A Link in the Chain: The decline of Jerusalem

The most significant transfer of power in Israeli history is unfolding. Political institutions and elite are being overshadowed by mayors, philanthropists, business leaders, nonprofits and civil servants. This transformation allows us to become a healthier society of closely networked communities.

Olmert's downfall is just the most recent milestone of a process that has been going on for thirty years.

During the first twenty five years of its existence, Israeli society and economy was mostly centralized, state-owned and controlled. There was one powerful party, MAPAI, and an all-powerful government that ran the country in a top-down fashion. As late as the early eighties, the government controlled more than eighty percent (80%) of the economy, provided all public services and controlled most media outlets.

The roots of this structure can be found in the Histadrut - the national labor organization - which was established in the twenties to address the collective needs of the working class and the individual needs of its members. This institution and its leaders played a historical role in the establishment of the State of Israel and had a long lasting impact on its character. Israelis were taken care of from cradle to grave, so to speak. This was a period of unmatched prosperity and astonishing military, economic and social achievements. It worked.

One of the most important virtues of MAPAI had been that it provided a political remedy to an electoral system that was prone to generate fragmentation and instability. With the demise of MAPAI in the early 70s, the weaknesses of this system were exposed. Disproportional power had been granted to smaller parties. Israel's overall economic and social performance began to deteriorate.

In fact, it has been more than thirty years that Israelis have been rightfully frustrated with their government and its performance. Our electoral system ushers in fragmented legislatures - the Knesset - that breed multi-party executives, the Government of Israel. Consequently, Israel suffers from chronically short and unstable tenures averaging a year and a half for a minister and two and a half years for the Knesset.

Powerful incentives for short-term, sectarian and populist conduct drive our politicians while Israel needs the exact opposite: long-term and substantive political leadership that focuses on collective interests.
Naturally an underperforming government has been subject to pressures to become more effective and efficient or to shrink. Failures to reform government have legitimized a most aggressive effort to shrink it through privatization. In a matter of two decades, from the Stability Package of 1985, Israeli government has shrunk by more than forty percent (40%), creating a huge societal void and a monumental challenge to the character and values of Israeli society: will we become a society of individuals and households that are each for his or her own or a society of stronger, healthier, more prosperous closely networked communities? Realizing the latter is the biggest challenge facing Israeli society.

The decline of Jerusalem also attracts powerful forces to fill the void. They are business leaders, mayors and municipal governments, philanthropists and nonprofits who increasingly assume positions of leadership and authority in areas that used to be controlled and managed by the central government. The Knesset and the Government of Israel would be right to encourage this trend by decentralizing power while providing the necessary legislation, regulation, standardization and enforcement in order to empower these forces to make more significant contributions to Israeli society.

The 2006 Second Lebanon War provided a dramatic manifestation of this trend. When the government failed to provide for the needs of hundreds of thousands of Israelis in northern Israel, philanthropists, nonprofits and world Jewry were much quicker and more efficient in filling the gap. Recently, even the Prime Minister's Office has come to terms with this powerful trend and has been leading a reform that will consolidate and regulate the growing role of these sectors.

This evolution is a blessing in disguise. It pushes our society to be more self-reliant and to relate to our local communities, no longer primarily associating ourselves to the higher authority in Jerusalem turning to the national government to address our problems.

 Israel may be transitioning into a society of closely networked communities. This process has many merits: First, it is important for national security. Strong communities are the building blocks of the ability to withstand national crises in the form of natural disasters or wars. Second, strong local communities can become engines of social and economic growth. Third, communities are much better equipped than the central government to address the needs of the poor, week and needy. Fourth, a strong community is very important for one's overall quality of life.

Finally, as it resembles the way Jews have organized themselves throughout the centuries in the Diaspora, it will allow us easier connection to our Diaspora communities.

This trend offers an opportunity for Diaspora Jewry as well. First, the number of areas available for meaningful engagements will expand dramatically. Second, it is in a position to impact three of the rising forces of Israeli society: it can influence Israeli philanthropists through leadership by example and leverage its giving to nonprofits and municipal institutions toward better and more efficient performance.

The decline of Jerusalem should be a source of grave concern. Reforming our electoral system to produce powerful incentives for our politicians to be forward-looking with a broad view is critically important. However, this crisis of governance may also offer an opportunity for a historical societal transformation. The outcome may prove to be more prosperous, more secure and even more Jewish.