Democratic Palestine : 31 (ص 45)
غرض
- عنوان
- Democratic Palestine : 31 (ص 45)
- المحتوى
-
Israeli Elections
On December 21st, seven weeks after the elections, a new coalition government was
formed, with Y. Shamir as Prime Minister, S. Peres as Finance Minister, Y. Rabin as
Defense Minister and M. Arens as Foreign Minister. The main points of the agree-
ment between Likud and Labor are the following: adherence to the Camp David ac-
cords; calling on Jordan to begin peace negotiations with ‘Israel’; no to talks with
the PLO; no to the establishment of a Palestinian state; no changes concerning the
sovereignty over the West Bank and Gaza Strip are to be made unless both coalition
partners agree; Jerusalem’s status as the «united and eternal capital of Israel» is not
to be changed. Moreover, the agreement stipulates that Shamir will remain Prime
Minister the whole term, and that if one of the partners withdraws from the coali-
tion, new elections are to be held. This government was formed due to the necessity
of uniting to face the current situation. It serves to confirm that the position of the
Israeli leaders hasn’t changed as far as essentials are concerned.
The November Ist elections had been
labelled the most important in the
history of ‘Israel’, but their in-
conclusive result clearly indicates that
‘Israel’ is not and will not be ready for
peace in the foreseeable future. With
Peres clinging to the Jordanian option
which had been marginalized even
before King Hussein’s decision to sever
legal and administrative ties with the
West Bank, and Shamir saying no to
almost everything (an international
peace conference, talks with the PLO,
withdrawal from the West Bank and
the Gaza Strip), the election campaign
ended as it had started, not offering any
new elements. Likud and Labor proved
to be very similar in their complete
failure to take a realistic position in the
face of the new situation created by the
uprising of the Palestinian people, and
their almost identical response to the
question of how to end it, i.e., more
violence and more repression.
Faced with the uprising and its
achievements, with growing interna-
tional condemnation and the failure of
the big parties to present a viable solu-
tion to the crisis shaking their society,
Israeli still voted according to the pat-
terns which have prevailed in the last
decade. As a result, the balance bet-
ween Labor and Likud remained even,
allowing neither to hold the reins of
power alone and making both depen-
dent on the demands of the small par-
ties, Or on a renewed government of
national unity/disunity.
The result of the elections allows us
to draw the following conclusions:
The Israeli democratic forces opposed
to Zionism are still weak; they have not
yet reached the point where they can
have a real influence on Israeli politics.
This fact, combined with the dispersion
of the Palestinian vote, explains the
disappointing results of the leftist and
non-Zionist parties. Hadash (the
Democratic Front for Peace and
Equality) obtained 4 seats, the same as
in the 1984 elections; the Progressive
List for Peace obtained one seat, as
compared to two in 1984; and the Arab
Democratic Party got. one.
Disagreements among these parties also
contributed to this result, since they
failed to agree on sharing excess votes,
which cost them at least two seats.
- The majority of Israeli voters appear
to have little or no regard for the opi-
nion of the outside world, whether the
international community’s condemna-
tion of Israeli human rights violations,
or the deluded attempts of King Hus-
sein and President Mubarak to put ina
good word for Labor and peace.
- The Israeli society is facing a major
crisis, not only on the economic level.
The most salient dividing line runs
between the secular majority and the
religious minority, but there are many
other points of conflict. Even if more
Israelis have started to realize that only
a major redefinition of the premises of
their society will bring about a solution
to their problems, first and foremost a
chance for peace, this didn’t reflect on
the result of the elections.
THE MINORITY HOLDS
THE BALANCE
With the two main parties’ avoidance
of seriously addressing the most press-
ing issue - the future of the 1967 oc-
cupied territories, the post-election
scene was overwhelmed by matters that
Significance.
aie actually secondary to the Zionist
project. With the 18 seats they attained,
the religious parties became the winners
of these elections. Though they have
always participated in the Israeli
political life, their role has increased a
lot in the last decade. The development
of their positions can be described as
follows: While after 1948, the National
Religious Party strove to combine
religious observance with Zionism,
Agudat Israel remained in theory anti-
Zionist, but coexisted with mainstream
Zionism and participated in elections.
An important change took place in
1967. Many religious Jews regarded the
war as a literally miraculous event, and
gave the occupation of the West Bank
and the Gaza Strip a religious
The religious parties
became more and more involved in
politics and started to step up their
demands, while right-wing settler
groups mushroomed, raising religious
slogans in support of colonization in
the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. In
1977, the National Religious Party,
which had always achieved its objec-
tives by joining forces with the ruling
party, joined the Likud government.
Agudat Israel joined the parliamentary
coalition, but not the government. In
the 1981 elections, Agudat with only
four seats held the balance in the
Knesset. Likud needed their votes for a
parliamentary majority, and Agudat
extracted increasing amounts of state
funding in exchange. In 1984, Agudat
Israel and Shas (formed by Sephardics
who left Agudat in 1983) won 6 seats
together.
Today, the National Religious Party
is very close to the extreme right with its
pledge to keep every bit of «Greater
Israel» and its demand for more set-
tlements. Shas, Agudat Israel and
Degel Hatorah keep their territorial at-
titudes deliberately vague and concen-
trate on «internal issues» like the
amendment of the Law of Return or
the implementation of strict Sabbath
laws. Though some of the spirtual
leaders of the Orthodox parties have
said that a territorial compromise is
possible, these parties can hardly be
considered advocates of peace. The
convergence between religious motiva-
tions and «security considerations» as
opposed to concessions seems to be
quite strong, and it came as no surprise
45 - هو جزء من
- Democratic Palestine : 31
- تاريخ
- ديسمبر ١٩٨٨
- المنشئ
- الجبهة الشعبية لتحرير فلسطين
Contribute
Position: 73774 (1 views)