ISRAEL'S BOURBON ELITE
Artículo de Ari Shavit en "Ha´a retz" del 28-11-02
Shortly after the Israel Defense Forces undertook Operation Defensive Shield
last spring, one of its commanders used an interesting metaphor to describe the
significance of the wide-scale military operation. What we're doing in the West
Bank, said the senior officer, is putting a blanket over the flames. We are not
putting out the fire and are not eradicating its sources. But by covering the
burning territories with a military blanket we are managing to prevent the
spread of the firestorm and we are slowly trying to smother it.
True. But in recent months it turns out the IDF occupation blanket is not having
a long-term influence. Worse: While the IDF and Shin Bet were putting a
suffocating blanket on Palestinian terrorism, the terror threw a suffocating
blanket over the Israeli public. And the Israeli economy. And the clarity of
Israeli thinking. In the second half of 2002, it has become apparent that
Palestinian terror has succeeded in significantly blocking the flow of necessary
oxygen that so far fed Israel's resilience.
The most outstanding expression of that weakening of Israeli resilience in
recent months is Mitzna's momentum. The fact that otherwise sensible Israelis
are now ready to be enraptured by the strange promises being made by the Haifa
mayor is testimony to the fact that ultimately the Palestinians are exhausting
Israel more than Israel is exhausting them. The fact that so many Israelis are
ready to accept Mitzna's terms of surrender - negotiations under fire,
withdrawal under fire, and immediate establishment of an armed and hostile
Palestinian state, shows that something in us has broken. After two years of
impressive resistance in the campaign, important parts of the Israeli public are
starting to consume false ideas again.
Mitzna's formula is so embarrassing that it's almost unpleasant to argue with
it. The principle of negotiating under fire means the collapse of Israel's
two-year effort to move toward some form of stability. Its price will be rivers
of blood. The principle of withdrawal under fire means incentives for repeated
attacks on Israel. The price will be war. The principle of the immediate,
unconditional establishment of an armed Palestinian state means Israel will lose
its ability to defend itself with conventional means. The price will be danger
to our national existence.
True, there's no chance that Mitzna's formula will be adopted as the basis for
Israeli policy. When the election campaign heats up and Omri Sharon and Reuven
Adler make clear to the public what the formula really means, the Israeli left
will go through the same process that happened to the American left in 1972
under George McGovern: It will be roundly beaten. But the mere fact that in the
last six months the new political eccentricity proposed by Mitzna has won
supporters among so many good Israelis shows that the Israeli elite remains a
Bourbon elite - it has learned nothing and forgotten nothing. More accurately,
it learned something for a little while and then immediately forgot it. Under
Palestinian pressure, it once again chose to forget.
Thus, with the end of the primary season, the man in the Muqata can chalk up a
not-so-small victory: the Mitzna phenomenon is unequivocal proof that in the
arm-wrestling match between Yasser Arafat and Ariel Sharon, Sharon does not
necessarily have the upper hand. The Palestinians may be suffocating under
Israel's iron fist, but ultimately, it was the Israelis who blinked first. The
suffocating blanket thrown over them by terror won a strategic success greater
than the military occupation blanket thrown over the Palestinians. The American
road map is also proof of that, as are the profound processes of depression and
loss of hope in Israeli society.
The campaign has yet to be decided. Israeli sanity has yet to speak the last
word. But to win the great war of terror that was imposed on us, Israel needs
another kind of thinking. To meet the existential challenge of the coming
decade, Israel must go through a process of creative and dialectic thinking that
would create a new ideological synthesis. That's why the most frustrating aspect
of the Mitzna phenomenon and its parallels on the right is the total
indifference of the politicians to the urgent need for some kind of ideological
restructuring. The despair from the way the election campaign has been conducted
so far results from the fact that it offers us a choice between two polar
anachronisms that share a joint deliberate ignorance of reality.
There are, however, 60 days left in the campaign. The only public in the Middle
East that has the right to choose its fate at the ballot box can still apply
moral pressure on those who dare pretend to be its leaders. But it is
intolerable that after all we've been through in recent years, our candidates
will behave as if they just arrived from outer space. It is intolerable that we
will once again allow them to lead us into the fool's traps that have been shown
by experience to endanger our very lives.