Posted on 03/23/2002 11:18:24 PM PST by LarryLied
In recent months we have been told repeatedly that the Israeli left has disappeared. In public opinion polls fewer than 20 percent of the Jewish public identifies itself as left-wing, 17 percent as center and more than 50 percent as moderate or extreme right. We are said to be witnessing a total conceptual collapse.
A more thorough examination of the public's attitude shows that the opposite is the case: the way of the left has triumphed and the ideological right has lost its way.
The heart of the new Israeli consensus beats in the left.
If we define the political left by means of four trademarks - readiness for the establishment of a Palestinian state; withdrawal from considerable parts of Judea, Samaria and Gaza; evacuation of a large part of the settlements, and a compromise in Jerusalem - and if we examine the public support for these ideas, we will find that it encompasses between 60 percent (those who support a Palestinian state and the evacuation of some of the settlements) and 35 percent (those who favor a compromise in Jerusalem) of the public.
The most surprising statistic relates to the positions of the Israeli right. A poll conducted by Market Watch, the results of which were published in the daily Ma'ariv, shows that 45 percent of those who define themselves as right-wingers support the establishment of a Palestinian state and the evacuation of some of the settlements.
No less surprising is the fact that the right of return of some of the refugees is supported by 20 percent of the population and by 9 percent of the right wing, and support for negotiations under fire extends to 48 percent of the population and 13 percent of the right. These data show that one of the problems of the Israeli left is the almost complete melting away of the ideological right.
The Israeli consensus today espouses attitudes that the Labor Party did not dare to put forward before Camp David and that the Peace Now organization hesitated to adopt just a few years ago. This situation has left the Israeli public confused. As long as the parameters of the political struggle were defined by the terms "Greater Israel" and "territorial compromise and Palestinian state," order prevailed and the debate was understood by all. Today, when the idea of Greater Israel has expired, the difference between left and right focuses on gut feelings.
To be on the right is to be openly angry at the Palestinians, to believe that Yasser Arafat's true face was exposed at Camp David, to want to "slam" the Palestinians with all our might - and only then to do what the left is proposing. To be on the left is to be angry in secret, to maintain that at Camp David both sides made fateful mistakes, to hold the view that there is someone to talk to and that a military strike that will cause the dismantlement of the Palestinian Authority will bring in its wake a cycle of bloody violence that will make a future compromise impossible.
In these circumstances the position of the right is drawing unprecedented identification. It is not difficult at all to persuade a public that is conducting its life between one funeral and the next that the other side does not want peace, that Israel offered the maximum at Camp David and was rebuffed, and that now there is no choice but to take the military route. A new social consensus is thus emerging based on the premise that only the force wielded by the right will lead to the compromise that is being proposed by the left.
This is the foundation of the support for Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, who purports to represent the new right, which will lead to a painful compromise after an even more painful military strike.
That foundation has become shaky for two reasons. First, Sharon never gave cause for anyone to believe that his position on withdrawal from the territories, dismantlement of the settlements and a compromise in Jerusalem conforms with the new Israeli universe of values. Second, the deterioration of the security situation places in doubt the military and political effectiveness of the "painful blow."
An examination of Sharon's actions shows that, with the support of the Labor Party cabinet ministers and the help of the cover they provide, the Sharon government excels in massive building and support for the settlements, total refusal to evacuate the settlers' "outposts," which are cropping up all over, setting up checkpoints that endanger the lives of the soldiers who man them, and military activity that is not confined to preemption but includes humiliation as well, and is agonizing Yasser Arafat and the entire Palestinian people.
There is a well-founded fear that when Sharon's phased plan is complete, we will discover that the political compromise desired by the majority of the nation is no longer possible. The settlements are tying us to the whole Land of Israel and the Palestinian Authority is utterly eroded, no longer in control on the ground and not a potential interlocutor. Anger and pain dominate in both peoples.
The vast majority who believe that the necessary political solution includes a Palestinian state, withdrawal from most of the territories, evacuation of most of the settlements and a compromise in Jerusalem must ignore worthless political labels and demand that the prime minister and the cabinet stop hiding behind military actions, reveal their political goals and explain how what they are doing is bringing those goals closer.
If they refuse to do this, the suspicion will grow that the defined aim of the Israeli government - "mopping up the territory" followed by "readiness for painful concessions" - is meant to soften public opposition to a series of military actions that will have the purpose of foiling a future political move.
If this suspicion turns out to be correct, it will be one of the most dangerous political acts of diverting attention in Israel's history - an act that is liable to lead to Israel's destruction as a Jewish democratic state.
If this guy is correct, that heart will not be beating for long. I hope and pray that he is wrong, as seems likely.
20 percent of the population are Israeli Arabs. Where is the surprise?
Funny, an Israeli leftist with his head in the sand assumes the same position as the Islamics when they moon their moon god.
They are a democratic country, it is up to them to make the decision to defend themselves using a method which will work. If they do not, we can't do it for them.
And I thought it was only Bush, Cheney, Powell and those evil Republicans who were trying to stop Israel from defending herself.
If you feel that way then join the Demos. :)) We GOP Jews are fine with Bush and Cheney, whom I am glad to see have given Arafat yet another snub.
Here, in a round about way is, I think, some good news: : AL-QAEDA CONNECTION Muslim group linked to attacks in Thailand
Don't see Thai's putting up with this. And many of them would like to see our old Nam era airbases bustling again.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.