her friends from the party. "In Likud, religious Zionists love small, weak and poor, with the science and space portfolio," she said, also noting that "in the government of the right-wing and white-blue we are not necessary."

If what happened was so predictable, then either you have mysterious powers or you're a sucker.

"True, I predicted everything in advance. I knew what Netanyahu would do if Gantz went with him. I alerted, talked, explained to our public. But what to do, we couldn't convince. Need to tell the truth, Netanyahu managed to convince better. Other options. "

You could not join the right bloc and go to government with Gantz.

"We couldn't get into a coalition supported by the joint list. We preferred to go with our ideology and be honest. We preferred to get up in the morning in opposition, and be able to look at ourselves in the mirror."

Photo: Ami Shuman

And so, for the first time since she entered the Knesset in 2013, Ayelet Shaked looks at herself in the mirror and sees behind her the desert opposition benches. "There are advantages to this," she says, "the most important of which is freedom. When you are part of the coalition, you are committed to coalition discipline. When you are in opposition, you have complete freedom to agree or oppose what you want. , We're only in the beginning. "

When you were in a coalition, were you also silent about ideological issues?

"We never kept quiet. We always said no. We compromised. Someone told me that Netanyahu is easy with the ultra-Orthodox, because they don't trouble him, and we do. We are an ideological faction, our job is to make trouble. Erekat, we put an ultimatum: Either he stops the terrorists' release, or we retire from the government. Thanks to that, no terrorists were released, and the negotiations blew up. We certainly did trouble, for that we were elected. "

And maybe because you are a tough partner, you found yourself outside.

"We found ourselves outside because Netanyahu made a strategic decision to dismantle the right-wing bloc, which led him where he was, and to go with the left. Formulating the bloc was his brilliant political decision, without which he could not have been prime minister. Of another government, and now, as far as he is concerned, the bloc has done its best and the bloc can go.

Likud states that you have presented requirements that do not match your achievement in the elections, six seats.

"In the Likud, not to say, they are not telling the truth. When we went on this journey, Netanyahu pledged that he would maintain what the partnership had, that the partnership would not be harmed. To the ultra-Orthodox, he really left everything they have, and even gave them extras. No matter, give them what he wants.

"He kept Deri the Interior Ministry and Gaffney the Finance Committee, it was a world war to take Melitsman the Health Ministry and he didn't think about it as long as Litzman refused. You think he would come to Gaffney and say to him, 'Leave, you don't get the Finance Committee, instead Did it take the job of a minister of nothing and nothing, or the chairman of the absorption committee? ' Do you think he would have done such a thing? More than that, the Negev and Galilee bag had already been given a blue and white, and then Shas said - 'Give it back, it's ours', and he immediately gave it back.

"To us, he did not leave what was, and it makes sense, we understand it, we do not live in a detached world. It is clear to us that we held three senior offices and knew that we enjoyed it only because there was a transitional government, we realized that with this it is impossible to stay. For it was ours - Nissan Slominsky was the chairman there from 2015 to 2019 - he would not leave us. He slandered us and pushed the constitutional committee to the ultra-Orthodox. The ultra-Orthodox told him that they did not want this committee at all.

"That's the most obvious sign that he just didn't want us. If he wanted us in the government, he would negotiate intensely with us.

"Netanyahu has transferred the justice file to Nissankorn and refused to give us a constitutional commission, so that there will be some balance with the Minister of Justice. He has given the defense file to the left. At first we said we would not enter to be a necessary escapee in the left government."

You say it's a left-wing government, but if you were to get the health file and go into the exact same government, suddenly it wasn't a left-wing government?

"We wanted positions of influence to balance the fact that this is a left-wing government. In front of the Justice Department, we demanded a constitutional commission. When we are part of the government, we have influence and we know how to pull it right."

What files did you request?

"Two significant cases that can be influenced. Not cases like the ones he has been sewing in recent days for politicians who are looking for honors and do not want to work. There are empty offices out of them. None of us agreed to be a minister for anything and nothing.

"Don't get it wrong, our first choice was to be influential in the coalition, we didn't want to be in the opposition. But it wasn't up to us. One of the ultra-Orthodox politicians told me, 'From the first moment we realized that Netanyahu wants to cast you into the opposition.' , He is the Likud leader. "

what is the meaning of this?

"Some of the right is not under his leadership today. He has today the opposition of a large part of the right-wing public in the State of Israel."

He offered you the education portfolio and the theme of national settlement and service. Serious issues that are important to religious Zionism.

