Herut was founded by Menachem Begin on 15 June 1948 as a successor to the Revisionist Irgun, a militant group in Mandate Palestine. The new party was a challenge to the Hatzohar party established by Ze'ev Jabotinsky. Herut also established an eponymous newspaper, with many of its founding journalists defecting from Hatzohar's HaMashkif. Herut's political expectations were high as the first election approached in 1949. It took credit for driving the British government out and as a young movement, reflecting the esprit of the nation, it perceived its image as being more attractive than the old establishment. They hoped to win 25 seats, which would place them second and make them leader of the opposition, with potential for future gain of government power. This analysis was shared by other parties.[2]
Platform
Objection to withdrawal of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and to negotiations with Arab states formed the party's main platform in the first Knesset election. The party vigorously opposed the ceasefire agreements with the Arab states until the annexation of Gaza Strip and the West Bank, both before and after the election. Herut differentiated itself by refusing to recognise the legitimacy of the Kingdom of Jordan after the armistice, and frequently used the slogan "Two banks of the Jordan River" in claiming Israel's right to the whole of Eretz Israel/Palestine. According to Joseph Heller, Herut was a one-issue party intent on expanding Israel's borders.[3]
Herut's socio-economic platform represented a clear shift to the right, with support for private initiative, but also for legislation preventing the trusts from exploiting workers. Begin was at first careful not to appear anti-socialist, stressing his opposition to monopolies and trusts, and also demanding that "all public utility works and basic industries must be nationalized".[3] Herut was from the outset inclined to sympathise with the underdog, and, according to Hannah Torok Yablonka, "tended to serve as a lodestone for society's misfits".[4] Herut won 14 seats with 11.5 per cent of the votes, making it the fourth-largest party in the Knesset; Hatzohar, on the other hand, failed to cross the electoral threshold of 1 per cent, and disbanded shortly thereafter.[citation needed]
The party was renowned for its right-wing views, and considered[by whom?] to be outside the mainstream. The practical differences between Herut and Mapai, however, were less dramatic than the rhetoric suggested. Factors to consider[clarification needed] include the establishment's interest in ostracising its Herut rival, and Herut's need, as an opposition party, to emphasise those differences and reflect their core voter's instincts.[5]
Among the most disturbing political phenomena of our times is the emergence in the newly created state of Israel of the "Freedom Party" (Tnuat Haherut), a political party closely akin in its organization, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties. It was formed out of the membership and following of the former Irgun Zvai Leumi, a terrorist, right-wing, chauvinist organization in Palestine.
The current visit of Menachem Begin, leader of this party, to the United States is obviously calculated to give the impression of American support for his party ... It is inconceivable that those who oppose fascism throughout the world, if correctly informed as to Mr. Begin's political record and perspectives, could add their names and support to the movement he represents.
Before irreparable damage is done by way of financial contributions, public manifestations in Begin's behalf, and the creation in Palestine of the impression that a large segment of America supports Fascist elements in Israel, the American public must be informed as to the record and objectives of Mr. Begin and his movement.
The public avowals of Begin's party are no guide whatever to its actual character. Today they speak of freedom, democracy and anti-imperialism, whereas until recently they openly preached the doctrine of the Fascist state. It is in its actions that the terrorist party betrays its real character; from its past actions we can judge what it may be expected to do in the future. ...
Within the Jewish community they have preached an admixture of ultranationalism, religious mysticism, and racial superiority. Like other Fascist parties they have been used to break strikes, and have themselves pressed for the destruction of free trade unions. In their stead they have proposed corporate unions on the Italian Fascist model. ...
The discrepancies between the bold claims now being made by Begin and his party, and their record of past performance in Palestine bear the imprint of no ordinary political party. This is the unmistakable stamp of a Fascist party for whom terrorism (against Jews, Arabs, and British alike), and misrepresentation are means, and a "Leader State" is the goal.
