I am writing this blog in order to express some constructive criticism about the American Jewish experience. In order to solve problems, as I have claimed, one must first admit that there are problems, then define their true nature, and finally one could try to propose some reasonable remedy. However, today, I shall devote some time to the recent elections in Israel. The results are quite unusual: the Qadima Party has received the largest number of seats in the Knesset, yet it seems quite obvious that the Likud Party will be asked to form the next government. Yet, beyond the strangeness of the results, I believe that some important observations can be made regarding the reality of Israel's society as expressed by its voters.
In the elections of 2006, the Qadima Party got its main support from traditional Likud supporters. Therefore, the Likud dropped to a mere 12 seats. Its voters gave their trust to Qadima that had essentially broken off from the Likud (a handful of Labor politicians had also joined, including Shim'on Peres, but generally speaking the new party was a moderate version of the right-wing Likud). Now, the Likud is back. Its voters returned in massive numbers. So, how did Qadima manage to win more seats than Likud? Where did its voters come from?
Qadima drew its support from the traditional Zionist left - Labor and Meretz! Tzipi Livni succeeded in defeating the left, not the right. What has happened?
The Israeli left wing since the Six-Day War promoted two main ideas: 1) holding onto the territories captured in that war is not in our interest; 2) the conflict can be solved by offering the Arabs a fair and generous proposal. It turns out that the left has succeeded in convincing our public that the continued Israeli presence in the territories is indeed not in our interest, but the public has rejected the idea that it's our initiative and our initiative alone that will bring the conflict to an end.
Obviously, the right wing had a different view after 1967. Keeping all the territories was its central theme, and it had very little faith that the Arab side would be placated. I remember hearing a dramatic speech of Menahem Begin in 1972 at Bar-Ilan University. He was convinced that masses of Jews would settle in Israel, and hence we would keep the territories and maintain a solid Jewish majority in the Land of Israel.
However, since the Oslo Agreement (and in spite of its failure), the mainstream Israeli public has adopted the first leftist position. It believes that it is in our very best interest to be rid of the territories. Only a smaller state can preserve a Jewish majority. With the end of the massive immigration of Soviet Jewry, the drama of aliyah has come to an end. There is no illusion, no hope whatsoever, that significant numbers of western Jewry will take upon its shoulders the burdens of the Jewish collective existence. The main reason is, obviously, that Jewish identity is no longer their primary identity; rather, the American identity is central in their lives. Adopting an American identity means that the exile has come to an end (a person with a primary American identity, living in America, is not a "Jew in exile yearning for redemption"). Israel, therefore, is the home of its Jewish population, and only here and there will a handful of idealists join us (in addition to the unpredictable case of Jewish refugees fleeing some terrible regime). In short, the public understands that we will be a minority in our own land unless we go in the direction of partition. Here, the left has won the debate: the right wing Likud and even Yisrael Beitenu want to be rid of the territories!
This, now, explains the seemingly strange fact that left-wing voters gave their support to Qadima, a party which has its main roots in the Israeli right. These former left-wing voters understand that the question of partition has been resolved. There is no fear whatsoever that the territories will be annexed or that any mainstream political party will avoid negotiations with the enemy. This issue has been resolved satisfactorily. The questions that remain are: "Can we placate the enemy? Is the end of conflict a possibility? Is it solely an issue of our offering a generous peace proposal?"
In these questions, the right wing of Israel has won the debate. There is little faith that the conflict can be resolved - and it's not because of us. The Hamas position, just for an example, regards our state as illegitimate, and it regards the armed struggle as a matter of principle. A nation such as Iran has made it clear that the disappearance of Israel is its official state policy. It has no grievances merely about "occupation" or "refugees", etc. Even the moderates of Palestinian society (who are willing to negotiate with Israel) are keen to conduct talks with us only for pragmatic reasons - not because we have any legitimate rights. The conflict is not coming to an end, so it seems, and the Israeli public has essentially expressed in its vote that it has accepted the traditional right-wing position in this regard.
To summarize: The right wing of Israel is no longer the right wing of the past. The dream of the entire Land of Israel has been abandoned. Hence, the left wing could vote for Qadima. Some probably voted for the Likud as well which likewise is not proposing to keep the captured territories. The issue that remains is the issue of "ending the conflict". Since many have abandoned the belief that we could convince the enemy to end the hostilities through some generous offer, they have now casted their votes for the right wing which is perceived (rightly or wrongly) as more capable of "conflict-management". The Zionist left (Labor and Meretz) has been reduced to 16 members of Knesset.
No comments:
Post a Comment