Should I stay or should I go now?

Referendum Day is here and on front pages of the Hebrew papers as Israelis hold their breath for the decision whether Britain will stay in the European Union or go.

At the same time, the tabloids drool over Israel’s new fighter jet that’s not yet in Israel but was exhibited at a gala reception for Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman in the US nonetheless. Like clockwork, they bring out the yuk yuk headlines playing on the F-35’s Hebrew name. Expect similar reportage and headlines in a few months when the first $100 million fighter jet actually arrives. Israel Hayom and Yedioth Ahronoth both make a big deal of the head of the air force’s comment that flying the F-35 in a simulator was like “holding the future in my hands.” Haaretz ignores the media spectacle altogether, opting to focus on Brexit instead.

Keeping with its air force theme, Yedioth Ahronoth rolls out a profile of air force academy pilots graduating next week, a third of whom were children growing up in northern Israel during the Second Lebanon War 10 years ago. It quotes them reminiscing wistfully about watching Hezbollah rockets soar over their towns en route to Haifa or other destinations south and running to bomb shelters. Is this about the Second Lebanon War? Is this about the fighter pilots? Is one third of the flight course being from the north exceptional? The paper doesn’t say and the piece is so unnecessarily gung ho that it’s hard to care.

With eyes on Britain, the papers weigh in on what’s best for the United Kingdom, and it’s overwhelmingly in favor of remaining an integral part of Europe, even if the arguments are familiar.

“‘Yes’ supporters claim that they get their country back,” Israel Hayom’s Boaz Bismuth writes. “It’s not so bad, as far as they’re concerned, if the pound plummets, if the City of London takes a hit, if Britain loses a large free trade area, if Scotland is strengthened by money from Brussels — and may again request to leave the United Kingdom. The principle is honor.”

“A ‘Yes’ by Britain to leaving can cause a dangerous domino effect,” he says, and other major players, like France and Germany, might follow suit. The UK’s exit from the Union would be a vote against “stability and the choice to go forward,” he says.

Though Haaretz doesn’t run an editorial advocating one position or the other, the situation is clear. It publishes an op-ed by Dov Alfon in which he says that the UK’s departure from the European Union would reverberate across the continent, and in France in particular. “It would leave President Francois Hollande in an untenable position: the British vote became, in effect, and certainly in recent days, a sort of vote of confidence in him,” he says. “As far as the French are concerned, their president threw his full weight against Britain leaving, including clear threats to stop preventing migration to England from France’s shores.”

“The real threat hides around the corner: if the British vote in favor of leaving the Union, what’s to stop the French from voting ‘yes’ at the next opportunity?”

Yedioth Ahronoth attempts impartiality by running parallel op-eds by voters on either side of the issue. Alex Napier-Holland writes in favor of the Brexit that the EU doesn’t allow its constituent states real financial independence, control of immigration or regulation.

The EU, he said, emerged in the wake of World War II and aimed to prevent infighting and bloodshed in Europe. “Today Europe is part of a global world, with a population that rejects prejudice based on religion, race, gender or sexuality,” he says, apparently oblivious to the rise of ultra-nationalist right-wing movements in Europe. He calls the notion of the EU antiquated and says the countries could get along just fine without the status quo. “There’s also life outside the Union,” he says.

On the opposite side of the issue, Dan Oakey writes that there are enough reasons against the Brexit to vote against it — economic, social or otherwise (he points to immigration, trade, and the delusional belief of Brexiters that their childhood will return once the UK leaves). He also argues that Britain can better face security threats, including radical Islam, from inside the Union, and that its economy will remain stronger as part of the bloc.

In local news, the death of two toddlers who were left in their parents’ swelteringly hot vehicle in southern Israel generates the same outrage it does each time it happens, which in Israel’s case is all too often. The familiar words — tragic, accident, mistake, distraught — all make their appearance like clockwork. Yedioth Ahronoth runs contrary to custom with an opinion piece calling for punishing parents who inadvertently kill their children because of negligence.