"I really wanted to be the minister of education in this government. It's a very important, significant case. But it's just one case. You fall into Netanyahu's spin. These issues have always been in the hands of religious Zionism. You don't need a minister of national service or a minister of settlement affairs, these units Trust in offices The settlement is not a portfolio, he tried to build a new portfolio of things that were with Uri Ariel in the Ministry of Agriculture.

"For a whole year, we received generous offers of blue and white. We could have the security file, the justice, the transportation, everything we wanted. We said no and stayed true to the right bloc."

So you suckers.

"No. This bloc is a right thing for the right, Likud's partnership with religious Zionists and the ultra-Orthodox is a right partnership. The problem is that once he had a new bride, he kicked the old bride."

The Likud claimed that the problem is with you, that you have four people - you, Bennett, Smutrich and Peretz - and each of you wants a role.

"Nonsense. We would get along with other rotations and solutions. We're good friends. Bennett, myself and Smutrich know how to work together. But we did not agree to a proposal that degrades the right and religious Zionism, a proposal that gives no power within the government. To be powerless in a huge government, When our important domains of control are in the hands of the left, that's not the point. "

You talk about what the ultra-Orthodox got, but Shas achieved nine seats.

"Torah Judaism has achieved seven mandates. It's about us, no difference."

And they received only a minister and two committees.

"They got a finance committee, a constitutional committee, and the Ministry of Housing with the Israel Lands Administration. Very significant issues. I tell you that if it were upside down, if we had seven and six, the proposal would have stayed the same. They are doing a good job, but Netanyahu may not be taking up his partnership.

"He tried to reduce us, put us in a position that is only sectoral. Religious Zionism is not a sector that cares only for itself, but for the entire public in Israel. I took the case file not only for religious Zionism, but to change and introduce right-wing ideology, which also believes in religious Zionism. When Bennett took the security file and Smutrich's transport, it wasn't just for religious Zionism, religious Zionism didn't want us to deal with only the things that mattered to her, these were people in the military, in economics, in the public sector, in the media. An attempt to humiliate us. "

If you say you care about everyone, why does a sectoral party actually need to? Why isn't the Likud as a right-wing party?

"The Likud has the role of a ruling party, but it needs an ideological party to the right of the Likud, which incorporates everyone who sees themselves as ideological right, and religious Zionism. And to address Jewish identity among the secular audience, in the state education.

"Before I went into the Justice Department, Netanyahu gave Tzipi Livni the justice file, and nobody made up for it. For years, he bragged and bragged that he was defending the justice system, but he was the one who prevented any change in it. When Bennett and I got into politics in 2013, we started talking about Sovereignty, no one talked about it until then. They talked about Bar Ilan's speech, two states for two peoples, and we started talking about sovereignty. Look at us like crazy. And here, seven years later, the US president is talking about sovereignty.

"It is our job to be a backbone. We have seen dark days in the Likud. It is a party that has made a leftist policy.

"We took good care of the needs of the Zionist-religious sector. In the past, the sector would receive supplemental coalition money, associations and institutions depended on politicians. My husband, we took care of it. When we wanted to close Rabbi Druckman's Or Etzion Yeshiva, we dealt with it. This sector has needs, and so a party needs.

"Regarding Jewish identity among the secular audience - the secular parties do not deal with it. The ultra-Orthodox do not do it either. This is our place."

If a sectoral party is needed, why did you and Bennett abandon the Jewish home and open the new right?

"You won't find a quote of mine that says there is no need for a religious Zionist party. We thought it was possible to increase power. The power by splitting is proved to be a mistake.

"In the second election, I said I would not come back if we did not unite them all, and that is what we did. Even today, the Jewish House, the National Union and the new right have to be united into one party, with primaries."

Before the second day, you talked about a double-digit result, and in the end you only brought in seven seats.

"There was a big fight, head to head, of blue and white and the Likud. Netanyahu turned to our public and said not to vote for us, because we will be in the government anyway, and if he loses to Gantz, then everyone will lose. He asked our audience to vote for Likud, so he could have power in front Gantz. And finally he went with Gantz. "

What does Netanyahu have against religious Zionism?

"Netanyahu prefers weak politicians next to him. We are not weak. He prefers weak religious Zionism. In 2013, he informed us that we were going to the opposition, and the only reason we were able to enter is the alliance with Torch. In 2015, he signed with Tzipi Livni, gave her the file Justice and negotiations with the Palestinians, and he did not sign with us until the last minute. It was only when Lieberman announced that he was going to the opposition that he signed with us for the past two days.

