Arsenal recovers to beat Tottenham
Manchester City goes 17 points clear • Everton stumbles in top-four race • Chelsea held by Leeds
LONDON (Reuters) – Arsenal recovered from the shock of conceding an Erik Lamela wonder goal to claim a deserved 2-1 victory over Tottenham Hotspur in their Premier League north London derby on Sunday.
Martin Odegaard’s deflected effort on the stroke of halftime deservedly leveled things up for Arsenal and Alexandre Lacazette’s 64th-minute penalty sealed the Gunners’ first win in six attempts against their bitter rivals.
It was a mixed afternoon for Lamela, who produced an audacious “Rabona” shot to put Spurs in front against the run of play after 33 minutes at The Emirates – one of the most remarkable goals ever seen in the long-running rivalry.
But the Argentine, who had come on to replace the injured Son Heung-min early on, went from hero to zero when he was sent off in the 76th for catching Kieran Tierney with his forearm.
While Lamela’s goal was unforgettable it could not disguise a largely disappointing display by the visitors, who squandered a great chance to boost their hopes of a top-four finish.
After Lamela’s sending off Tottenham’s 10 men finally applied some pressure and had a Harry Kane effort ruled out late on for offside before he hit the post with a free kick.
Spurs are still without a league win at Arsenal since 2010 and the defeat left them in seventh spot, six points behind fourth-placed Chelsea. Arsenal stayed in 10th spot with 41 points, four behind Tottenham.
Meanwhile, Manchester City moved 17 points clear of the pack with a
3-0 win at Fulham on Saturday with John Stones continuing his surprising goal-scoring touch and Sergio Aguero rediscovering his.
Defender Stones, who had managed one goal in his first 170 Premier League appearances, has now netted four in his last 10.
His close-range effort broke Fulham’s resistance two minutes after the interval and after Gabriel Jesus capitalized on a Fulham mistake to make it 2-0, Aguero netted a penalty to grab his 181st City league goal, but first in 14 months.
While City has all but sewn up its third title in four seasons, the battle for a top-four spot continues to be unpredictable and looks set to go to the wire.
Chelsea’s 0-0 draw at Leeds United made it 12 games without defeat since Thomas Tuchel replaced Frank Lampard in charge.
But it opened the door for Everton later to close the gap on Chelsea, which occupies fourth spot.
Victory against Burnley would have put Everton into fifth, two points behind Chelsea having played a game
less, but Carlo Ancelotti’s side suffered another home stumble.
Chris Wood and Dwight McNeil gave Burnley a 2-0 lead and while Dominic Calvert-Lewin did pull a goal back for the host side, it could not avert a seventh league defeat at Goodison Park.
“It’s a big disappointment but we can’t give up. There are 10 games left and we fight until the end,” Ancelotti said.
Everton remains in sixth spot with 46 points from 28 games, two points behind West Ham United, which had a chance to go level on points with Chelsea, and have a game in hand, if it won late Sunday at second-place Manchester United.
Burnley’s win eased its relegation fears as it is now seven points ahead of third-from-bottom Fulham, which had looked impressive in the first half against City before crumbling.
“Disappointing. I asked the team to be brave and show courage against the team who will be champions – and we were,” said Fulham boss Scott Parker. “There’s no denying the mistakes we gave away for the goals were sloppy. We will dust ourselves down and move on.”
Bottom club Sheffield United parted ways with manager Chris Wilder on Saturday and while it looks doomed to the drop, West Bromwich is also running out of time.
A 1-0 defeat by Crystal Palace left West Brom eight points behind Fulham and 17th-place Brighton & Hove Albion.
“There’s 27 points available and 20 needed,” said West Brom manager Sam Allardyce, who has never been in charge of a relegated team in the top flight.
Palace captain Luka Milivojevic decided the game with a VAR-awarded penalty while the other talking point was Palace’s Wilfried Zaha opting not to take a knee before kickoff – the first Premier League player not to make the anti-racism gesture this season.
“There is no right or wrong decision, but for me personally I feel kneeling has just become a part of the pre-match routine and at the moment it doesn’t matter whether we kneel or stand, some of us still continue to receive abuse,” he said.
“I now just want to focus on football and enjoy being back playing on the pitch. I will continue to stand tall.”
The approaching elections are the second time in the electoral history of the State of Israel that the elections will be decided not only on the basis of the achievements of the lists that actually pass the electoral qualifying threshold (which today stand at 3.25%), but on the basis of the votes given to the lists that fail to cross it, and are consequently considered “lost votes.”
