There are times in politics when doing nothing is the best option

By Ira Sharkansky

JERUSALEM — There are times in politics, and they may be most of the times, when it is best to do nothing.

Long ago I learned that the essential rule in policy making is: Don’t make things worse. At about the same time, I heard that America is safest when Congress is on vacation. Now I am pretty sure that Israel is safest when the Knesset is not in session.

Politicians in both countries–and in many others–do not know the rules. They want to fix things with laws, typically with their name on them. However, we can thank politicians for the competition that is built into their work. Legislators propose many more laws than their colleagues are willing to approve. Each may get a few minutes of media exposure with the claim that they are about to fix something, but the purposely cumbersome nature of the legislative process limits the damage.

There are several examples of damage control in Israel this week, as politicians are striving to do nothing.

The Shalit affair bumps from one negotiating episode to the next, without results. The prime minister stays in the middle, not clearly joining the camp of those in favor or those opposed to the deal most recently on the table. His rhetoric is almost as good as Barack Obama’s. He is dealing with the dilemma of trying to bring the soldier home, without endangering Israelis in the process.

We hear once again that some Kadima MKs are pondering a move to Likud, but are not doing it yet. Why should they? Likud has enough strength in the Knesset without them, and they are not likely to be more powerful as Likud back benchers than as members of the Kadima opposition. There is no election on the horizon, so they can wait for better opportunities. the same can be said for the Labor back benchers straining under the rule of Ehud Barak, and threatening to bolt the party but not quite doing it.

President Obama is concentrating on health, and most likely Christmas and New Year celebrations. Without any imminent pressure on Israel from his White House, it is best for Israeli officials to enjoy the local quiet due to someone else’s holiday season. They won’t be caught celebrating Christmas, and the religious parties will damn those who celebrate the New Year of the goyim. Doing nothing is better than a mistake while anticipating pressure that has not come yet, and might not come at all.

Different political and bureaucratic actors are saying things and issuing documents about the settlement freeze, but nothing decisive is happening. The multiple actors who have something to do with a freeze, or with granting exceptions, are enough to assure uncertainty.

Iran may be the most burning issue on Israel’s agenda, but it is also important to other countries. Why should Israel alone pre-empt, when the governments of Sunni Arab countries,  the United States, and others also have an interest in stopping the development of an Iranian nuclear weapon, or having to decide how to live with an Iranian nuclear weapon if the process does not stop?

Jews who worry about another Holocaust may think their concerns are the most pressing. Insofar as others are in the same boat, cautious Israeli ask why should they do the bailing all by themselves. In response, others will say that the Jews of Europe said in the 1930s that “It will not happen to us.” And “Those who do not know history are fated to repeat it.”

However, history never repeats itself. The details always differ, and the “Devil is in the details.”

In short, people are maneuvering, seeming intent to stay out of trouble by not doing the wrong thing, or not doing the right thing in the wrong way.

Coping with uncertainty is how politics works most of the time. And among the principal strategies of coping are avoidance and delay.

The future is ambiguous. Many things can influence the near future, and many more will influence what happens later. There are likely to be pleasant as well as unpleasant surprises, and wise people see a lack of clarity when they look ahead.

Advance planning is desirable, provided it preserves flexibility. On occasion it may seem essential to pre-empt a hostile force by even greater hostility. Most of the time, however, it is worth waiting to see if the threat that might be really is.

In most countries that matter, the people can count on a week of celebration.

Happy Holidays

*
Sharkansky is professor emeritus of political science at Hebrew University

—