Civil - military relations in Israel

Résumé du document

Israel is a democratic republic and operates under the parliamentary system. Executive power is exercised by the prime minister and the government. It was founded in 1948.The Israeli defence forces, Tsahal, were also created in 1948, with the professionalisation of several paramilitary underground armies like the Haganah or the Irgoun. These self defence militias aimed at protecting the Jewish emigrants at the beginning of the 20th century (in application of the sionist doctrine). This characteristic makes the particularity of Tsahal: the army has strong links with the population and has been very influenced by the sionist theories. As many armies in the world, the first role of Tsahal is protect the country from the external attacks. Internal security is the other role of Tsahal (growing risk of terrorism)
A third role of Tsahal is to foster the national cohesion. Observing the several roles of Tsahal, we can understand the very specificity of the IDF (Israeli defence forces). But, are there real democratic civil-military relations in Israel? And if not, why during the first sixty years of their history the IDF never overtly challenged the authority of the civilian government? We will see that although Tsahal has kept all the time a very pre-eminent role in Israeli life and politics there are several mechanisms of control which protect the democratic process.

Extraits

[...] A strong link between tha armed forces and the Israeli society -The militias that in 1948 have formed the armed forces were based on the Zionist doctrine. They aimed at protecting the Jewish emigrants in Israel against Arab and English populations. The Jewish paramilitary organizations of Palestine before Israeli independence were fiercely political, as shown before. It means that Tsahal's goal is also protect the identity of the “jewish nation”. It's a kind of subjective control in the sense that the paramilitary organisations and then, Tsahal itself share the same values with the civilians (authority and population). [...]

[...] Levi Eskhol (1963-1969) * 5. Golda Meir (1969-1974) 6. Yitzak Rabin (1974-1977) * 7. Menahem Begin (1977-1983) * 8. Yitzak Shamir (1983-1984) * 9. Shimon Peres (1984-1986) 10. Yitzak Shamir (1986-1992) * 11. Yitzak Rabin (1992-1995) * 12. Shimon Peres (1995-1996) * 13. [...]

[...] The evolution of Tsahal: a constant process of professionalisation (=kind of old professionalism) In 1948, Tsahal was born by the professionalisation and the “regularisation” of several paramilitary undergroud groups. Since 1987 and the first intifada, Tsahal is operating deep changes. Partly because of the debate in the society about the palestinian question, and partly because of a change in its strategy. Since august of 2005, and the nomination of Dan Halutz, a project of internal reform is being applyed: - reduce the number of soldiers (now, more or less 631,500 people), reducing the period of obligatory conscription. - nominate younger generals - reinforce the military formation . [...]

[...] The chief of staff participated regularly in cabinet meetings and gave opinions on government security policy. Members of the IDF could vote and engage in normal political activity, but with certain restraints. They could join political parties or politically oriented groups and attend meetings, but they were barred from taking an active role as spokespersons either for the IDF or for a political group. -Retired officers entering politics were not concentrated in a particular part of the political spectrum. Few officers were associated with the small minority of groups upholding autocratic political values. [...]

[...] Conclusion To conclude this essay, we can say that civil-military relations in Israel are very complex. Although Israel has always been a democracy, the military has a very important role and some prerogatives that are in contradiction with the democratic principle. The relations between military and civilians (talking about population) are also very particular: Tsahal has a very good image in the society (but because of the last war in Lebanon, this fact is changing). So, why did the armed forces never take the control of Israel? [...]