There is a lot of hard work to do,
a lot of heavy pulling, to bring our nation to where it needs to be.
I hold on to hope that all will yet be well, but am sorely
disheartened.
Yesterday, I quoted Naftali
Bennett, head of Habayit Hayehudi, thus:
"for days after the election the
Likud refused to speak to the Jewish Home. They boycotted us… we expected to be
a natural partner and to be the first to enter the Netanyahu government."
The message he claims he got was, "the religious Zionist party won’t enter
the coalition, at any price."
What Netanyahu did was foolish, I
said. Rude. Conveying to the newcomer Bennett a sense of
being excluded. But, I asked, now that Netanyahu had contacted Bennett
was the prime minister's original rudeness sufficient reason for
Bennett to have fashioned his current policy as he has?
Today, I have a likely
answer, from someone very close to Habayit Hayehudi. Bennett, I
was told, understood that once he broke his alliance with Lapid, Netanyahu
would take in Lapid, and leave him out.
Oh.
Bennett's impression that
Netanyahu was determined that the religious Zionist party would never enter
the coalition was not just
a response to a snub early on; Bennett apparently recognized this
behavior as a reflection of a deeper Netanyahu intention.
~~~~~~~~~~
Today I also heard another story
about Netanyahu's intentions. This is the second time I have heard it. At
first I discounted it as hearsay. Now, although I cannot confirm with
absolute certainty that the charge is accurate, I no longer can discount
it.
Someone inside of Yesh Atid
maintains that Netanyahu told Lapid that if he breaks with Bennett and comes in
by himself, it will be easier to take down settlements.
Uh huh.
The endorsement of the Tekuma
rabbis makes a whole lot of sense now.
~~~~~~~~~~
And still I am not done. The
AIPAC convention has been going on in Washington, and lame duck Defense Minister
Ehud Barak addressed the thousands gathered there.
A "full fledged peace deal with
the Palestinians" was not possible now, Barak said.
Good that he says this upfront, I
thought.
Then he said that an interim agreement should be attempted to
protect Israel's security.
I was no longer sure this was
good, depending on what he was referring to.
~~~~~~~~~~
And then...he said that if this
couldn't be achieved, it might be necessary for Israel to take unilateral steps
to prevent a bi-national state: Israel may need to "consider unilateral
steps that would include demarcating a line within which Israel would
keep the settlement blocs and ensure a Jewish majority for generations to
come." Israel would establish a "long term security
presence on the Jordan River." (Emphasis added)
Say what???
UNILATERAL steps?? We did that once already, when we pulled out
of Gaza. We saw what that brought us. What he's suggesting here is
that without an end of conflict agreement with the Palestinian Arabs, without a
mutually agreed upon border, Israel should pull back from some parts of
Judea and Samaria and fully turn
over land to them.
A very very bad idea. I can
only touch here upon all of the reasons why it's a terrible idea.
Note first that he refers to
settlement blocs, so be certain that there are many Jewish communities in Judea
and Samaria that would be demolished under such a plan. Many Jews who
would be torn from their homes.
We would be relinquishing
rights to the land -- something we should not do.
~~~~~~~~~~
But beyond this, we would
be diminishing Israel's security. A border is only an internationally
recognized border if parties on both sides agree. Israel "demarcating
a line" would not be recognized internationally and would certainly not be
recognized by the PA, which would demand we keep pulling back until we were
behind the '67 armistice line.
Once we pulled back, we would be
UNILATERALLY relinquishing the practice by the IDF of doing
operations to take out terrorists and training centers, and weapons
caches and weapons manufacturing sites in Palestinian Arab
areas. The fact, my friends, is that the IDF does these operations
nightly. It's what has kept things quiet, because the PA security forces
will not do this. (I'll come back to this in more detail in a future
posting.) Without an IDF presence in these areas, security and
intelligence and military officials agree, there is a great likelihood that
Hamas would take over. Abbas is very weak. And so then we would have
Hamas on our eastern border as well as at our southwest in
Gaza.
Great idea!
Please note that Barak refers
to a security presence in the Jordan Valley (to prevent smuggling of weapons
and entry of foreign forces). But he says "long term," not permanent.
But how long is "long term," and what happens after
that?
With all of this I still haven't
mentioned the question of what would happen to certain high places in
Samaria if there were a pullback. All Barak spoke about was retaining
settlement blocs, not retaining land for security purposes and strategic depth.
If Arabs had control of those high places they could even hit the airport.
~~~~~~~~~~
No done deal here. Just an idea
floated -- perhaps even a trial balloon. We must respond and be vigilant
to the greatest degree possible.
I assure you, Barak did
not speak without Netanyahu's go-ahead.
