Israeli election - 2009

Nethanyahu will probably end up giving Obama what is known throughout Washington, DC as the Rahm Emanuel salute!!

Nethanyahu will not allow the Palestinians to hurl missles against Israel. He will make them pay tenfold.

The government's position, Olmert said, is that "if there is shooting at residents of the south there will be an Israeli response that will be harsh and disproportionate by its nature to the shooting at residents of Israel and at our forces."

Do you honestly think that Israel is in any position to do that? My understanding is that Israel is highly reliant on US support.

"In the night between Thursday and Friday, when the secretary of state wanted to lead the vote on a ceasefire at the Security Council, we did not want her to vote in favour," Olmert said.

"I said 'get me President Bush on the phone'. They said he was in the middle of giving a speech in Philadelphia. I said I didn't care. 'I need to talk to him now'. He got off the podium and spoke to me.

"I told him the United States could not vote in favour. It cannot vote in favour of such a resolution. He immediately called the secretary of state and told her not to vote in favour."

"She was left pretty embarrassed."

Yet despite the criticisms of Netanyahu then, he too flashed a pragmatic streak.

Netanyahu pledged never to even talk to then Palestine Liberation Organisation chairman Yasser Arafat, but ended up signing what was considered at the time to be a major agreement with Arafat at Wye River in 1998.

Given the complexity and diversity of opinion that exists across the Israeli political spectrum, another Netanyahu-led coalition may yet have the capacity to surprise.

Is it holocaust guilt, do yu think, or does it reflect the strength of numbers of Jewiah folk in the US? (Not that all jews are zionists).

So, who won?

You can find my answer in an article I wrote for The New Republic. As you can see, I do not necessarily agree with the common wisdom according to which the "right" had won.

Here's a paragraph:

Though there are no clear winners from yesterday's polls, the clear loser in this election is ideology. The hardnosed right-wing parties are fairly small--the National Union, presumably representing the settlers and the people who, three years ago, opposed the withdrawal from Gaza, will only have four seats. The left-wing "Peace Now" party, New Movement-Meretz--supported by celebrity authors Amos Oz and David Grossman--won a meager three votes, the worst outcome since its inception. The religious parties lost votes and influence. If a unity government will be formed--which is looking like an increasingly likely possibility--these fringe parties will have almost no influence.

The relative consensus that has been crystallizing among Israelis in recent years means that it is difficult to categorize Israel's major parties as "left" or "right." The country's political landscape consists of very large "center"--to which belong most voters of Likud, Kadima, Labor, and some voters of Lieberman's Yisrael Beiteinu--all in all, about 75 seats out of 120. The margins are now populated by a number of fairly small parties: The Arab parties (7-8 seats), the tiny "left" (Meretz, elements in the Arab-Jewish Hadash, and maybe a member or two of Labor, totaling 6-7 seats), the "right" (National Union, some voters of Yisrael Beiteinu, and some Likud voters, adding up to 15 seats), and the "religious" parties (Shas and United Torah Judaism, with their 15 seats).

There are three main reasons for Palestinians to be deeply pessimistic about today's Israeli elections.

The first is the much-publicised surge in popularity for the far-right Yisrael Beiteinu party, whose leader, Avigdor Lieberman, is almost certain to get a leading role in the new cabinet.

True, Lieberman has worked with centrist and centre-right governments before - he was once chief of staff to Binyamin Netanyahu, the Likud leader, and had a spell as a minister in the outgoing administration - but he is no friend of the Palestinians.

He wants Arab-Israelis to swear loyalty to Israel as a Jewish state and to keep Jewish settlements in the West Bank, handing over to the Palestinians Arab-inhabited areas of Israel in exchange. Much of what he says may be vote-winning firebrand bluster - the loyalty oath is sheer nonsense - but he is at best divisive and at worst dangerous.

Second, much of Israel's political leadership appear to have little belief in, or appetite for, any peace process beyond keeping Hamas quiet in Gaza.

The Government believes it soundly beat Hamas in the recent conflict: it was delighted at the accuracy of its intelligence and the success of its campaign, and points to a number of assumptions Hamas made that were totally undermined. A third intifada - as called for by the Islamist group - failed to materialise; there was no supporting action from Hezbollah, supposedly an ally, in southern Lebanon; Hamas failed to kidnap a single soldier or shoot down an enemy jet; and it believed Israel would never send in its ground troops, a belief that was proved fatally wrong.

Hawks in the Defence Ministry believe it is possible to “finish off” Hamas, although others balk at the time and number of casualties this would involve, but neither party is keen on reoccupying Gaza and its 1.5 million people.