In the light of the foregoing considerations, it is imperative that the truth about Mr. Begin and his movement be made known in this country. It is all the more tragic that the top leadership of American Zionism has refused to campaign against Begin's efforts, or even to expose to its own constituents the dangers to Israel from support to Begin.[6]
The hostility between Begin and Israel's first Prime Minister, the Mapai leader David Ben-Gurion, which had begun over the Altalena Affair, was evident in the Knesset. Ben-Gurion coined the phrase "without Herut and Maki" (Maki was the Communist Party of Israel), a reference to his position that he would include any party in his coalition, except those two.[7] In fact, Herut was approached at least three times (1952, 1955, and 1961) by Mapai for government negotiations; Begin turned down each offer, suspecting that they were designed to divide his party.[8] The ostracism also expressed itself in the Prime Minister's refusal to refer to Begin by name from the Knesset Podium, using instead the phrase "the person who sits next to M. K. Badar", and boycotting his Knesset speeches.[5][9]
Ben-Gurion's policy of ostracising Revisionism was performed systematically, as seen in the legal exclusion of fallen Irgun and Lehi fighters from public commemoration and from benefits to their families.[10] Herut members were excluded from the highest bureaucratic and military positions.[9]
Decline
In the municipal elections of 1950, Herut lost voters to the centrist General Zionists, who also attracted disillusioned voters from Mapai and established themselves as a tough opposition rival to Herut. At the second national convention, Begin was challenged by more radical elements of his party. They wanted a more dynamic leadership, and thought he had adapted himself to the system. At the convention, Begin's proposal to send children abroad for security reasons, although there was a precedent for such a measure, sounded defeatist, and it was unanimously rejected. It was considered to have hurt the party's image. In March 1951, Herut lost two of its Knesset seats, with the defection of Ari Jabotinsky and Hillel Kook from the party to sit as independent MKs. Referring to previous written commitments, the party sought to revoke their Knesset membership, but the issue was still not settled by the next election three months later.[2]
Critics of the party leadership pointed out that the party had changed and lost its status as a radical avant-garde party. Uncompromising candidates had been removed from the party list for the upcoming elections, economic questions loomed large in the propaganda[clarification needed], and Mapai had co-opted some of the Herut agenda, not least by declaring Jerusalem as Israel's capital. These critics and outside commentators thought that Herut seemed irrelevant.[2]
In the 1951 elections, Herut won eight seats, six less than previously. Begin resigned as leader, a move he had considered before the election because of the internal criticism.[citation needed] He was replaced by Aryeh Ben-Eliezer, whose leadership was nipped in the bud when he suffered a heart attack in late 1951. Ya'akov Rubin became party chairman in his stead.[citation needed]
As a young party without institutions paralleling those of Mapai, who were predominant in most areas of social life, Herut was at a serious disadvantage. Its leaders were politically inexperienced and clung to the principle of not – as representatives of the entire nation – accepting financial support from any interest groups. They were prevented from building a strong and competent party structure because of this.[11]
Begin's return
Menachem Begin addressing a mass demonstration against negotiations with Germany in Tel Aviv 1952Party membership card in 1956. Note similar logo as the Irgun
The Reparations Agreement between Israel and West Germany of 1952 brought Begin back into politics. It gave the party new momentum, and it proved an effective weapon against the General Zionists. The Reparations Agreement awoke strong sentiments in the nation, and Begin encouraged civil disobedience during the debate on the affair. The largest demonstrations gathered 15,000 people, and Herut reached far beyond its own constituency. The party let the issue fade from the agenda only after having wrested a maximum of political capital from it.[2][12]
The third national convention included a fierce debate about democracy and legitimate political actions. There was strong sentiment in favour of using the barricades, but Begin vigorously resisted it. The government of the nation, he claimed, could only be established via the ballot box. The convention gave Begin important legitimacy by sending a message to the public that the party was law-abiding and democratic. At the same time, it secured the support of the hard-liners who would not compromise on its principles.[2]
Economic and fiscal policy were given greater emphasis, and the party attacked the Histadrut for its dual role as employer and trade union. It proposed to outlaw such concentration of power and also abolish party control of agricultural settlements. Herut reasoned that workers were empowered by private enterprise. A 25 per cent tax[clarification needed] cut was also envisioned.[13]
In the 1955 election, the party nearly doubled its seats to 15, and became the second-largest party in the Knesset, behind Mapai. Apart from an improved campaign, the accomplishment was attributed to the activist party platform in a situation of deteriorating security, to more support from recent immigrants and other disgruntled elements,[2] and to disillusionment with the economic situation. The Kastner trial also played into Herut's hands,[14] when, together with Maki, they helped bring down Moshe Sharett's government in 1954 through a motion of no-confidence over the government's position in the trial.[citation needed]
