Haaretz's Ari Shavit has long been warning that unless Israel caves in to the US and EU demands to satisfy the Palestinians, Israel will be abandoned. And in his latest article (U.S. has had enough of Netanyahu's babbling) he thinks that events prove him right.
Bibi believes that words replace deeds, and he puts what we say ahead of what we do. His attempts to mitigate international pressure on Israel by promising a "path-breaking" speech in a few weeks, either before the U.S. Congress, or at the annual AIPAC conference ... [but i]n view of the Americans' disappointment after Netanyahu's Bar-Ilan speech, only acts of substance will impress them and the rest of the world. They've heard enough speeches ...
As far as it goes this is true: I always considered Netanyahu all talk and no action where it counts.The real question, however is precisely what are the "acts of substance" that will satisfy the Palestinians. Predictably for Shavit:
Whoever has his feet on the ground, and understands how deep is the crisis of confidence marring our relations with Washington, not to mention the economic stagnation gripping America, knows that prospects of receiving additional assistance depend entirely on genuine progress in the peace process - taking risks, such as (for example ) the return of the Golan Heights, or the designation of borders so the Palestinians can feel, at long last, that they have a state of their own. Even in this scenario, an American government well-versed in dealings with us will tread carefully. Obama cannot afford to come out looking like a sucker.I
In other words, having pushed Israel to concessions without any reciprocation from the Palestinians and having given the latter a pretext--settlements--for intransigence, to avoid looking like the sucker that he is, Obama requires that Netanyahu give the Iran-Syria-Hizb'allah-Hamas axis a third border with Israel and accept the "Auschwitz borders" with the Palestinians without any commitments on their part.
Shavit is nostalgic for leaders like Ben Gurion and, ironically, Ariel Sharon:
Nor are there Ben-Gurions in these parts; a Ben-Gurion is a leader who knows where he's headed, and who has the strength to tell the truth to his countrymen. Ariel Sharon did not deliver speeches in Congress or the UN; instead, he spoke to his people via an interview in Haaretz, and before he evacuated Gaza, he spoke historic words: "The time has come to end our addiction to the dream of Greater Israel."
It is, indeed, likely that Ben Gurion would not have brought Israel to its current predicament but, I suspect, by not heading where Shavit wants Bibi to go. As to Ariel Sharon, does Shavit really wants to persuade us that evacuating Gaza is the example to follow? Hard to believe.
In a previous post I referred to Caroline Glick's criticism of the flawed strategy of "getting the West to be nice to Israel" by appeasing the Palestinians, while the Palestinians focused on de-legitimizing of Israel and on getting from the West what they could not get via war and terror. This appeasement strategy started with Oslo and Netanyahu's intention to present his new initiative abroad is evidence that it is still active.
It is this flawed strategy that brought the predictable circumstances Israel is finding itself in today. And, to reiterate, strategic mistakes are difficult to correct, particularly after such a long time.
Israel's left, of which Shavit is a member, deems further concessions to be the solution, which is counterintuitive because it is inconsistent with reality: concessions always brought demands for further concessions. In her latest column (A win-win plan for Netanyahu) Glick documents this very process:
For the past year and a half Netanyahu's policy for dealing with Obama's animosity has been to try to appease him by making incremental concessions ... [yet] Obama's newest threat is that through the so-called Middle East Quartet, (Russia, the UN, the EU and the US), the administration will move towards supporting the Palestinian plan to declare Palestinian statehood ... and since its leaders reject Israel's right to exist, "Palestine" would be born in a de facto state of war with Israel ...To credit this threat, Obama has empowered the Quartet to supplant the US as the mediator between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Buoyed by Obama, Quartet representatives and American and European officials have beaten a steady path to Netanyahu's door over the past several weeks. Their message is always the same: If Israel does not prove that it is serious about peace by giving massive unreciprocated concessions to the Palestinians then they will abandon all remaining pretense of support for Israel and throw their lot in completely with the Palestinians.
Glick suggests a strategic correction in the opposite direction to that pushed by the left. And what do you know: it is the strategy that Israel employed prior to Oslo and from which it deviated at its peril (Yehuda Avner's book THE PRIME-MINISTERS documents the pre-Oslo strategy and its effectiveness, particularly during the premiership of Menachem Begin, who was vilified but proved prophetic).
The only way to stop Obama from moving forward on his anti-Israel policy course is to work through Congress.And the most effective way to work through Congress is for Netanyahu to abandon his current course and tell the truth about the nature of the Palestinians, their rejection of Israel, their anti-Americanism and their support for jihadist terror. At the same time, Netanyahu must speak unambiguously about Israel's national rights to Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria, our required security borders, and about why US national security requires a strong Israel.
Glick also recommends that in his speech Netanyahu should announce the following acts of substance:
... a plan to apply Israeli law to the Jordan Valley and the major blocs of Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria ... a plan to wean Israel off of US military aid within three years ... and [firing] Barak and replac[ing] him with Moshe Ya'alon.
She argues that:
What I am certain of is that what the left pushes in defiance of reality has already proved delusional and suicidal. They refuse to recognize that Israel finds itself today in the hole precisely because ever since Oslo Israeli governments, including Netanyahu, followed their strategy. Which would explain their denial.
...not only would he blunt Obama's power to threaten Israel. He would secure popular US support for Israel for years to come. And if he did that, he would restore the Israeli voters' support for his leadership and stabilize his government through the next elections.To be honest, I am highly skeptical about the effectiveness of the old strategy at this stage of the game. Had it not been abandoned, chances are Israel would have been better off.
What I am certain of is that what the left pushes in defiance of reality has already proved delusional and suicidal. They refuse to recognize that Israel finds itself today in the hole precisely because ever since Oslo Israeli governments, including Netanyahu, followed their strategy. Which would explain their denial.
Yet if I were to guess, I would bet that Netanyahu will follow Sharon and Olmert and stick to it.
No comments:
Post a Comment