Q&A: Is it really because of the Judea and Samaria regulations?
Is it really because of the Judea and Samaria regulations?
Question
Hello,
Bennett said in his speech, and it is also written on his Facebook page, that the reason (which supposedly seemed to be the only one from what he said) that he is dissolving the government is because they would not succeed in extending the Judea and Samaria regulations.
Do you think that really is the reason? How is it that Bibi did not evacuate al-Ahmar for many years despite an explicit Supreme Court ruling, whereas here Bennett is suddenly so committed to the law.
I’m afraid that Bibi will return again, again endless rockets, again riots, again rockets on Jerusalem, again housing prices rising, and again paralysis, lies, corruption, and more and more and more and more—and one could keep writing “more” many more times.
Answer
There is no connection at all between the issues. Evacuating a place is an order to carry out an action, and the government can disregard it and fail to comply with the Supreme Court’s order. But without the Judea and Samaria regulations, the legal status of the residents there changes with respect to all state institutions (police, courts, army, income tax). There is no specific order here that a government can just brush off.
But I have neither the ability nor the interest to judge whether Bennett meant that or not. I can assume that this government had already fallen even before his decision, and even without the Judea and Samaria regulations. And indeed I agree that Bibi’s return is a disaster in many respects (not necessarily the ones you listed).