Who is Avigdor Lieberman?

News that Israel’s police recommended indicting Foreign Minister Avidgor Lieberman, was met outside of Israel with a fairly uniform media response: a reminder that Lieberman is a controversial right-wing politician of Moldovan origin who used to work as a bouncer. Often there is an inset box mentioning that President Obama recently held personal talks on the Middle East. European papers have not had the column inches to fully explain Lieberman’s background but they have occasionally covered what might seem to be his main policy areas: a Palestinian state (against), Iran (against), and bombing Egypt’s Aswan Dam (willing to be convinced). For Lieberman any publicity is good publicity. Allow us to give him some.

Formerly an aide to Benjamin Netanyahu, Lieberman served as Director General of the Likud party before Netanyahu’s (first) election as Prime Minister and then afterwards as Director General of the Prime Minister’s office. Their relationship was so close that Yisrael Beiteinu, his party, was set up with Netanyahu’s connivance and the assistance of his supporters. The rationale for increasing Likud’s electoral competition was to anchor voters from the former Soviet Union (“Russian”) into the right wing block. At that time the leading Russian immigrant politician, Natan Sharansky, was openly flirting with Netanyahu’s opponent, Ehud Barak. Pundits watched Sharansky’s chess matches, attempting to draw conclusions from how he fared against each Prime Ministerial candidate. Unfortunately the ploy was not sufficient to retain the premiership for Netanyahu and their relationship was said to have cooled.

But it was a worthwhile sacrifice for Lieberman: within a decade his party has become the third largest in Israel, and he has become the first politician in the history of the nation to occupy a major office of state despite no proper affiliation with either of the main political entities. He has managed by clearly learning the lessons of previous secular hopes, the Centre Party and Shinui, to name two recent examples. These are: a willingness to sit in the opposition rather than be tainted with a failed period in government; not promising supporters a revolution that can’t be delivered, and not allowing the emergence other factions that would threaten his predominance.

Unfortunately this means that the party will have problems replacing him if he resigns from the Knesset, as he has promised to do if indicted. The ministers from his party would be the obvious contenders however whilst some have begun to show streaks of independence since the last elections, none of them have yet demonstrated the desire of the talent to take over. National Infrastructure Minister Uzi Landau, a defector from the Likud, brought mainstream respectability to Yisrael Beiteinu but he could easily find a political home elsewhere. Minister for Police Yitzhak Aharonovich is formerly a senior policeman. Beholden to no one in his present role, he does not look like wanting to move. Although no one would dream of suggesting otherwise, Absorbtion Minister Sofa Landver is not capable of the job. She became a Knesset member a payback from (now President) Shimon Peres – she had been his Russian teacher. Thus the two main contenders are Lieberman confidantes Stan Misezhnikov, Tourism Minister, and backbencher Fania Kirshenbaum. Misezhnikov is a rising star but with the focus still more on rising than star, whereas many Israelis would not even recognise the name Kirshenbaum. If either became leader Lieberman would still be perceived to be pulling strings. Quite likely he would be despite the scandal that will ensue.

None of this will matter. For sure, the electoral cycle will likely see Yisrael Beiteinu drop a few mandates from the 15 it currently holds, but not because of Lieberman’s alleged misconduct. Israelis have long ago ceased to expect honesty from their leaders. Such probity was taken for granted in the early years of the state, when the founding fathers were seen to have struggled for independence if not entirely selflessly then at least not dishonestly. This came to a change in the 1970s when the Labour movement not only lost its security credentials but was also hit by a plethora of corruption, graft and fundraising scandals. It has been over a decade since a prime minister has come and gone without following their example.

Similarly, the “Russian” public is not likely to be concerned about Lieberman calling the shots from an air-conditioned office on the West Bank – or potentially a jail cell – as opposed to from the floor and corridors of the Knesset. Studies in both Israel and Russia indicate that Russians are more disposed towards authoritarian leaders, particularly under the veil of democracy. Lieberman provides that at present (there is no real internal party democracy) and could continue doing so from outside parliament. A cautionary reminder though – this did not work out for Shas’ former leader Aryeh Deri, who 10 years ago was were Lieberman is now.