Maybe he has enough religious Zionists in his party. Elkin, Edelstein, Hotobli.

"They are not doing anything, they have no political power over Netanyahu. I understand that when you are in the Likud you are part of a group, you support the prime minister. You cannot go against him. Do you think that Otobili will tell Netanyahu 'Leave the committee for appointing Likud dinars' ?! "She can't do it. She is in the Likud, can't go out against Netanyahu. In general, you saw what files he gave Rafi Peretz and Hottobly."

You cannot ignore the statements that he has something personal against you and Bennett.

"Unjustly. We worked and served him with great loyalty when we were his helpers."

Do you feel that everything is personal?

"Of course. His attitude towards us is an unpleasant attitude personally. But when you work with each other, you work matter-of-factly."

What did you do to him being angry with you?

"We didn't do anything. We served him faithfully."

There are rumors that he is accusing you of sewing his "Bibitor" bag.

"It's a lie and false. The next person to say I leaked the Bibitors affair will get a libel suit."

So what does he have against you anyway? Maybe his family doesn't like you?

"There's no reason. But you have to ask him."

Maybe Sarah Netanyahu doesn't want you next to him?

"I don't want to address that."

When was the last time you made biscuit cake?

"I did recently, came out great."

Are you whipping cream or not?

"I have a great recipe. One layer of biscuits, whipping cream and instant pudding, adding white cheese and mix, then a layer of melted dark chocolate."

***

You got the security file by trick. You said you were going with Gantz, and you pressed Netanyahu until he gave him the security.

"We did not negotiate with Gantz."

Someone threw an opponent Levine that Otto you go with them.

"We got a good blue brush - the security, the justice and everything we want. Netanyahu saw the numbers, understood it and gave the defense portfolio."

Yariv Levin says you were just a minute before walking with Gantz.

Almond smiles a big smile. "This is what is known as knowing how to negotiate well."

This is called political exercise.

"It's totally legitimate. Suckers have never been, certainly not with Netanyahu. Even with eight seats, we got nice cases. Even when he wanted to throw us into the opposition in 2013, he found us in a coalition-allied coalition."

After the last election you were a little suckers. You signed loyalty statements every Monday and Thursday.

"Not every time we signed, there was a stage that we said, enough with the signatures. It was ridiculous. We told you we were going with you, and that was it. In retrospect, we needed him to sign us. That was the mistake.

"I preferred to live with my ideological choice, even if it is in opposition. Opposition is not the end of the world. Every politician also needs to know to be in opposition. I started working with Netanyahu when he was in the opposition with 12 seats. I saw how he is growing and growing. This is not the end of the world."

Where did you go wrong?

"In the third election, I didn't see many options to act differently than we used to."

So you went as a sheep to the slaughter.

"When we looked at all the options, there was no choice. I prefer to be in opposition and not go to government with the left. Most blue and white people are leftists."

Benny Gantz and Gabby Ashkenazi this left?

"Blue and white is the left, you guys will see it again. Schuster, Haimovich, Zamir, also Benny Gantz - this is the left. They tried to obscure it. I don't understand why they are ashamed of it. Why they should be ashamed of their positions. I'm not sorry We didn't go with Gantz. Solomon with where I am. "

You were a partner in the government that cleared Amona and did not evacuate Khan al-Ahmar. You too can say left.

"With eight mandates, we did the maximum we could. Around Amuna evacuation, I changed the state's answers to the High Court from end to end."

***

How did you get the departure of Rabbi Rafi Peretz for a role in the government?

"Can't say I was surprised."

Where did you hear about it?

"In the media. He didn't bother to call to tell us."

That front too. You said in closed conversations that he was the weak link, and that he would leave.

"Right, we know who we're working with."

so what happened?

"I do not want to expand on this issue. I wish Rabbi Rafi success in the Ministry of Jerusalem."

Do you think he is not fit for politics?

"I think it's his choice, and he made a mistake. Throughout the post-election negotiations, Naftali updated everyone on everything. It was proper that Rabbi Rafi would talk to us before he made such a move, it was much more respectable. But we considered such a scenario."

Have you talked since?

"Peace Peace in the Knesset."

Do you believe Gantz will be prime minister?

"In politics you can't know."

There is an agreement.

"In politics everything can be."

***

This past week, right-wing men have been dealing with the issue of sovereignty. They met with members of the Yesha Council, and often speak publicly about the plan, and in particular the dangers inherent in it, in their opinion.

