Elections would kill gradual opening

Nearly a month after entering its second lockdown on the eve of Rosh Hashanah, Israel now is at a critical juncture.

The absolute numbers of people testing positive for coronavirus on a daily basis is dropping, the percentage of positive tests among those being tested is declining, and the number of people in serious condition in the hospital is also going down.

That’s an indication that with all the griping and complaining, with all the high profile incidents of people not abiding by the regulations – whether they be protesters demonstrating against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, or hassidim gathering with their rebbe – the majority

of people are following most of the rules, human contact has been dramatically reduced, and the incidences of infection have declined. That’s the good news. But we’ve been there before. On May 4, some six weeks after the first lockdown, Netanyahu outlined a gradual easing of lockdown restrictions: People could wander more than 100 meters from their homes; groups of people could meet outdoors if their number did not exceed 20; and weddings of up to 50 people were allowed. The original plan was to open everything slowly.

But then populism set in. People, hurting financially and tired of being cooped up for so long with their children, clamored for a return to normal life. They wanted schools to open, trains to run as usual, restaurants to serve food and gyms to welcome people for workouts.

The media were full of stories questioning why restrictions were still in place, why children were not back in school, why bars were still closed, why cinemas remained shuttered – in brief, why life had not returned to normal.