State of Chutzpah
By Uri Avnery - Gush Shalom
09-09-2006
IN EVERY language there are some words that cannot be properly translated into any other. It seems that they express
something intimately connected with the speakers of that language and rooted in their history, traditions and reality.
Such words become international expressions, appearing in other languages in their original form.
For example, the German word "Schadenfreude". Or the English word "gentleman" and the American word 'business". Or the
Russian word "pogrom" (originally meaning devastation). Or the Japanese word "kamikaze" (divine wind, the title given to
suicide bombers). Or the Mexican "manana" and the similar Arabic "bukra" (both meaning tomorrow. The difference between
them? The joke says: Bukra is not so urgent.) And, lately, the Palestinian "intifada".
The most prominent Hebrew addition to this international lexicon is "chutzpah", a word that has no equivalent in any
other language. Some English words may come close (impertinence, cheek, insolence, impudence), but none conveys the full
meaning of this Hebrew-Yiddish expression. It seems that it reflects something that is especially characteristic of
Jewish reality, which was transferred to the State of Israel, which defines itself as a "Jewish State".
THE PRESIDENT of Israel is supposed to symbolize the common denominator of all our citizens. Therefore it is proper for
him to symbolize this trait, too. And indeed, it is difficult to imagine a more quintessential chutzpah than the
behavior of His Excellency, President Moshe Katzav. He is the supreme symbol of Israeli chutzpah. Katzav has been
accused of the sexual harassment of several women who worked for him in the President's office, as well as in his
earlier public offices. At least three of them accused him of rape. Such accusations are, of course, far from a
conviction. The investigation is still going on. The President, like any other citizen, must be presumed innocent until
found guilty in court. It is quite possible that in the end he will not even be indicted, or - if this happens - that he
will be acquitted, though perhaps only for lack of proof. But that is not the point. The point is that the President of
the state, like Caesar's wife, must be above suspicion. It is sufficient that there be reasonable grounds for suspecting
the President - such as a criminal investigation - for him to resign his office. If he is later acquitted, so much the
better. Let it be clear: I have nothing against Moshe Katzav personally. On the contrary, I have praised him on TV for
his readiness, in spite of belonging to the Likud, to listen to Arab citizens. I once brought to him a delegation of
leaders from the West Bank, and he treated them with the utmost courtesy. But as a citizen of Israel I am ashamed. The
affair in which he is involved dishonors the office and, indirectly, the entire state. "Citizen Number 1" has become the
butt of jokes. One thing can be said in his favor: in his chutzpah, too, he symbolizes the state, or, at least, the
ruling elite.
THE KING of chutzpah, its very personification, is the Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert. If he had a gram of shame, the
minimum of decency, he would have resigned the day after the cease-fire. There is no need for an inquiry to decide the
obvious: that he is guilty of a long line of disasters that have caused the death of a thousand human beings, including
almost 200 Israelis - men, women, old people and children. It can be debated of what exactly to accuse Olmert: the
starting of an unnecessary and hopeless war (as I believe), or "only" the incompetent conduct of the campaign from start
to finish. But any one of these is enough for a decent person to go home and wait there for the results of the
inquiries. But Olmert does not even dream of doing that. He continues as if nothing has happened. In the US this is
called "stonewalling". He stands there naked like the emperor in the children's story. All the promises he made only a
few months ago, during the election campaign, have dissipated like smoke in the wind. He has no political plan left. He
has not even the ability to carry out any plan, if he had one. He has no time to think about anything, except his
political survival. Winston Churchil once said about a former British Prime Minister: "The right honorable gentleman
sometimes stumbles on the truth, but he always hurries on as if nothing has happened." Olmert, similarly, hurries on his
way. He objects to the investigation of the war through the instruments prescribed by law. He tries to set up a
whitewash investigation by an unquestioningly loyal group chosen by himself. He goes on using every opportunity to make
another of his banal, cliché-laden speeches, which do not contain a single word of truth, or even of interest. That is
chutzpah. Not chutzpah in the harmless, jocular sense often signified by this word, but a dangerous, rude and aggressive
chutzpah. In practice, the state remains without leadership. It is unable to take bold decisions in a situation which
demands them. His personal survival overshadows everything else, from the problem of the prisoner exchange to the daily
killing of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. It must be stated again and again: the state is not private property.
