A national consensus?
By Moshe Arens
By Moshe Arens
Haaretz 15 July 2009
www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1100310.html
"We have achieved a national consensus on the concept of two states for two
peoples," announced our prime minister at the opening of last week's cabinet
meeting. This "national consensus," achieved after several weeks of
intensive intellectual effort by him and his advisers, is now being
trumpeted as one of the great achievements of Benjamin Netanyahu's
government.
In terms of party politics it, no doubt, dealt a severe blow to the leading
opposition party, Kadima, and its leader, Tzipi Livni. She, who for the past
few years seemed to have nothing else on her mind than the establishment of
a Palestinian state, suddenly had the rug pulled out from under her, and now
tries to explain that Netanyahu is not serious when he advocates the
establishment of such a state.
Forging a consensus between the coalition and opposition, or bridging the
gap that existed between them until now, is easy. The coalition just has to
adopt the opposition's position, and presto, there is a national consensus.
The other way around is a little more difficult. What if the opposition
leader were to declare that Jews have a right to live and settle in the Land
of Israel, and that nowhere should the presence of Jews be forbidden? Or
that Jewish settlers who established themselves lawfully in Judea and
Samaria with the permission and encouragement of Israeli governments should
not be uprooted from their homes? Or if she were to emphasize that Israel is
a sovereign nation that does not take orders from anyone, not even the
president of the United States? We would surely have a national consensus,
but the opposition would find itself in deep political trouble.
Actually, in a democratic society there is nothing more natural than the
rivalry between political parties and the absence of a consensus between
coalition and opposition. That is what democratic politics is all about. And
that was the focus of the recent Israeli elections in which the electorate
gave its verdict.
As a matter of fact, a national consensus is not in the nature of things in
a democratic society, except at a time of national emergency and mortal
danger. It is then that ranks have to be closed, with the common enemy
facing a united front. And although a nuclear Iran represents a danger to
Israelis of all political persuasions, it has nothing to do with the
establishment of a Palestinian state or continued construction in the Jewish
settlements in Judea and Samaria.
As for past commitments by American and Israeli governments, written or
unwritten, on settlements and "settlement blocs" in Judea and Samaria, they
do not carry the weight of international agreements and are liable to change
as new governments take office following elections. This is the case in the
United States, where a Democratic candidate has won an election after
promising a change from the policies of his Republican predecessor, and is
equally true in Israel, where a Likud candidate has won an election on a
promise that he will not follow the policies of the previous Kadima-led
government.
The fact of the matter is that there is no national agreement in Israel on
the establishment of a Palestinian State at this time, or on the position
adopted by Ehud Olmert and parroted by Livni that unless a Palestinian state
is established, Israel will cease to exist. Nor for that matter is there
general agreement on the urgent need to negotiate with Palestinian
representatives an agreement that they currently are in no position to
implement, which should be "put on the shelf" while awaiting better times.
At present, with Hamas ruling the Gaza Strip and the Palestinian Authority
headed by Mahmoud Abbas far from being in control in Judea and Samaria, the
Palestinian state is no more than a fantasy. It may or may not become a
practical option in the future, and it would be appropriate for the Israeli
government to make clear that it does not preclude the establishment of a
Palestinian state if and when this becomes possible. By the looks of it, a
lot of water will flow down the Jordan River before that happens.
www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1100310.html
"We have achieved a national consensus on the concept of two states for two
peoples," announced our prime minister at the opening of last week's cabinet
meeting. This "national consensus," achieved after several weeks of
intensive intellectual effort by him and his advisers, is now being
trumpeted as one of the great achievements of Benjamin Netanyahu's
government.
In terms of party politics it, no doubt, dealt a severe blow to the leading
opposition party, Kadima, and its leader, Tzipi Livni. She, who for the past
few years seemed to have nothing else on her mind than the establishment of
a Palestinian state, suddenly had the rug pulled out from under her, and now
tries to explain that Netanyahu is not serious when he advocates the
establishment of such a state.
Forging a consensus between the coalition and opposition, or bridging the
gap that existed between them until now, is easy. The coalition just has to
adopt the opposition's position, and presto, there is a national consensus.
The other way around is a little more difficult. What if the opposition
leader were to declare that Jews have a right to live and settle in the Land
of Israel, and that nowhere should the presence of Jews be forbidden? Or
that Jewish settlers who established themselves lawfully in Judea and
Samaria with the permission and encouragement of Israeli governments should
not be uprooted from their homes? Or if she were to emphasize that Israel is
a sovereign nation that does not take orders from anyone, not even the
president of the United States? We would surely have a national consensus,
but the opposition would find itself in deep political trouble.
Actually, in a democratic society there is nothing more natural than the
rivalry between political parties and the absence of a consensus between
coalition and opposition. That is what democratic politics is all about. And
that was the focus of the recent Israeli elections in which the electorate
gave its verdict.
As a matter of fact, a national consensus is not in the nature of things in
a democratic society, except at a time of national emergency and mortal
danger. It is then that ranks have to be closed, with the common enemy
facing a united front. And although a nuclear Iran represents a danger to
Israelis of all political persuasions, it has nothing to do with the
establishment of a Palestinian state or continued construction in the Jewish
settlements in Judea and Samaria.
As for past commitments by American and Israeli governments, written or
unwritten, on settlements and "settlement blocs" in Judea and Samaria, they
do not carry the weight of international agreements and are liable to change
as new governments take office following elections. This is the case in the
United States, where a Democratic candidate has won an election after
promising a change from the policies of his Republican predecessor, and is
equally true in Israel, where a Likud candidate has won an election on a
promise that he will not follow the policies of the previous Kadima-led
government.
The fact of the matter is that there is no national agreement in Israel on
the establishment of a Palestinian State at this time, or on the position
adopted by Ehud Olmert and parroted by Livni that unless a Palestinian state
is established, Israel will cease to exist. Nor for that matter is there
general agreement on the urgent need to negotiate with Palestinian
representatives an agreement that they currently are in no position to
implement, which should be "put on the shelf" while awaiting better times.
At present, with Hamas ruling the Gaza Strip and the Palestinian Authority
headed by Mahmoud Abbas far from being in control in Judea and Samaria, the
Palestinian state is no more than a fantasy. It may or may not become a
practical option in the future, and it would be appropriate for the Israeli
government to make clear that it does not preclude the establishment of a
Palestinian state if and when this becomes possible. By the looks of it, a
lot of water will flow down the Jordan River before that happens.
Posts