In the 1992 elections, so it has been argued, one of the main causes for the Yitzhak Rabin’s victory was that 65,185 right-wing votes were lost because four small right-wing lists did not pass the 1.5% qualifying threshold that prevailed at the time.
This analysis is not completely accurate, because even if the “lost votes” would have been counted as part of the right-wing bloc, Rabin’s Labor Party still had a majority, for the simple reason that Shas decided to join his coalition. Would Shas have decided otherwise, if the 65,185 right-wing votes had not been lost? Perhaps, but we shall never know.
It should also be noted that in the 1992 elections Labor received 44 seats, Meretz received 12 and the Likud 32. In the current elections the predictions are that Labor will receive six to seven seats, Meretz might fail to pass the qualifying threshold, and the Likud will consider it a great victory if it receives more than 30 seats.
Times have changed, the large parties are no longer as large as they used to be, but the game has remained the same, and when the society is more or less split down the center politically, as it was in 1992, and has been since the first 2019 elections, under the current Israeli political system it might be the parties that do not pass the qualifying threshold that determine the outcome.
In the current elections the number of lists that are considered borderline cases is four (if we leave out Yaron Zelekha’s Economic Party, which is nowhere even near the qualifying threshold). Of the four, one – the Religious Zionist Party – will definitely go with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, if it passes the qualifying threshold. Another – Ra’am (an Arab party) – is expected to support a government headed by Netanyahu, if it passes the qualifying threshold, though Netanyahu has stated that it will not form part of his coalition. The third, Meretz, and the fourth, Blue and White, are definitely part of the “just not Bibi” bloc, and the state of both is deceiving because there are rumors that Likud supporters tell pollsters that they are going to vote Meretz or Blue and White, to try to create the impression that these parties will pass the qualifying threshold, and on judgment day – March 23 – the reality will emerge – one of many current rumors that might or might not be true.
Whether Netanyahu will manage to form a government depends on a combination of three factors: how many votes Yamina will receive; whether the Religious Zionist Party and/or Ra’am will or will not pass the qualifying threshold; and whether Meretz and/or Blue and White will or will not pass the qualifying threshold. Whether the other bloc will have the option to form a government depends on the same three factors.
In other words, if the Religious Zionist Party and Ra’am pass the qualifying threshold as far as Netanyahu is concerned, he will nevertheless need Yamina to be able to form a government, but it can be a smaller Yamina.
In order to form a government the “just not Bibi” bloc will need both Meretz and Blue and White to pass the qualifying threshold, or to leave the contest at the last moment if the polls show that they are definitely beneath the qualifying threshold.
This bloc will also require a situation in which Netanyahu will not have a majority even with Yamina, which could happen if the Religious Zionist and/or Ra’am fail to pass the qualifying threshold.
With regards to what is liable to happen in the “just not Bibi” camp, the Likud, including Netanyahu, seem to be deliberately spreading false information to the effect that right-wingers who will vote for Yamina or New Hope will be voting for a government led by the Left, since the largest party in the “just not Bibi” bloc is Yesh Atid.
Besides the fact that Yesh Atid leader Yair Lapid is not a leftist but a centrist, the fact that Yesh Atid is the largest party in the bloc doesn’t necessarily mean that Lapid will form a government should the bloc have the required majority. Both Naftali Bennett and Gideon Sa’ar have stated that they will not sit in a government under Lapid, but both have also declared that they have no problem sitting with Lapid. Lapid, on his part, has declared that if getting rid of Netanyahu means foregoing the premiership, there are things more important than one’s ego.
In fact, the truth is that a vote for Sa’ar is a vote to strengthen the rightists in the “just not Bibi camp,” while a vote for Bennett can end up either strengthening Netanyahu or strengthening the “just not Bibi camp” – that is, if we believe Bennett that no matter what happens, he will do everything he can to prevent fifth elections.
Of course, we can believe or disbelieve all the statements made by all the political leaders, though some of the statements are fake news to begin with.
MY OWN feeling is that if Netanyahu will fail to get the 61 seats he requires to form a government, even with Bennett, the other side will manage to form a government, headed by either Sa’ar or Bennett.
My own preference is Sa’ar because I believe that he has the qualifications and ability to handle a government with a very diverse membership (from Meretz, if it gets through, to Yamina), while ridding our government system of some of the worst ailments that have spread in it during the last six years of Netanyahu’s rule: a culture of vulgar cockiness, lies, fake news, petty corruption, broken promises and systematic incitement against opposition groups.
