I don't know Israeli society, and I would like to be wrong about the degree of extremism in it, but it's hard to explain the endless colonization of the West Bank without concluding that extremists have power in that society. Then too–further rationalization for what's about to follow–Israel's in crisis, and it's important to look at that crisis with a cold eye, but the media in the U.S. tend to overlook the rightwing radicalism that paralyzes the government. Though the Times has been catching up lately. Enough throat-clearing. Here's a piece on Tzipi Livni in the Middle East Report by Peretz Kidron that argues that Livni is too claimed by the right to try to undo the settlements.
What struck me was Kidron's conspiratorial take on Olmert's exit:
But the allegations against
Olmert relate largely to peccadilloes not entirely uncommon in
Israel’s ruling circles, evoking puzzlement over the relentless
pursuit that ultimately brought him down. One theory argues that
the eagerness of law enforcement agencies was tacitly supported
and perhaps even instigated by far-right groups outraged over
Olmert’s apparent intention to follow in the footsteps of his
mentor and predecessor in office, Ariel Sharon, by ordering a
unilateral withdrawal from extensive portions of the occupied
West Bank, in a pattern laid down by Sharon’s “disengagement”
of Israeli troops and settlers from the Gaza Strip in August
2005. Any such “surrender” of territory within the divinely Promised
Land is regarded as anathema by far-right fanatics and religious
zealots. Their anger has already led to the assassination of
one prime minister, Yitzhak Rabin, who was gunned down in 1995
by a militant because of his willingess to strike a land-for-peace
deal with the Palestinians. If this speculation about a right-wing
conspiracy is indeed correct, Olmert can count himself lucky
to have escaped with his life, being required merely to offer
up his political office.
'“surrender” of territory within the divinely Promised Land is regarded as anathema by far-right fanatics and religious zealots. Their anger has already led to the assassination of one prime minister, Yitzhak Rabin, who was gunned down in 1995 by a militant because of his willingess to strike a land-for-peace deal with the Palestinians.'
Olmert also hinted at the fanaticism of the hard-liners by referring to their demands to strike Iran, unilaterally if necessary, as "megalomania." Yet the two party regime in America regards Israel as monolithic, and refers to criticism of this kind of irrational, murderous fanaticism as "anti-semtism." The effect of this is to tie official American policy to the whims of a group that is basically mentally ill. Now, if it were Christians behaving in this manner, the left-liberal Dems would be all over them as irrational, religious screwballs. But because it is Jews, the left-liberals don’t utter a word. Just like the Neocon GOP, the Neoliberal Democrats' religion is Zionism. Why won’t the Democrats admit that, just as they accuse the GOP, they don’t really believe in the separation clause? And why do they pretend to despise the agenda of the religious right in America when they share with it the agenda and religion of Zionism?
Phil:
You're right, you know nothing about Israel. You speak of extremists, and yet you cite an article by Kidron, a conspiracy theorist on the fringes of the fringe of the Left.
Since you do nothing but obsess on Israel day and night, why not come here and look around? Take a few months, you will need it, we're a big country despite ourselves.
Failing that, you resemble the worst sort of armchair know-it-all–a sort of Sarah Palin really
Phil,
You're right. Olmert was lucky he wasn't Rabined. You know, murdered by an Orthodox Jewish extremist fanatic (sorta like a Islamic extremist fanatic) acting in "fulfillment of his faith" as he said at the time, and who was most definitely acting at the behest of a larger group. No, instead the religious extremist fanatics just went after Olmert with petty scandals, as we know partly from your reporting, and that was just for his not unilaterally nuking Iran.
Come to think of it, if he had said what he just did a year ago, he definitely would have been Rabined.
Out of respect for the dead, let us have a moment of silence for Rabin, a true man of wisdom and peace, who was leading Israel forward to salvation, before he was cut down out of paranoia and ignorance.
I've always said, there's no "left" in Israel to speak of. It's there in name only. In leftist terms, the so-called left in Israel are the equivalent of hardcore right-wing…
That's on the level of the masses.
As far as leadership goes, the same, really. There is no such thing as hawks and doves. I (miraculously) got my hands on the latest book by Amos Harel & Avi Issacharoff (banned in Lebanon, I was told), and reading it only confirmed what I've always said. The only difference between, say, a Livni and an Olmert, or an Olmert and a Sharon, is how many targets to bomb regardless of the civilian deaths. Whether to bomb residential areas now, or leave it for later. "Petty" things like that, if you know what I mean.
