The Labor Party was on its way out of the national unity government Wedensday evening, after Defense Minister Benjamin Ben-Eliezer handed in his letter of resignation Wednesday evening.
Ben-Eliezer’s resignation came as a last-ditch meeting in the Knesset with Prime Minister Ariel Sharon aimed at finalizing a compromise deal to stave off Labor’s threatened departure from the government, ended in a shouting match.
Toward afternoon, it appeared that a compromise deal had been worked out over Labor’s demand that funding to settlements in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, to the tune of $145 million, be reallocated to the weaker sectors of society. Labor has also been demanding that more funds be allocated to students and pensioners.
While Labor’s departure from the national unity government will not topple Sharon immediately, it will force him to rely on the far-right, or ultimately call early elections.
The US should get the both of these idiots along with saddam if they act in the middle east. Peace would come very quickly. Oh yeah dont forget Arafat. His days are numbered anyway.
Unless Monster Sharon is removed from power, it will not stop the IDF commiting further atrocities in the West Bank. Israel needs forward looking, liberal polices which advocate a genuine PEACE with the Palestinians, not a Right wing militarized agenda which Sharon had implemented ever since his trip to the Dome of the Rock which he carried out only to destroy the fragile peace that existed at the time.
Is this a case of having the ball bounce back, only to hit your own face? Aerial Sharon and Co. had been asking for the sidelining of Arafat and his govt, but Arafats nominated cabinet just got approved, and Sharon has been all but forced to call elections. Poetic Justice.
I can only hope Israelis dont vote for state terrorism ever again.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ahmadjee: *
What happens if they do elections & Sharon & Co. win more support than before?
[/QUOTE]
Excellent point. One of these articles gives the breakdown of the Knesset based on spectrum category: right, left, center, religious, arab. The prediction appears to be that Likud and the right would gain power in an election at the expense of the left and center. The only question seems to be whether Sharon will emerge as party leader or will Netanyahu.
Moral of the story i guess is that you better be careful what you rejoice and hope for. With Act I closing on this coalition government, wait till you see what Act II brings. It is not a pretty picture.
What is slightly more satisfying is that this particular tiff is on a very real issue of jewish settlements. Labor opposes funding settlements, whereas Sharon refused to budge from his budgetary proposals.
Personally I consider these settlements as illegal. I am sure there are a lot of people who agree with me. If elections are called, this will be a major election issue.
It will be interesting to see how Israeli electorate feels about this issue. Do they still endorse "Land-for-Peace" of Labor party or they plan to support the belligerant and brutal policies of right-wing and Sharon, which has so far brought more and more misery to Palestinians and is a direct cause of hundreds of deaths of civilians within Israel.
fAISAL;
Unfortunately the issue of settlements will not be the determining factor in the outcome of the election. Many public opinion polls have been posted in various threads in Gupshup showing that a majority of Israelis are willing to dismantle settlements as part of an overall peace. The majority of Israelis either support or are resigned to drawing borders that do not include outposts/settlements.
The problem (and reason why Sharon and Likud seem to be gaining ground in the Israeli electorate) is that the majority of Israelis do NOT believe that settlements are the MAIN obstacle to achieving peace and they do not believe that dismantling settlements will stop the suicide bombers. As long as there is a strong presence of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, PFLP, and other groups that insist upon the total destruction of Israel and vow to continue the bombing and terror regardless of whether there are settlements or not, Israelis will vote for the party and people who they think are most likely to give them security and protect their lives. A party's or person's position on settlements is only of secondary importance in the Israeli voters mind.
Its interesting. Any person who follows the events in ME will find a strong correlation between the issue of settlements and the security of Israelis. Then again, perhaps situation on the ground is much different.
In any case, do you have some statistics on how many Israeli civilians were killed during the tenure of Labor Prime Ministers (Rabin et al) and Lekud Prime Ministers (Netenyaho, Sharon et al).
I would think that killings of Israeli civilians directly bear upon the security environment of Israel,a nd since the policies of Labor and Lekud are quite drammatically different on some core issues, it should be pretty clear to the electorate as to whose policies provided more security to civilians and the state.
There is too much mistrust on each side, which has given rise to the support of extremist among the Palestinians as well as Israelis. Such mistrust is not decreasing, nor has but increasing with both sides (and their supporters) blaming other for all the fiasco. Things will get far more worse before they will start to become normal ... if at all.
Faisal, ironically all settlements (with the exception of 3 or 4) have been built during the Labor governments, including Rabin’s. An average Israeli believes that settlements have got nothing to do with the violence, and it will continue regardless. Besides, Israel will either compensate or return the area once there is some sort of settlement. Who is not willing to settle? depends on who you talk to.
NYA, that maybe true. Point being Labor were more open to the idea of giving something in return for peace with Palestinians. What they were willing to give would all depend on the negotiations. Lekud on the other hand is much more hardline in their policies, who will rather kick Palestinians than to give them anything. Thats why anywhere they are given an option to use negotiations or force, they use force on the pretext that there is no point in negotiations with them.
So the difference in policies is clear.
Now the question is, whose policies provided more security to the Israeli civilians?
Is the policy of confrontation, using military might, dropping bombs in the middle of refugee camps, working?
Is it making the lives of Israeli civilians more secure?
Or the policy of negotiations, a sort of carrot-and-stick better?
Finalize a deal, where you give them something they need and get back something you need, be it compensation for settlements, clearly demarcated borders, position on East Jerusalem or whatever. Its all a matter of negotiation.
Whether continuing that process, keeps the hopes alive for Palestinians and they are less prone to blow themselves up?
Thereby does this policy makes lives of Israelis more secure, in the short-term and the long-term?
Faisal writes:
"Now the question is, whose policies provided more security to the Israeli civilians? "
I think what you see happening is that the Israeli electorate has no answer to that question because things on the ground happen which make them fluctuate. They give one side a chance to make some progress for awhile and when progress doesn't happen quick enough, they give the other side a chance. While many staunch Palestinian supporters will claim the offers were not enough, no Israeli leader ever offered as many concessions as did the Barak government at Taba in January 2000 (2001???). He was elected on a peace/concession platform. No deal and (regardless of whether you believe
Sharon the candidate incited it) the Israelis got the 2nd Intifada. While the positions of the parties on the left and right are now hardening in opposition, the electorate apparently doesn't feel that Sharon has had enough time to demonstrate that his policies are failures. Most of us think that day will come and hope that it is sooner rather than later.
One thing is for sure, when the next Left/Center government comes into power, the Palestinians really had better provide some tangible evidence to the Israeli people that Left/Center policies will lead to greater security. If a Left/Center government is met with Palestinian policies that still allow for Hamas, Islamic Jihad, PFLP, etc. terror bombings and activities to be launched from Palestinian lands, the Right wing government that will follow it is sure to be even more brutal than the present one.