Two litigants entered the rabbi. The rabbi heard the arguments of the first and ruled: "Right." He listened to the other's words, and again declared, "Right." The Rebbetzin heard and said to her husband: "Is it possible? Surely they contradict each other?" The rabbi replied, "You're right, too."
This old Jewish joke sums up one of the unfunny problems that the State of Israel has been dealing with for decades – the loss of the Jewish hold on the Galilee. About 70,420 Jews, compared to 15,<> Arabs, or about <>%, is the approximate figure. By all accounts, this is an emergency.
On the day of a security order, which already took place during Operation Guardian of the Walls, the Arab communities could become an internal security challenge to Israel. On the day of a political order, they may demand independence or at least autonomy. In any case, most Israeli Arabs define themselves as Palestinians and, of course, do not identify with the values of the Jewish state. The situation was summarized by Benny Gantz, chairman of the state camp, when he said that "the State of Israel may find itself between Gedera and Hadera."
The fear of losing the Galilee was at the background of two stormy discussions held by the government in recent weeks. The first dealt with "national priority areas." The second was initiated by Ben-Gvir's "Zionism Law." At both meetings, the prime minister and the ministers voiced very strong criticism of the Israel Land Authority (ILA).
"Advanced necrosis"
Netanyahu defined the ILA policy as "crazy data with catastrophic national consequences. I won't tolerate it. It doesn't make sense for a plot of land to be sold for 100,90 shekels in an Arab community and a million shekels in an adjacent Jewish community. They [ILA] own <>% of the land and constitute an economic and real estate barrier."
Defense Minister Yoav Galant was more blunt, saying that "the planning institutions are acting out of anti-Zionist considerations." Settlement Minister Orit Struk said at the time, "In the Lev HaGalil area, we are in a stage of advanced necrosis. This is a national question. We are losing space in the heart of the Galilee that will simply be wiped out, because people will not live forever, and young couples, even if they are the most idealistic, have no way of building their home in such an expensive place. We have lost the Jewish North in the sense that we think in socio-economic terms on a national priority map. A national priority map should tell where it is important for the State of Israel to promote settlement."
These harsh statements led to a government decision to establish an inter-ministerial team to formulate, within a month, a map of national priority areas for housing. According to this map, the Planning Administration and the Israel Land Authority are supposed to operate. The team, headed by Prime Minister Office Director General Yossi Shelly, as Netanyahu's representative, will hold its second meeting next week.
Behind closed doors, the heads of the settlements in the north call the director of the Israel Authority a "snake" and a "non-Zionist." For his part, he believes that the "Zionist war" of his opponents is fake, and that their only concern is to receive discounted plots for their children
But the IMA, and more specifically the office of the minister responsible for it, Yitzhak Goldknopf, is not waiting for the government. Goldknopf went on a battle to defend the reputation of his subordinate authority, including decisions made by previous governments. In a letter to Netanyahu and the ministers, he wrote that their allegations against the ILA are "empty criticism and baseless accusations." Goldknopf accused Smotrich of being a "major barrier" to the execution of plans.
But Goldknopf not only talks but also does. This coming Monday, long before the inter-ministerial team finishes its work, the Israel Land Council will convene to shape its policy in a way that effectively contradicts the government's decision.
Why does Goldknopf work unilaterally and not wait for the government? "There are decisions that need to be made urgently, and if necessary they will be corrected after the ministerial work is completed," his office said. Blessed be the believer.
The ILA itself is, of course, prevented from attacking the government or its leader. Therefore, its response stated: "The Authority is subordinate to the government and implements the policy and decisions of the Israel Land Council. The ILA is a state authority and is prohibited from responding and arguing with such statements. The ILA periodically examines marketing policy in order to adapt itself to the changing reality."
Crisis of confidence
The trouble is that the argument over the procedure is only the trailer, since the quarrel has become personal and ugly. On the one hand, the Israel Land Authority and its head, Yanky Quint. On the other side, the heads of the settlements in the north and the ministers who back them. Behind closed doors, the latter call Quint a "snake," a "non-Zionist," and other greetings along those lines. Quint, for his part, believes that his opponents' "Zionist war" is fake, and that their only concern is getting discounted lots for their children.
So there is no trust between the parties. Nor a dialogue, or even mediation by an acceptable party. The heads of the settlements actually want to talk. Goldknopf and Quint are not into it. So the ILA Council will make its decisions without hearing them. And when there is no policy, it is no wonder that there are no results either. For several years now, slander has been flying from side to side, regardless of the incumbent government.
Political correctness does not allow the parties to speak candidly about the situation, since in the current legal situation in the Jewish state, an official who talks about the "Judaization of the Galilee" will be prosecuted on charges of racism. That's why everyone plays with the words and the criteria.
Contrary to the accusations against him, Quint, a religious Jew, a graduate of the Seder yeshiva and a veteran of combat service in the IDF, actually understands the urgency very well. He cares deeply about the demographic relationship between Jews and Arabs. His top priorities are the cities in the north, where the ratio of populations is also changing for the worse. According to him, first and foremost, the numbers speak. Four families in one building in Safed are no less important in terms of national interest than four families in one of the observatories in the Galilee. Settlement concepts like 'holding onto the territory' don't speak to him. Both here and here we need to bring good and strong populations. That's his approach.
The second point is the manner of expansion of non-urban settlement. This week, the Knesset approved the government's first reading of the government's proposal to increase the number of families living in communal communities by up to 1,000. Seemingly a victory for settlement. But the question is how long it will take to fill the quotas. The heads of the councils, and the ministers who support them, believe that localities should be allowed to expand according to their own pace and rules. In other words, a few families each year and admissions committees that will make sure that the new neighbors are suitable for the old residents and thus the community will be preserved. According to them, there is settlement value to homogeneity of the community.
Quint revolts against this perception. In his opinion, the land belongs to the state and not to the residents, and therefore the screening is unfair and improper. What is certain is that the representatives of the settlement do indeed hold the stick at both ends. They also reject the ILA's proposals to expand on a large scale and quickly – Quint suggested that they market the plots in masses through the ILA – but also claim that the state is abandoning the settlements.
And that's just the tip of a nutshell. Each side presents its own data and metrics. The settlers go crazy at the exorbitant prices of the new lots, while their Arab neighbors receive huge discounts. Quint replies that prices are high throughout the country and that Gush Misgav should be compared to Lod or Rehovot, not Majdal Chrome. Thus the mutual mud-throwing continues in a conflict in which at least some of the arguments of each side are right. Netanyahu, whose loss of the Galilee happens during his long shift, for some reason does not call Goldknopf and Quint to order. In the meantime, no responsible adult has been found to save the Galilee.
Wrong? We'll fix it! If you find a mistake in the article, please share with us