The Sephardi Perspective: No 'ethnic demon" in the Kadima race

"This is the moment we bury the ethnic demon in Israel," declared Amir Peretz in his victory speech for the Labor leadership in November 2005. However, he soon found out that his heritage remained an issue throughout his relatively short tenure as Labor leader and failed Defense Minister.

With Minister of Transportation Shaul Mofaz putting his hat in the ring for the post of Kadima leader, Sephardim are the closest they have ever been to representation atop the Israeli political ladder.

Iranian-born Mofaz could become the first Israeli prime minister who doesn't have a European heritage. No Sephardi has ever had such a realistic hope of attaining the premiership in the history of the state of Israel.

Mofaz already has an impressive resumé and has succeeded in many positions usually reserved for Ashkenazim. He became one of only a handful of non-European Chief-of-Staffs in the IDF, with the first being Moshe Levi in 1983 - a full 35 years after the founding of the state.

Unlike many prominent Sephardi politicians such as Amir Peretz, David Levy and Aryeh Deri, Mofaz is not known for being concerned with social and economic affairs. He has only held the transportation and defense portfolios in the government.

As a result, although considered hawkish, Mofaz has not become identified with 'Sephardi politics'.

We are not witnessing any backlash and cries of discrimination when Mofaz is attacked in the press and by fellow politicians the way we witnessed it when Binyamin Ben-Eliezer and Amir Peretz ran for leadership of the Labor party.

Indeed, the 'ethnic demon' has been the decisive factor in almost every election ­from the riots in Wadi Salib in Haifa in the 1950s, the Black Panthers of the 1970s, and Dudu Topaz's "chach-chachim" of the 1980s.

Apart from receiving the blessing of Shas spiritual mentor Rav Ovadia Yosef, which is given to all who seek it, Mofaz has not sought, nor received much of the Sephardi vote.

This is largely because Kadima members, who will decide the outcome of the race, do not appear to have much of an obvious 'Sephardi agenda'.

The upcoming Kadima race is being compared to the race between the US' Democratic presidential candidates, with Livni compared to Hillary Clinton and Mofaz in the guise of Barack Obama.

Obama's campaign has been clouded with references to the skin color of the Senator from Illinois. Whether used as a weapon or as a deflective measure, Obama relates to his ethnicity constantly on the campaign trail. In contrast, Mofaz's ethnicity has hardly been alluded to.

The simplest explanation for this could be that Israeli society has matured and is ready for an 'ethnic' prime minister. However, recent barbs at Peretz and Ben Eliezer prove that this is far from true.

Ben-Eliezer was frequently pejoratively referred to as 'Fuad', similar to those who include the middle-name 'Hussein' when referring to Barack Obama. This demonstrates to the listener or reader that the candidate is an outsider and casts aspersions on whether he or she is fit for that particular office.

However, Mofaz appears not to have suffered thus far in the Kadima race for his ethnicity or his skin tone. This may have more to do with the nature of the Kadima party than anything else.

When Kadima was formed, the leadership learned from the lesson of the almost exclusively secular Ashkenazi Shinui, which lasted only one election. Kadima, from the outset, attempted to be inclusive and attracted members from across ethnic, religious and political divides.

Kadima's first Knesset list featured 11 women, 11 Sephardi candidates, six former generals, six immigrants from the former Soviet Union, four Orthodox candidates, seven academics and two residents of Judea and Samaria.

However, in becoming the party for everyone, it became the party of no one. Kadima became a party without a well- formulated identity. Its voters would be hard-pressed to explain exactly what the party stood for and although there may be many Sephardi Kadima members, these tend not to be from the lower socio-economic classes in which unfortunately the Sephardim have disproportional representation.

Thus, unlike Labor or Likud, Kadima had no definitive parochial affinity. Possibly the antagonism directed towards the likes of Peretz or Ben-Eliezer was because of the feeling that the Labor movement was formed and largely populated by Ashkenazim.

Or because mistrust of the left wing is seen as a protest vote, by Sephardim settling accounts, election after election, for the humiliation and insult they and their parents and their parent's parents suffered. Either way the history of the Labor party has an effect on its current perceived identity.

Mofaz is part of what researchers Michal Shamir and Asher Arian call the 'dealignment' of the Israeli party system. This dealignment describes a general loosening of the ties between society and the political society in response to social and political modernization. Thus, Kadima is at the forefront of a shift away from ethnic or identity politics that characterized much of the first few decades of the state.

The Kadima member or supporter has sought this party because it is an attempt at a 'new way' in Israeli politics. Perhaps this clean slate has allowed a non-European like Mofaz to possibly ascend to the top of their party and perhaps even the pinnacle of Israeli politics.

The writer is an editor at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs for the Middle East Strategic Information project.

www.mesi.org.uk