It is not some booty that belongs to whoever has succeeded in laying his hands on it, accidentally or not. It is a
national treasure entrusted by the citizens to a particular politician, which must be given back by him if he is proven
unable or incompetent to exercise his duties. Any other attitude is chutzpah.
NO NEED to waste words on the chutzpah of Amir Peretz. It speaks for itself. He bears personal responsibility for all
the blunders of the war, from the unthinking decision to start it, up to the last military decision. From the boastful
beginning to the bitter end he showed a shocking inadequacy. A decent person would have resigned the moment the guns
fell silent. His refusal is chutzpah. The chutzpah of Peretz is almost bizarre. He achieved political power on the basis
of his explicit promise to carry out basic social reforms. Not only did he ignore this promise, he did the very
opposite. His effort to continue now as if nothing has happened and even to present himself as a social leader is
pathetic.
BUT EVEN these three champions - Katzav, Olmert and Peretz - pale in comparison with Dan Halutz. Together with
likeminded people I demonstrated opposite the Ministry of Defense when he was sworn in as Chief-of-Staff. It was clear
to us that such a person, who had behaved as he did behave and who had said what he did say was not fit to lead the
Israeli army. But even we did not foresee in our wildest imagination that in such a short time, and in such an extreme
manner, he would confirm our darkest forebodings. From a purely military point of view, Halutz is the greatest failure
in the annals of the Israeli army. From a human point of view, he justified the prophecy that he has a brilliant future
in the court of The Hague. From a political point of view, his understanding equals that of a primary school pupil (if
the pupil community will excuse me.) The boastfulness of the Air force, the arrogance of an incompetent general, the
brutality of a person who is able to bring tragedy to hundreds of thousands without batting an eyelid - all of these
were exposed during the war. As has been published, he told the government on the sixth day of the war that from that
moment on there was no possibility of achieving anything more. Said so and did not demand to stop, said so and went on
with the killing and destroying, day after day, night after night. On the eve of the cease-fire he sent his soldiers
into a militarily senseless, completely unnecessary offensive, in which the lives of 33 of his soldiers were sacrificed.
But Dan Halutz does not resign. It doesn't even enter his mind. This week, at a meeting of former generals, accusations
and even insults were slung at him, and he did not budge. A decent person would have resigned at once. It is clear that
an officer who has failed in this manner, who is so much distrusted by the army, cannot carry out the general overhaul
demanded now - the replacing of the entire general Staff, and especially the replacing of all the commanders who were in
charge of the campaign. Can a person who refuses to bear the responsibility for this entire bungled campaign demand that
his subordinates shoulder theirs? When chutzpah is the norm in the army - what chance is there for its rehabilitation?
I KNOW, there are several arguments for keeping the champions of chutzpah in office. There are no obvious alternatives.
The bad may be replaced by worse. Olmert's resignation may lead to new elections, in which the more extreme Right may
win. His resignation may also lead to the inclusion in the government of Avigdor Liberman, compared to whom the
Frenchman Le Pen and the Austrian Haider are bleeding-heart liberals. Who can guess who and what might come after
Halutz? All these arguments are valid, but they must give way to one simple demand: Chutzpah must not be allowed to
reign. The acceptance of personal responsibility by the directors of the government and the army is an essential feature
of a healthy society. It is a simple moral imperative, like the categorical imperative of Kant, an imperative that does
not allow for any compromise. The Talmud warns against "chutzpah towards heaven" (God). We must warn against chutzpah
towards civil society, the sovereign on earth.
*************
GUSH SHALOM p.o.b. 3322 Tel Aviv 61033
Your donation helps make our voice heard
Please, send checks in your own currency - for confirmation of receipt include email address
In several countries tax-exemption can be obtained by donating through local charities
info@gush-shalom.org www.gush-shalom.org