|
|
|
By
Michael Dahan
November 2 , 2002
Michael Dahan is an Israeli-American political scientist living in Jerusalem.
The recent dissolution of the National Unity Government in Israel
should not come as a surprise to anyone closely following the Israeli
political scene. The reason the unity government lasted so long was
that it was comfortable for all parties involved. By keeping his
opposing political party under his government umbrella Prime
Minister Sharon was granted with a much-needed degree of
legitimacy in both internal and external politics. On the other hand,
Labour party cabinet members found political relevance in their
participation in Sharon’s government where, otherwise, their lack of
ability to provide Israelis with an alternative national strategy would
have consumed their few remaining political credits among Israeli
voters. Israeli democracy will sorely be tested in the weeks to come,
and to pass this test a bold, peace oriented leadership must step
forward.
The resignation of Binyamin Ben Eliezer, head of the Labour party
and the former Defense Minister had nothing to do with the budget
or the funding of the settlements. During the course of the coalition
Labour ministers did not lift a finger against the funding and
expansion of the settlements, which took place at an alarming rate.
Ben Eliezer, as Defense Minister, did absolutely nothing to stop the
violent actions of the settlers preventing Palestinians from
harvesting their olives (a crucial source of income for entire villages,
especially in light of the horrid economic conditions within the
Occupied Territories), or the fatal attacks of settlers against
Palestinian farmers. Even the widely reported removal of one of the
illegal outposts (a strange choice of words, considering the fact that
all of the settlements are illegal) was more of a public relation stunt
than anything substantial, meant to toss sand into the eyes of the
Israeli public and the world.
The real reason for the resignation (and the removal of a few illegal
outposts in the Occupied Territories) is to be found in the internal
party politics of the Labour party, and the upcoming Labour party
primaries on November 19th. Ben Eliezer felt that by resigning, he
would stand a better chance of being re-elected to head the party.
The resignation leaves Sharon with a minority government, and he
is now seeking partners for his coalition among the far right parties
and the former Chief of Staff Mofaz as his Defense Minister. Sharon
himself would most likely prefer to act as Defense Minister, but the
official Commission of Enquiry into Sharon’s actions and
responsibility during the Sabra and Shatilla massacre in Lebanon
ruled that Sharon cannot serve as Defense Minister. Should he
attempt to do so, it is likely that the Supreme Court would rule
against such a move. If a right wing coalition is indeed formed, the
true political objectives of Sharon will at last become fully apparent
to both the Israeli public and the world community. Indeed, as the
conservative and senior Israeli journalist Nahum Barnea, has
recently noted, it is the settlers and their leaders that are actually
dictating Israeli policy, not the elected government. This will become
even more apparent in the coming months.
But the Labour party resignation is also an opportunity for the
parliamentary Left in Israel to regroup and to show leadership from
the opposition benches. It is an opportunity for Labour to redefine
itself, and to present a truly alternative political and social agenda.
As it stands today, the Labour party is no more than a pale reflection
of its former self, with little to distinguish it from the Likud. Today
there is a chance, albeit slight, for the party to serve as a focal point
for the parliamentary Left. Labour will certainly find it easy to attack
Sharon, who has not managed to provide security or peace, as he
promised during his election campaign. They will certainly be able to
expose Sharon’s true intentions – increasing expansion of the illegal
settlements, brutal treatment and humiliation of the Palestinian
people, the destruction of the Palestinian Authority and any chance
to reach a fair settlement with the Palestinians. They will be able to
expose what Sharon meant when he said that he was “ready for
painful compromise” – that both the pain and the compromise as far
as Sharon was concerned would be on the part of the Palestinians,
not Israel, as former Foreign Minister Peres used to joke. They will
be able to expose the investment of at least 800 million US dollars
in the settlements for the 2003 fiscal year (MK Mossi Raz of Meretz
has found at least 400 million US dollars directly committed to the
settlements within the 2003 budget, with a similar sum hidden under
various expenditures, not to mention the cost to the defense budget
in guarding these settlements) at the expense of a collapsing
economy, the unemployed and the disenfranchised.
In the days and months ahead, the Labour party and the Israeli Left
are at what could be an historical crossroad. The real question is
whether the Labour party is able and capable of taking advantage of
the changes of the past week and rise above petty internal politics
and to present an alternative leadership to the Israeli people – a
leadership dedicated towards moving forward in an attempt to reach
a political solution to the problems at hand, and to finally end the
brutal and illegal Occupation. If they fail to do so, they will cease to
be relevant to the Israeli political system.
Back to Top
© 1998-2000 Arab World Books
|