365
Yediot Aharonot believes that in the debate over the role of cartelization and tycoons in the Israeli economy, the fact that the latter employ many ordinary workers is often overlooked, and asks: "Who looks out for them, the major producers of the economy\’s value?"
Ma\’ariv criticizes the US and Western handling of the Iranian nuclear threat. The author suggests that their "soft response" to Tehran "will soon drag additional regimes into the nuclear arms race," and will spur greater Shi\’ite terrorism, and warns: "From here, the route to chaos is short and one-way."
Yisrael Hayom says that Knesset approval of the proposal to formally legalize the homes on Ulpana Hill in Beit El would mean that "Israel is adopting post facto legislation. It would overturn a court verdict at a time when the democratic world has no concept of a \’law to circumvent the High Court of Justice\’. Theoretically, such a country is liable to deteriorate to the point where it punishes citizens who legally express themselves against the regime because the latter has, in the meantime, changed the law. This reads like a story by Franz Kafka, 88 years after his death." The author says that Likud ministers Dan Meridor, Benny Begin and Michael Eitan "cannot support such a proposal, not because they have turned their backs on the Land of Israel, but because they refuse to turn their backs on the ideas of Zeev Jabotinsky and – mainly – Menachem Begin, specifically on the latter\’s 1951 manifesto on t! he supremacy of the rule of law*." The paper contends that "Nobody wants to see the demolition or uprooting of the homes, but this is one of the cases in which accepting a bad verdict by the judicial authority is better than demolishing the High Court of Justice merely to justly allow five homes to remain standing." The author recalls that "The government of Menachem Begin, which was established around a decade after the Six Day War, determined the settlement enterprise would not be carried out on private Palestinian land. It is possible that a generation of politicians has arisen in the Likud that does not know of the Jabotinsky-Begin heritage and the reservations surrounding it. It seems to me that it is a source of pride." The paper agrees with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu\’s contention that the proposal would hurt Israel\’s international standing. *See pages 24-29
The Jerusalem Post discusses last summer’s socioeconomic protests in light of the range of economic reforms to combat exorbitant food prices recommended by the Kedmi Committee – one of several created in the wake of protests – and states that “While the Kedmi Committee’s recommendations are good in principle, their implementation will be no easy matter. Perhaps another round of socioeconomic protests this summer will put the necessary pressure on politicians to take Kedmi seriously.”
Haaretz asserts that “If right-wing MKs don\’t come to their senses at the last moment, the current Knesset will sully the reputation of Israel\’s parliament with deliberations and a vote on two bills that have no place in an enlightened, law-abiding, democratic country.” The editor argues that the bills in question – a bill for the protection of landholders in Judea and Samaria and a bill for the protection of the rights of the builders of structures in Judea and Samaria – “obscure criminal intent to retroactively approve illegal and unauthorized construction on West Bank land owned by helpless Palestinians,” and states that “Israeli construction in the occupied territories is not a consolation prize for people whom the state and court have accused of serious breaches of the law.”
[Sever Plocker, Eli Avidar and Dan Margalit wrote today’s articles in Yediot Aharonot, Ma\’ariv and Yisrael Hayom, respectively.]