"President Trump is the most sympathetic president the State of Israel has ever had," Shaked says. "There was none, and I doubt it would be. Ambassador David Friedman is a precursor to the settlement, he helped build Bethel. We have their gratitude for them. They are good people and want the good of the country.

"In fact, the Trump plan was built by Netanyahu. It should be called the Netanyahu plan. For many years, since Bar-Ilan's speech, Netanyahu has been talking about establishing a demilitarized Palestinian state, more limited than the one Olmert and Livni talked about, but still a Palestinian state.

"We are opposed to the establishment of a Palestinian state. In order for me to support this plan, some changes must be made to it. First, change the map. The maps I have seen have Palestinian succession and Israeli enclaves. There must be the opposite - Israeli succession and Palestinian enclaves.

"In addition, according to the map we have, there will be a nationalization of more than 100,000 Palestinians. Speaking of annexation of all C areas, one can swallow a nationalization of 100,000 people, but when sovereignty is applied only to 30 percent of the area, it is not worth it.

"In addition, the plan should remove the issue of construction freeze in isolated communities. If God forbid, a Palestinian state be established, large communities such as Otniel and Mount Bracha are supposed to be cut off islands, and the plan will freeze them. Mount Bracha is a settlement that can reach tens of thousands of housing units. Make him wilt.

"According to the plan, 50 percent of C areas are completely frozen. There is no construction, non-Jewish and non-Arab, for at least four years. This should be reduced to three years, and it will be clear that after three years it is possible to build free."

Why three years rather than two years?

"Two years is excellent, three years is feasible. If Trump is elected again, three years is still in his term."

The plan has simplified terms for Palestinians, and they have already announced that they will not accept it.

"That is true, but who assures me that there will suddenly be no other government in the United States that will not be bound by the conditions outlined today and rely only on the Israeli agreement to establish a Palestinian state in half of the territory?

"We must not accept a plan that recognizes a Palestinian state. The Israeli government has never recognized a Palestinian state, not even the Oslo Accords."

The pragmatic right says that in order to convey a historic event of sovereignty in the Jordan Valley and Judea and Samaria, concessions must also be made.

"We see that what works is the Mapainian system - where builders have sovereignty. Even if it's not officially. Therefore, we are not prepared to accept an agreement that says that half of the area goes to the Palestinians. In such a situation, we prefer to wait another 50 years. We have patience. "

When you were in government you talked about the Trump and Netanyahu statement in the White House as a miracle that marks "the beginning of our redemption growth." Now it suddenly became a danger?

"Our position on sovereignty does not depend on political position. Even when we were Netanyahu's partners, we said it was a plan that could be dangerous to settle. From that press conference it was understandable that two days later sovereignty could be applied without any commitment. Suddenly we saw that things were different."

***

The judicial system has come up in public discourse in recent months and has caused quite a few controversies. Shaked, the former justice minister, talks about the great distrust of right-wing circles toward the system.

"I have to separate the prosecution and the prosecution from the courts. When I took office, I had a goal - to balance the judicial system in a more national and conservative way. I did this through control of a judiciary selection committee. We appointed conservative and national judges to all cases, and see it today in all judgments , Both in the Supreme Court and in the lower courts, although this name is less pronounced: Once upon a time, the Supreme Court had one judge like Noam Solberg, who today has a conservative camp, along with judges like Joseph Elron and David Mintz.

"That trend should have continued. If I had another term in the Justice Department, I would have two or three more conservative judges from it, and then the Supreme Court would be balanced, half and half. Half national conservatives, and half progressive liberals."

But for now, there is really no change. Only recently has a verdict been issued stating that the home of one of the terrorists who murdered Dvir Sorek should not be demolished.

"It's a great example. We saw Judge Mintz say to demolish the house, and Judge Vogelman says not to demolish. That's exactly the fight."

So you're actually talking about selecting judges based on their political positions.

"No, we do not order judgments. The judge is independent. But there is some spirit. You can see direction by judge's rulings. I do not classify judges by ballot, I divide by their rulings, between conservative judges and progressive liberals.

"Even in the latest ruling, which allows the prime minister to stand under indictment, there are statements such as that of Justice Mazuz, who says it is unethical for Netanyahu to choose, and for that matter, Justice Mintz, who says - 'He must not put himself in the shoes of the voters.' Exactly the difference: There are differences in the basket of values ​​between conservative and progressive judges.