I provide here the e-mails of key
members of Likud-Beitenu. Please! write to them. Tell them that you
know about Defense Minister Barak's outrageous suggestion at AIPAC that
unilateral withdrawal from parts of Judea and Samaria might have to be
considered.
Provide a couple of lines on why
this is a terrible idea. Say that Barak is lame-duck, on his way out, and
had no business speaking for Israel in an international forum at this
point. And urgently request that they do everything
within their power to assure that there are no withdrawals:
Danny Danon: ddanon@knesset.gov.il Moshe
Ya'alon: myaalon@knesset.gov.il
Tzipi Hotovely: zhotovely@knesset.gov.il Ze'ev
Elkin: zelkin@knesset.gov.il
Yuli Edelstein: yedelstein@knesset.gov.il
Ruby Rivlin: rrivlin@knesset.gov.il
Moshe Feiglin: mfeiglin@knesset.gov.il
Gideon Sa'ar: gsaar@knesset.gov.il
Ofir Akunis: oakunis@knesset.gov.il
Uzi Landau: ulandau@knesset.gov.il
Yisrael Katz: yiskatz@knesset.gov.il
Yariv Levin: ylevin@knesset.gov.il
Yair Shamir: yshamir@knesset.gov.il
Avigdor Lieberman: aliberman@knesset.gov.il
Click on each address; write one message and copy and paste to each, with
an individual salutation added.
The new government must not be a one-man show. The actions of key members
of the Knesset will be critical in helping to keep the prime minister
accountable and honest in his political dealings. Members of the ruling
faction must be roused to take a responsible role here.
Please, share this broadly.
~~~~~~~~~~
One other significant point must
be made here, before I move on:
Barak referred to taking this
action in order to "ensure a Jewish majority for generations to come."
Well, it is a crock that if we retain all of the land to the Jordan River we
will become a minority, swallowed up by an Arab majority. This is a scare
tactic, used as a reason to give up land.
See here with regard to Jewish and
Arab birthrates and their implication for Israel:
And here, information about
misrepresentations in the PA census, which leads people to believe there are
more Arabs in Judea and Samaria than there are:
~~~~~~~~~~
The other concern I have had in
these last few days has to do with sinat hinam. Causeless hatred,
which, we are taught, is what brought about the destruction of the Second
Temple. If we do not love our fellow Jews, do not unite for common
causes, then we cannot be strong.
I have been vastly uncomfortable
with the notion that the haredi parties, which are fighting for the status quo
in yeshiva exemptions, should be excluded from the coalition. That
exclusion will not bring compromise or peaceful settlement, but
bitterness.
And sure enough, I've
seen some very bitter comments from haredi leaders who have said, You don't
want us? Wait until we're in the government again, and see what we'll do
to you. I have even seen threats to vote against retention of
settlements. A bad way to go.
~~~~~~~~~~
Only late today did I see a
comment by Lapid that offered a glimmer of hope regarding the possibility of
moving past this unfortunate situation. At a faction meeting today, he
said that Yesh Atid wants to represent everyone’s interests, including
the ultra-Orthodox.
“I hope to establish a good, broad government that’s
good for the people, and not for the politicians. And even the ultra-Orthodox
will find that Yesh Atid is not only not against them,
but takes care of them too.”
A bit audacious for my
taste. HE hopes to establish a government? And he thinks he can
represent everyone's interests? Not sure about that. But the tone is
certainly conciliatory. He's saying he cares about the ultra-Orthodox as
well. Now we have to see how he demonstrates this.
~~~~~~~~~~
Bennett's statement seems more
modest, more in keeping with the tone that might be expected of a
newcomer:
"We rolled up our sleeves and are
working very hard to help Netanyahu form a government that serves the
people."
~~~~~~~~~~
In any event, both Lapid and
Bennett are saying that while meetings are going well, it is not time to close
on coalition agreements yet.
May it come for good things in the
end.
~~~~~~~~~~
In closing, a correction: I
got fooled. The story about Mick Jagger doing concerts here in Israel in spite
of pressure on him not to was a Purim gag coming out of France. Got it from a
good source, so I guess a whole lot of people were fooled. My thanks to
David Orbach, who alerted me.
~~~~~~~~~~
©
Arlene Kushner. This material is produced by Arlene Kushner,
functioning as an independent journalist. Permission is granted for it to be
reproduced only
with
proper attribution.
If
it is reproduced and emphasis is added, the fact that it has been added must be
noted.
This material
is transmitted by Arlene only to persons who have requested it or agreed to
receive it. If you are on the list and wish to be removed, contact Arlene and
include your name in the text of the
message.
No comments:
Post a Comment