The thought of a government made up of the Likud minus most of its liberal elements; the ultra-Orthodox parties, which harbor a very strong resentment against the secular sections of the population, which have accused the ultra-Orthodox population of much of the responsibility for the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic; a nationalist-religious list made up of racist and homophobic messianics and Kahanists, in which Yamina plays the role of balancing “moderate” – is a nightmare for many of us.
I realize, of course, that there are also many Israelis for whom the thought of a government that is anything but pure right-wing-religious is a nightmare. It looks as if the approaching elections are going to be about whose nightmare will turn into reality.
Just a footnote: As the number of media appearances of No. 10 on the Likud list – writer Galit Distel Etebaryan – increase, so my feeling grows that we shall be missing MK Osnat Mark, who is unlikely to return to the 24th Knesset. In both cases it is less a problem of what the two women say, which is a matter of opinion, and I certainly have nothing against opinionated women. The problem is how they say it.
The writer was a researcher in the Knesset Research and Information Center until her retirement, and recently published a book in Hebrew, The Job of the Knesset Member – An Undefined Job, soon to appear in English.
The recent normalization agreements between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan have fundamentally altered the strategic dynamic of the Middle East for the better and delivered win-win outcomes for each of the parties. For the first time in decades, zero-sum politics gave way to enlightened policies boosted by the enthusiasm of millions of Israelis and Arabs thirsty for a brighter future. The signing of the Abraham Accords immediately instigated joint business enterprises, a rush of tourism despite the pandemic, scientific partnerships, open political cooperation and more. The challenge now is to complete the circle and deliver a win-win for Israelis and Palestinians, too.
The Biden administration has set sober expectations for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Knowing that a final-status accord is likely out of reach for the time being, the administration is focused on bottom-up peace-building to improve the lives of Israelis and Palestinians while preserving the possibility of a negotiated two-state solution.
As it goes about seeding the ground for progress, the administration has made clear that it wishes to build upon the Abraham Accords and help further Israel’s integration into the region.
One of the strengths of the
Abraham Accords is that the four agreements demonstrate that the Palestinians do not hold a veto over regional progress. Possibly the most glaring weakness of the accords, though, is the perception that they operate as an alternative to advancing the cause of Israeli-Palestinian peace. While the normalization deals did not come about through a traditional peace process, they were not divorced from it. Top UAE officials made clear to the Israeli public that only by suspending annexation of the West Bank was the normalization agreement with the UAE possible.
The question facing the Biden team is how to further deepen Israel’s ties to the region in a manner that enhances the potential for peace between Israel and the Palestinians rather than ignoring it. It is here where Congress has provided the administration a vital tool.
AT THE END of 2020, as part of the omnibus spending package, Congress enacted the Nita M. Lowey Middle East Partnership for Peace Act (MEPPA) with bipartisan support. MEPPA authorized a five-year, $250 million people-to-people peace-building fund and an investment initiative to give the bandwidth and budget to answer the question, “What are we doing to ensure the next generation of Israelis and Palestinians don’t hate one another?” Often an afterthought, MEPPA gives the administration a coordinated way to think about peace-building, not as a series of programs, but as an integrated policy tool.
Congress, wanting to leverage the groundbreaking American investment as well as maximize its efficacy, baked into MEPPA a multilateral element encouraging international donors. In doing so, Congress intended to harness the added legitimacy gained from multilateral endorsement of MEPPA in the eyes of Israelis and Palestinians and ensure equitable burden-sharing.
The Biden administration can use MEPPA to gather additional commitments from both the region and European allies to address incitement, dehumanization and economic disparity between Israelis and Palestinians. In doing so, the administration can utilize MEPPA to further the Abraham Accords, institutionalize new regional dynamics while providing needed economic stimulus to the Palestinian private sector, and deal head-on with adult and youth attitudes that must change if progress will be possible.
The advantages that the Abraham Accords have created should not be quarantined to just the fight against a nuclear Iran. MEPPA offers the ideal way to capture the new regional spirit to elevate aspirations for a just, sustainable and lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians.
MEPPA sets in motion longterm grassroots peace-building combined with joint Israeli-Palestinian economic development projects to support future diplomacy. It also enables an early opportunity for the US to repair relations with the Palestinians, cultivate a foundation of trust between Israelis and Palestinians, rebuild trust with European partners, and capitalize on the regional normalization dynamic in a way that prioritizes Israeli-Palestinian peace. MEPPA can show once again how US taxpayers can amplify and solidify their investment and impact through engaging allies, and how US leadership and innovation is still the indispensable ingredient for meaningful international cooperation.