For now, Israel wants a Hamas that is strong enough to stop rockets being fired, but not so strong that it can regroup, import new weapons and win over Gazans by rebuilding the shattered territory - hence the refusal to let cement and other construction materials through the checkpoints.

As for casualties, defence officials believe they were damned if they took military action, and damned if they let the rockets keep on raining down on Sderot, Ashkelon and other towns - so they went in.

Hamas does not want to relinquish Gaza - according to some experts, it kept back its core fighters so they could quickly re-establish control once the fighting was over. Furthermore, it knows it will not be allowed any foothold in the West Bank, run by the moderate Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas who is heavily sponsored by the West, so it has no incentive to join a consensus government with Fatah and little reason to moderate its stance.

Thirdly, the favourite to win the election is Mr Netanyahu. “Bibi”, as he is known, has mooted the idea of economic support for the West Bank as a way of encouraging moderates before any political progress can be made. This, say his opponents, just lets him kick a Palestinian state into the long grass. In any case, they add, Mr Netanyahu’s idea of statehood is of an emasculated entity - no defence force, no independent airspace, and totally reliant on Israel for its contacts with the outside world. This is not statehood, the Palestinians complain. It is autonomy - and the situation will not be resolved but merely managed.

Put all this together - a far-right Cabinet minister antipathetic to Arab-Israelis, a Hamas regime that is contained but not vanquished, and a Likud-led administration with no interest in going further down the line towards a Palestinian state - and one fears for the people of Gaza, and for any hope of progress in the peace process.

Gazans will not have their homes rebuilt, they cannot speak out against Hamas without fear of execution - and, at the same time, will continue to hate the army that destroyed their homes and killed their brethren.

They may not have air tight security but they can live and prosper. It is not the first time in History that the Islamic Hordes have attacked other nations.
There was no negotiation then. There will be none now UNLESS Hamas and other fundamentalists allow Israel to strenghten their security.

Israel was set for the return to power of Binyamin Netanyahu after the Likud leader was invited to form a coalition government yesterday.

Immediately after he was invited to become the next prime minister by President Peres, Mr Netanyahu lost no time in restating his warnings about a nuclear-armed Iran, calling it the greatest existential threat faced by Israel since its creation. His words came a day after the UN announced that Tehran had acquired sufficient uranium to build a nuclear bomb " a “red line” development Israel has said it will not tolerate.

Likud came second in last week’s elections to the Kadima party, led by Tzipi Livni, but Mr Netanyahu’s chances of forming a government are significantly greater. However, he may find himself at the head of a narrow, far-right coalition that is at war with itself and at loggerheads with the US.

His main partner will be the hardline nationalist party Yisraeil Beitenu, led by Moldovan Avigdor Lieberman. With the support of the remaining parties on the right " the ultra-Orthodox and settler factions " the new coalition will be able to count on 65 MPs in the 120-seat Knesset.

As well as his willingness to confront Iran over its nuclear ambitions Mr Netanyahu opposes the establishment of a Palestinian state, an issue on which the US Government will want to make progress.

George Mitchell, the peace envoy appointed by President Obama almost as soon as he took office, fired a warning shot across Mr Netanyahu’s bows, saying that Israel needed to pursue a political track with the Palestinians, not just an economic one " which is what Mr Netahyahu has proposed.

The Likud leader’s plan for an “economic peace” means that Israeli forces would keep security control of the West Bank and its borders and air space. Palestinians would police their own towns. Israelis would mount raids against militants deemed a threat.

In return Israel would build industrial centres and attempt to bolster the Palestinian economy in an effort to turn the population away from radicalism. It is unlikely that any Palestinian leadership could accept such terms and retain any credibility, especially with support for Hamas on the rise. ... <cont>

Binyamin Netanyahu’s appointment as Prime Minister-designate this morning will be a bitter-sweet victory for the right-wing Israeli leader.

While clinching the nomination from President Shimon Peres, the smooth-talking, US-educated former commando " Bibi, as he is known in Israel " may find himself at the head of a narrow, far-right coalition that is at war with itself and at loggerheads with the new US Administration.

Headed by Mr Netanyahu’s Likud " which has lurched to the right since its former leader Ariel Sharon left to form the centrist Kadima party three years ago " and with its mainstay in the far-right Yisrael Beitenu party of Avigdor Lieberman, the new coalition will be able to count on 65 MPs in the 120-seat Knesset.

Bolstered by ultra-Orthodox and settler parties, Mr Netanyahu’s government will enshrine the neo-conservative, hawkish values of the Bush Administration, just at a moment when American has suddenly swung back to its more liberal values under Barack Obama. ...<cont>