will Israel change

[humayun "The King"]

Stormy changes have occurred in the day-to-day politics of Israel: Ariel Sharon, the prime minister, has resigned from the party he founded in 1973, the Likud, and Shimon Perez has dissociated from the Labour Party, after being unexpectedly defeated in a tussle over the party leadership. Sharon advised the president to dissolve the Knesset and a general election has been ordered for March 28 next year. Sharon has formed a 'centrist' party of his own, Kadima. What do these developments signify? Closer to home, what is the importance of these developments for Pakistanis? The short answer is that something of importance for Pakistanis hinges on these changes: we have always been deeply concerned with what happens to Palestine and Palestinians. What happens in Israel vitally affects the future of Palestinians. Palestinians have virtually been left alone by most Arab states. Their cause deserves, however, the sympathy of all humanists and democrats. But there is more.

Pakistan has taken baby steps towards recognising Israel, whether the people like it or not. Then, the net change that might take place in Israeli politics as a result of the March 28 election would make a lot of difference to the fortunes of Palestinians and many others farther afield. Also, this would presage significant changes in the Middle East. Encouraging Israel means giving it licence to do to Palestinians what its bellicose leaders please. The latter are not believers in human equality; for them Palestinian rights mean nothing. Only Israelis have unlimited rights. There is pressing need for rational people to stand by Palestinians' rights. This may look rather academic to others. But historically it is of much significance to Pakistanis.

The changes in Israel have occurred because of divisions and confusion within Israeli politics. Sharon, by unilaterally withdrawing from the Gaza Strip while keeping the area in an iron grip, appears to be clearing the road to implement his own programme for the West Bank. Few can be certain what Sharon actually aims at. The 'Separation Wall' is now nearing completion. A large amount of land, slightly more than half of the West Bank, looks likely to be usurped by Israel. Shimon Perez's accession to his side will strengthen Sharon who wants to negotiate with the Palestinians from a position of invincible strength. He means to convert the proposed Palestinian state into quite widely separated cantons, constantly surrounded and controlled by the Israeli army. It is true Sharon has, rather ambiguously, said he accepts the US-given 'roadmap'. But what that precisely means is unclear because Israel has had too many reservations and unexpected interpretations of both the Oslo agreement and the roadmap.
But some new uncertainties have arisen. The Israeli right wing is now even more divided. The Americans are meanwhile trying to force the Israelis on to the roadmap they had prescribed for the Arab-Israeli dispute. As a result of which Sharon decided to gamble: he expects to win the next election through the new party by luring some of the centrists and even many Labour voters to his side by his bogus talk of promoting a centrist politics. How he will act after winning the polls remains a big uncertainty.

Let us note that Sharon is under attack from the extreme right, represented mainly by Benjamin Netanyahu, the former prime minister and darling of Likud's ultras. Probably much of the Israeli right stays with Ariel Sharon, now trying to lure some centrists and even leftists to his Kadima party with the red herring of a new party and new politics. But the Labour Party has elected a new leader with a new line -- a radical change.
Amir Peretz, the new Labour chief, is a Sephardim (of Asian-African origin). He is not an Ashkenazi, or white-skinned immigrant from Europe, as all Labour leaders have been so far. He has already electrified the rather dormant left in Israel. He represents a virtually new political strand in Israeli politics. Hitherto, Israeli politics was largely concerned with relations with the Palestinians with a view to making Israel secure. Security has long been the leitmotif of Israeli politics. In its place, Amir Peretz has brought some harsh facts of Israeli life centre-stage.

The poverty line in Israel may be 30 per cent or thereabout. The discrepancy in incomes and opportunities between the Ashkenazi and the Sephardim, the have-nots, has been growing. He wants more social solidarity -- i.e. more expenditure on social sectors -- to improve the living conditions of the bottom 40 per cent of Israelis. Insofar as the security question is concerned, Peretz is willing to sign a peace treaty with the Palestinians on the basis of the 1967 frontiers, as UN Resolution 242 actually prescribed. He is apparently willing to withdraw from the West Bank and Gaza, dismantle settlements and let a true Palestinian state arise. That is the promise. The question is, will this truly make the Israeli left invincible or will the old magic of 'security questions' hand the right wing another victory in March 2006?

What is not in doubt is that Netanyahu's ultra-right will fiercely attack Sharon. Netanyahu stands for even less land to Palestinians and a status quo on social matters. He is likely to be supported in the next parliament by other small right-wing groups. Sharon's chances lie only in his personal popularity that eats into all political divisions. He is also banking on the bulk of right as well as basically rightist elements within the Labour Party. The latter have lately been socially as conservative as any rightist. They are not pushed by social issues of persistent unemployment of a section of the population and growing disparities of income for a growing number.

The gamble therefore is that Sharon hopes by his new party to lure as many votes from Labour as possible. On the other side, the question is whether the new Labour leader can revive the earlier peace camp and energise the party on social questions, making greater social solidarity and a more equitable distribution of wealth key election issues. Can Peretz create a new left, raring to come back, is the question. Can he make it grow? He has risen through the ranks as a trade unionist. Can he capture a majority of Knesset seats on his own or in coalition with centrist elements, if any are left?
Whether Netanyahu wins or Sharon carries the right, there remains the question of peace terms for the hapless Palestinians. The only ray of hope the Palestinians can see --- and they may be mistaken -- is in the American intervention. How far American intervention can go is a difficult question to answer. The major uncertainty has to be noted: can a newly energised left come in out of the cold? It has been Sharon's junior partner. Is it a new force?

The political battle now is between Peretz's social ideas and the lure of Palestinian land held out by both Netanyahu and Sharon. Netanyahu is, if possible, more to the right than even Sharon. But Sharon is about as rightist as they come. It is his political flair that has got him into a situation where he looks like a centrist force. Doubtless that is a price that Sharon is paying to defeat Netanyahu. The latter may also have to pay on social questions, while focusing only on security issues. Anyway, the next election in Israel will be significant for the outside world in terms of the policies the new government adopts vis-a-vis the Palestinian state, and whether or not Peretz will actually be able to win on a peace programme by bringing social questions centre-stage.

(courtesy dawn)