Israeli society loves to blame its leaders every time they are faced with the consequences of the actions that they always supported. For example, 80% of Israelis loved Olmert & Peretz during the 2006 war against Lebanon, and now, almost everyone hates Olmert – not because he brought war and deaths on them, but because he couldn't give them the results they were asking for. In Israel, the leaders are not there to GOVERN, but to produce results for which they are given mandates : continuation of the occupation, annexation of more lands, killing of more Palestinians, the eradication of any chance for a Palestinian state. You can talk all you want about the fact that a one-state solution will soon be the only option, it won't make a difference for Israelis, because they are hypnotized, hallucinating, they still believe, truly believe, in the possibility of achieving their "Jordan is Palestine" goal. Really, how many years does it take for a public to grow sick of the immoralities committed in its name in the West Bank/Gaza Strip?? One would think that public opinion would've been at the point of adopting the irreversible view that Israel should not annex even a dunam of Palestinian land, should leave the territories in exchange for peace (same for Golan), but no, they complain about war but want more war, they refuse to give up on lands even in return for peace and normalization of ties with a country with which Israel has been at war for the past 60 years. Imagine that! After all that, no Israeli can complain that they are misunderstood, that they really want peace, that Arabs want to throw them into the sea, and all the myths that are repeated ad nauseam… Israelis want a war they can win, more than a peace that will save the lives of so many of their own people as well as Palestinians, Lebanese, Syrians, etc.
a conspiracy theorist on the fringes of the fringe of the Left.
The wonders of relativity. Does this tell us were you stand? He writes this: "One theory argues that the eagerness of law enforcement agencies was"
Why should he call it theory, if he considers it as a fact? All he says is, it would merge neatly with the interests of that section. Cui bono?
I found the Livni-the-enigma-passage the most interesting and this:
Instead, he opted for a strategy more in keeping with Israeli tradition, taking advantage of his portfolio as transportation minister to recruit bloc votes among groups dependent upon his ministry’s good will. Dangling promises of benefits, his aides enrolled troops of bus drivers and dockworkers as members of Kadima, and made sure they turned out to cast their votes. The numbers thus drummed up were not large, but in a party with a nominal membership of 70,000 — only half of whom bothered to turn out — several thousand such “bloc voters” were almost enough to tip the scales in favor of Mofaz.
Interesting who similar these tactics are. I'd consider this borderline. Shouldn't there be a law to close this gap?
Interesting author that doesn't feel fringe of fringe on the left to me. Unfortunately the net does not tell me much. Maybe I should learn Hebrew, finally.
the comments mention Rabin, Sharon and Olmert as politicians that have suffered for their 'controversial political agenda'. Nobody here mentions my all time favourite: Shimon Perez. From my point of view, he's been fighting for a realistic policy for at least 20 years but has always been stymied by the Israeli electorate. The moderate voter block living in large urban areas needs to vote en-masse to one party or nothing changes. If America's umbrella over Israel falters, there will have to be blood before a significant portion of the voting public gets convinced that they are putting their future in jeopardy.
Many of the Israeli settlers in Palestinian territories also have dual American citizenship. The US should treat these people the same way it treatd John Walker Lindh, and put them in jail for twenty years.
israelis are sheep like americans are sheep, and if fact all civilized humans are, as jesus noted. but when americans were herded into a corner they finally showed their teeth, so we may expect israelis to do so also when their security blanket goes.
myth of zippy is different = myth of lucky barry is different.
@ Paul Easton: so when the 'sheepish' Israelis paint themselves in a corner, how much are they ready to fight to get out? How much blood and pain are they ready to inflict? After WW1 Germany was ostracised and punished to a humiliating slow death, they came back with a vengeance and destroyed Europe. Are the Israelis ready to do the same? Your argument is going down a very predictable path, I hope you understand in full the consequences of your vision.
My only hope is that my family and friends 4+ hours by air from ground zero wouldn't be unduly affected by the regional conflagration your lot are re-kindling.
There's a third way: learn to live with The Other as equals. You are turning a civil and political issue into a military one – a zero sum game. You're doing it because that's the only way you want to win. For a curious outsider the situation in Palestine simply shows two groups of intransigent idiots that prefer to annihilate each other than try to work together for a better future. Sharon saw the light, Rabin did as well, Olmert and many others with past leadership positions in the IDF seem to have drawn the same conclusion, who's left of the intelligentsia that still espouses total annihilation or at least expulsion of the 'enemy'?