"Today, my father Nissenkorn has a majority in the Judiciary Committee, and he will be able to do whatever he wants in the Supreme Court appointments. I hope the committee will continue on this line."

So the actual Ayelet Shaked revolution, which everyone was talking about, didn't really happen. The court, according to you, remains under the control of judges identified with the left, and is satisfied with the citation of judges in a minority opinion.

"There is a change. The left expected the High Court to put itself in the ballot box and say that Netanyahu cannot serve as prime minister, and that did not happen. As I pass interrupt, I see the change. In nine or 11 judge assemblies, the conservative camp is still small. In limited compositions, the change is very noticeable. It is a process that has started, it cannot be completed in one term. It is impossible to fix 30 years in one term. That's why it's so bad that Netanyahu has given up on the justice portfolio. "

And what about what's going on in the prosecutor's office?

"Those who come from outside today are not able to deal with tenders in the prosecutor's office, everything is internal tenders. This is how the DNA of the prosecutor's office is preserved. It needs to be opened up and to allow transitions between defense and prosecution. "

Do you share the statements that the prosecutor's office is seeking for Netanyahu? That there is selective enforcement?

"Ehud Olmert was a left man, he negotiated with Abu Mazen, he gave up on Jerusalem, and still charged him. It's not just against right-wing people. There were things against Ruby Rivlin, against Haim Ramon, who suffered serious investigative failures, against Kahalani. There were cases against people of all kinds and opinions.

"It should be remembered that Shi Nitzan is Netanyahu's nominee, he and Tzipi Livni brought him in. When they brought his name to government approval, the Jewish Home Ministers were the only ones trying to stop this nomination. Bennett, Uri Ariel and the late Uri Orbach voted against that we saw him A very 'demanding' character when it comes to the settlers in Judea and Samaria. Bennett spoke with the prime minister and told him not to bring this appointment to the government, and Netanyahu said about Shai Nitzan that he was a very deserving nominee. Those are the facts. This is the reality.

"There is another problem with the prosecutor's office: they do a criminalization process for politics. When I was the justice minister, I talked to the prosecutor's office all the time and told them to be careful about it. Political procedure is a matter of giving, it does not mean there is corruption between two people. With interests is a conflict of interest. Be careful not to turn political practice into something criminal. "

This week Shaked rose to the Knesset stage and in a very uncharacteristic form, she shouted loudly in the direction of Tzipi Hotbeli, that her party gave up the ultra-Orthodox on the committee for appointing diners. "Netanyahu took what was important to us and sold it to the ultra-Orthodox," she said. "As a Likud representative, you are deceiving religious Zionism. You said you would worry about religious Zionism, so how do you let the head of the committee move to the ultra-Orthodox? Disgrace!"

Suddenly, when you are in opposition, attacking the ultra-Orthodox? Where have you been all these years when you worked with them in the same coalition?

"We are not attacking the ultra-Orthodox, we are attacking Netanyahu who is giving up the ultra-Orthodox on important things, such as the Committee for Appointment of Dayanim. In our last term we achieved things that were never achieved. For the benefit of the ultra-Orthodox, but in return he gave us the case file.

"We have achieved achievements in the Dayanim Committee, which have never been here. We appointed four religious Zionists to the great rabbinical court. This is something that dramatically changes the mood in the court. Something that did not exist."

***

What are your plans for the future? Smutrich told us that he and Bennett were working on forming a new and united party. Aren't you in the loop?

"Of course. We are a trio, and the three of us think that the Jewish home, the national union and the new right must be united into one big party, which will gain public trust by primaries, and from there grow."

That is, the direction is to pursue a sectoral party?

"The intention is to build a significant and larger party. Not the one that will compete with the Likud, these are two parties with different roles. The Likud is a ruling party, and an ideological party of the Zionist right and religious Zionism."

Then you got rid of the idea of ​​being prime minister. You once said that being prime minister is possible only from the Likud.

"It is true that if you want to be prime minister you have to move to the Likud."

Miri Regev claimed that she thwarted your intention to move to Likud.

"Last year, after not passing the blockade, people from the Likud contacted me and told me it was time to run for Likud and do a job there."

And why didn't it happen?

"The political system came out again for the elections. I saw an opportunity to unite the three parties, and that's what we did."

How about Mirror Regev?

"Go ahead to the next question."

In the future, would you like to move to the Likud and run for office there?

"At the moment it is not at issue. In the future I do not know what will be."

judadatit@gmail.com