Herut added another seat in the 1959 elections, feeding on feelings of resentment against the dominant left that existed mainly among new Sephardi and Mizrahi immigrants. The party failed, however, to maintain the momentum of the previous election, and to make substantial gains, as had been hoped. As the young nation grew stronger, the public did not feel the same existential dread, lessening the impact of Herut's activist message, especially after the Suez crisis, in which Ben-Gurion's performance was perceived favourably. The Wadi Salib riots a few months before the election caused the government to play the role of maintainer of law and order, which resonated well among the middle class. Mapai exploited the situation successfully by depicting Begin as dangerous.[2]
Gahal alliance
Herut helped bring down the government again in 1961 when they and the General Zionists tabled a motion of no confidence over the government's investigation into the earlier Lavon Affair; in the resulting 1961 election, the party maintained its 17 seats. Toward the end of the Fifth Knesset in 1965, and in preparation for the upcoming election, Herut joined with the Liberal Party (itself a recent merger of the General Zionists and the Progressive Party) to form Gahal (a Hebrew acronym for the Herut-Liberal Bloc (Hebrew: גוש חרות-ליברלים, Gush Herut-Liberalim)), although each party remained independent within the alliance. The merger helped moderate Herut's political isolation and created a right-wing opposition bloc with a broader base and more realistic chance to lead the government. The full alliance did not survive, however, because seven members of the Liberal Party, mostly former Progressives, soon defected from the Liberals and formed the Independent Liberals; they disagreed with the merger, identifying Herut and Begin as too right-wing. Mapai also experienced defections at the time, and the Knesset session closed with Gahal holding 27 seats, second only to Mapai's remaining 34.[citation needed]
Monument in memory of the eight members of Irgun and the two members of Lehi hanged by British authorities between 1938 and 1947. Under Ben-Gurion, public commemoration of fallen Irgun and Lehi militants was strictly refused. Under Levi Eskhol, however, they began to be rehabilitated, indicating a more equal status for Revisionism and Herut.
Over time, the public perception of both Herut and its leader had changed, despite the ostracism imposed by Prime Minister Ben-Gurion. Begin had remained the main opposition figure, against the dominant politicians of the left, particularly in debates regarding such heated issues as the Lavon investigation and Israel's relationships to Germany. This prominence evaded much of the ostracism's impact, and Ben-Gurion's hostility became ever more savage. He eventually started to liken Begin to Hitler – an attitude that backfired, making Begin to stand out as a victim.[citation needed] The political climate took a favourable turn for Revisionism and Herut in mid-1963, when Levi Eshkol replaced Ben-Gurion as Prime and Defense Minister.[2] A government resolution in March 1964 calling for the reinterment of Zeev Jabotinsky's remains in Israel attests to this. Fallen Irgun and Lehi militants also began to be commemorated more equally, with their reputations being rehabilitated.[10]
In the 1965 elections, Gahal won only 26 seats, well below that of the left's new Alignment, which won 45. In Herut's search for a scapegoat, its leadership was questioned by many; they considered that Begin, despite his achievements, brought an indelible stigma from his militant days before and around independence, scaring off voters. Internal opposition arose, and Herut's eighth convention in June 1966 became turbulent. The opposition group sensed that Begin's leadership position was too strong to challenge; so, they concentrated on winning control over the party organization. They won overwhelming victories in all votes for the composition of party institutions. Begin responded by putting his own political future at stake. He threatened to leave the party chair, and maybe also his seat in the Knesset. Begin's move mobilized delegates in emphatic support for him, but the party convention still ended with great internal tension, and without a party chairman; the chair would be vacant for eight months. Party opposition to Begin' leadership came to a showdown a month after the convention, when Haim Amsterdam, an assistant to one of the opposition leaders, Shmuel Tamir, published a devastating attack on Begin in Ha'aretz;[15] this led to the suspension of Tamir's party membership.[16] The leaders of the opposition then established a new party in the Knesset, the Free Center, with the loss of three seats for Herut. After this revolt, Begin returned to party leadership.[2][17]
Gahal joined the government on the first day of the Six-Day War, with both Begin and the Liberal's Yosef Sapir becoming a Minister without Portfolio; Ben-Gurion's Rafi also joined,[18] with Moshe Dayan becoming Defense Minister. The national unity government was Begin's own brainchild.[citation needed] This had a significant positive effect on his image. Critics agree that it was a major turning point in Herut's road to power, since it granted it the legitimacy it had been denied up until then. The national unity government was more than an emergency solution in a time of existential danger; it reflected a relaxation of ideological tension, which enabled the government to outlive the emergency.[19] Moreover, Begin and Ben-Gurion were reconciled. Ben-Gurion needed him in his bitter rivalry with Eshkol and Begin surprised his adversary by proposing to Eshkol that he should step aside in favor of Ben-Gurion as the leader of an emergency government. The proposition was turned down, but Ben-Gurion, who recently had compared Begin to Hitler, now praised his responsibility and patriotism.[2]
The outcome of the war strengthened Herut. The principle of the indivisibility of the land had seemed as an archaic principle with little practical significance, but now, it emerged from the fringe of consciousness to the core of national thought. Begin saw it as his first mission in the government to secure the fruits of the victory by preventing territorial withdrawal and promoting settlement.
