Bad boys in blue

Another day, another headline about a top police officer sexually harassing his subordinates. In what has become a sadly familiar read, all three papers are united in their shock and disgust at the state of the police.

Haaretz reports that five women have signed affidavits stating that the high-ranking officer (whose name has yet to be released, but holds the rank of deputy commissioner) sexually harassed them while they were under his command. Unlike other investigations, the police actually suspected this one was coming after an anonymous letter was sent to the Police Investigation Unit a few months ago. Since then, five women have come forward and confirmed what was written in the letter. Despite the officer’s contention the letter is a fake, the Justice Ministry suspects he is lying since the evidence against him shows a consistent modus operandi.

Israel Hayom’s front page headline paraphrases Yohanan Danino, “Police Chief: Zero tolerance for sexual harassment in the police.” Since taking office, Danino said that he has made it a priority to rid the police of anyone who deviates from the law and that the police recognize that sexual harassment is a problem.

Despite Danino’s cleaning house, columnist Itzik Saban writes, “This is not the police leadership that the public deserves.” Saban does try to put a positive spin on the mess, saying that the fact that the police are publicizing the investigations shows an unprecedented level of transparency. While it is certainly disgraceful today, if the police can actually root out the problem it will make the organization much stronger in the long run.

Yedioth Ahronoth carries an op-ed by former police spokesman Hillel Partouk who writes, “We knew and we were silent.” He says that all the current problems are caused by the police’s organizational culture. During his time in the police, there was not one lecture or training session of sexual harassment. This differs from other public institutions, like the army, that do educate their members on sexual harassment. Partouk credits Danino for finally “changing the culture from the top.”

The king’s speech

Once called “King Bibi” by Time magazine, Netanyahu’s planned speech in early March before a joint session of Congress continues to make news. Haaretz reports that Israeli consuls in America have warned the Foreign Ministry that the speech will harm US-Israeli relations. Consuls from San Fransisco, Chicago, Atlanta, Boston, Philadelphia, and Los Angeles have phoned the Foreign Ministry and sent messages warning of the damage the speech will cause. Yaron Seidman, the Philadelphia consul general, said in a message that the speech is perceived as “poking a finger in the eye of the government and the president.”

One person the speech might not be a finger in the eye to is Vice President Biden, as he might not be there. Yedioth reports that part of the fallout from the speech is that Biden, like Obama, won’t attend the speech. Things aren’t going well for Ambassador to the US Ron Dermer, either, as Jewish Democratic members of Congress met with Dermer and chastised him and Bibi. “Netanyahu is harming Israel and putting it in the middle of the political debate,” they reportedly told Dermer.

Netanyahu’s speech in March will focus on Iran’s nuclear program, but Netanyahu is also worried about Iran’s conventional weaponry. According to Israel Hayom, during a trip to the north to visit with soldiers and civilians Netanyahu said that Iran’s goal is to open a new front from Syria. He said that similar fronts have been opened already in Gaza and southern Lebanon, and this adds to the proof of just how dangerous Iran is to the world.

Is it that danger that possibly prompted Israel to send a message to Iran asking for restraint? Haaretz’s Zvi Bar’el writes that Iran’s chairman of Security and Foreign Policy said the Iranians received a message through an official channel after an Iranian general was killed in an airstrike attributed to Israel. The message from Israel said Israel had no desire to let “this problem continue and cause an escalation, and Israel would expect the other side would behave similarly as well.” If this message is true, it means that Israel and Iran have official channels of communication between them.

Election opinions

In the opinion pages, Israel Hayom’s Haim Shine takes aim at the false promises of scandals and political promises in this election. Politicians who say they can magically lower the cost of living or housing prices are trying to perform sleight of hand. “The State of Israel is not a Rubik’s Cube or a game of Monopoly. It is a huge project that requires experience, talent and skill,” he writes. He says that Herzog and the left don’t understand that what the US wants, the Israeli public is reluctant to give. “One who is more popular in Ramallah than in Jerusalem has no chance of being elected. Better to be carp in water than a whale thrown ashore.”

In Haaretz, Ari Shavit writes about the “Zionist failing of Netanyahu” and thinks this election is not about bottles but “Who is the Zionist leader who will rejuvenate Zionism and rehabilitate the State of Israel?” Serving the Jewish state is close to Bibi’s heart, but to serve the state, the state “must be democratic, have a Jewish majority and enjoy international legitimacy.” He writes that Netanyahu’s policies are crushing “the social cohesion, social resilience and spreading despair.” He concludes that Netanyahu’s policies aimed to ensure Israel’s security are actually undermining it.