Left and Right Are Irrelevant In Jerusalem

Perhaps one of the most salient characteristics of Israeli culture is its tendency to politicize everything, and to infer a world view based on an identification of 'right' or 'left.' Ethnic background, economic status, education and religiosity are all common idicators of what have become deeply ingrained prototypes of Israeli partisan political positions. In fact, when in doubt, there is even a simplistic, one-question litmus test that will determine an individual's political bias : What would be worse for you: to have a sister who is a prostitute, or a son who is gay? (Anecdotal evidence suggests that right always answers the latter and the left the former.)



It is interesting to note that the formation and the initial success of the Kadima party in Israeli politics is a fulfillment of the prophecy of "the big bang." This theory that says that in the widely-acknowledged demographic reality of a growing parity between Jews and Arabs in our little sliver of earth, the creation of a Palestinian state is not only inevitable, but is imperative for the future survival of the state of Israel. This understanding erases the traditional differences between right and left and enables the formation of a fusion, centrist party that combines the left's willingness to compromise and the right's suspicion and caution. The traditionally left-wing platform of negotiations with the Palestinians has been elevated to the level of national consensus and the proof is in the pudding: amongst the founders of Kadima were Ariel Sharon and Shimon Peres, ideological arch enemies from the right and left for decades who ended their political careers on the same partisan bench, together with a host of well-known Israeli politicians from both Likud and Labor.

However, the positions of left and right are alive and well when it comes to the future of Jerusalem, still a volatile issue for the Israeli electorate. Just insert the words, "...will divide Jerusalem" after the name of any potential candidate for office to guarantee defeat at the polls (see Bibi Netanyahu's defeat of Shimon Peres by less than 1% in the 1996 prime ministerial elections). Anyone running for mayor here with a modicum of political saavy understands that talking about the division of the city is taboo, especially since the secular population of Jerusalem leans heavily to the right. A smart candidate, no matter what he truly thinks, will signal right in his campaign.

I'd be the first to castigate a politician who is dishonest about an important issue in his campaign - except for Jerusalem. This city's future is a national, and not a municipal issue. Anyone with half a brain understands that the fate of the capitol will not be decided in city hall, but in the Knesset. With all due respect to the mayor of Jerusalem, the future division of the city is none of his business. The mayor's job is to reverse the trend of strong populations leaving the city, to create jobs, to build tourist infrastructure, to provide affordable housing for young couples, to clean up the streets and to strengthen the educational system. The mayor must have a vision of Jerusalem twenty years down the road and the perseverance to lay the groundwork for the next generations of residents. The ultra-orthodox candidates have proven that they are not up to the task; our best option is uncharismatic, right-wing but enterprising Nir Barkat. It infuriates me to read that some of the leaders of the Meretz party, my political home, will not cast their votes for him because he is right wing. Wake up, you idiots! Right and left are irrelevant in this election. Jerusalem needs a capable leader who can rise above partisan and sectorial politics to tap the extraordinary potential the city has to be a fabulous home for its residents and a wonderful place to visit.