Despite the breakaway of the Free Center, Gahal retained its representation in the Knesset in the 1969 elections, and several of their candidates were elected as mayors. Herut was included in the new government of Golda Meir with six ministers (out of 24). The recruitment of Major-General Ezer Weizman, the first general to join Herut and a nephew of Israel's first President, was a considerable public relations achievement. The Government participation did not last long, since Gahal left in early 1970 over the acceptance of the Rogers Plan, which included an approval of the United Nations Security Council Resolution 242, a move that was largely dictated by Begin.[2]
In the 1977 elections, Herut – now as a part of the Likud – finally reached power, and Menachem Begin rose to Prime Minister
In September 1973, Gahal merged with the Free Centre, the National List and the non-parliamentary Movement for Greater Israel to create Likud, again with all parties retaining their independence within the union. Within Likud, Herut continued to be the dominant party. In the 1973 elections, Likud capitalized on the Governments neglect in the Yom Kippur War, and gained seven seats, totalling 39.
In the following years, Likud sharply criticized the Government's accords with Egypt and Syria. Stormy demonstrations were organized in conjunction with Gush Emunim, signifying an important political alliance. In the 1977 elections, Likud emerged victorious, with 43 seats, the first time the right had won an election. Begin became Prime Minister, retaining his post in the 1981 elections. In 1983, he stood down, and Yitzhak Shamir took over as Herut (and, therefore, Likud) party leader and Prime Minister.
The party was finally disbanded in 1988, when Likud dissolved its internal factions to become a unitary party.
^ abcdefghijkYechiam Weitz: "The Road to the 'Upheaval': A Capsule History of the Herut Movement, 1948–1977", in Israel Studies, Fall 2005, Vol. 10, No. 3.
^ abGideon Doron: "Right as Opposed to Wrong as Opposed to Left: The Spatial Location of 'Right Parties' on the Israeli Political Map" Israel Studies, Fall 2005, Vol. 10 Issue 3.
^Isidore Abramowitz; Hannah Arendt; Abraham Brick; Rabbi Jeshurun Cardozo; Albert Einstein; Herman Eisen; Hayim Fineman; M. Gallen; H.H. Harris; Zelig S. Harris; Sidney Hook; Fred Karush; Bruria Kaufman; Irma L. Lindheim; Nachman Maisel; Seymour Melman; Myder D. Mendelson; Harry M. Oslinsky; Samuel Pitlick; Fritz Rohrlich; Louis P. Rocker; Ruth Sagis; Itzhak Sankowsky; I.J. Shoenberg; Samuel Shuman; M. Singer; Irma Wolfe; Stefan Wolfe (4 December 1948). "Letters to The Times: New Palestine Party: Visit of Menachem Begin and Aim of Political Movement Discussed"(PDF). The New York Times. Retrieved 3 August 2011.((cite news)): CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
^Peleg, I., Begin's Foreign Policy, 1977–1983: Israel's Move to the Right (New York, 1987). p. 37
^ abUdi Lebel: "'Beyond the Pantheon' Bereavement, Memory, and the Strategy of De-Legitimization Against Herut", in Israel Studies, Fall 2005, Vol. 10, Issue 3.
