In Israel, only the right can carry out the left's policies

[Vladimir]

Uri Dromi
Friday April 23, 2004
The Guardian

Many in the Israeli left today have mixed feelings. Here is Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, super-hawk and once architect of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and Gaza, starting to carry out what they had been advocating for years: disengagement from the Palestinians.

This reminds me of what Henry Kissinger said in 1978 when he heard that Jimmy Carter had brokered a peace treaty at Camp David between Israel and Egypt. The former secretary of state, who had worn out his shoes negotiating interim agreements between the parties, saw the deal brought to conclusion by someone else. Yet Kissinger didn't lose his wit. "It was frustrating," he said, "to realise how much had been accomplished without me."

It was the left in Israel that had always preached a two-state solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The idea was that between the Jordan river and the Mediterranean there was enough room for both peoples to live next to each other in peace, in their respective sovereign states. However, Palestinian ongoing rejectionism and the Israeli process of settlement have resulted in an entanglement.

The Oslo process was the first opportunity given to the Israeli left to prove its capability in carrying through its peace platform. The sceptical Rabin, prodded by the over-optimistic Shimon Peres, tried to trade sense of security for the Israelis with sovereignty for the Palestinians. The experiment failed. The Palestinians couldn't wash their hands of terror and an Israeli ultra-rightwing fanatic assassinated Rabin.


read the rest at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1201514,00.html

My comment: I don't think I'd call Sharon's plan 'carrying out left-wing policies', but the premise of the article is an interesting one from a political-thory point of view. The old 'only Nixon could go to China' ploy I guess... it makes a certain amount of sense.

[tinnypriv]

1. Every point of fact

In this article is wrong. That is some achievement.

Moreover, given the background of the author, he surely knows he is telling outrageous lies. That makes it worse.

[Classical_Liberal]

2. Kind of dissappointing to see this in Guardian

Am I the only one to notice the guardian is tilting neoliberal since bbc flap?

I am reading it much less than I was and evertime I do I am dissappointed.

[Vladimir]

3. I don't know about that

The Guardain swung sharply the the right on the issue of the Iraq War (before the war began) but has since been shifting steadily back to its centre-left ground. Thing is, its always had the tradition of running occasional right-wing/centrist opinion pieces for the sake of balance. So I think this article should be viewed in that context...

[tinnypriv]

4. Well

I don't read the Guardian a great deal, but I'd agree with your obervation.

Bear in mind that their sister sunday paper (Observer) did run an outrageous pro-war fabrication of an editorial long before the war began, and that of course was before the BBC 'flap'.

That editorial actually resulted in substantial protests in UK activist groups, with many initiating boycotts, etc. I myself was involved in setting up some of those, and wrote a long rebuttal of the Observer lies, distributed in the same circles. Of course, that had no effect, as should be expected.

In any case, The Guardian has often taken an editorial position so extreme it is even contradicted by the Israeli government itself. They even had to publish a correction once (prompted by letters, protest etc - a sanitised letter of mine was printed - can direct you to that if you like).

Also, speaking of the BBC, the head of programming independently circulated private advice (which leaked) stating (this is from memory), that:

"On call-in shows and interactive programming, we seem to be attracting a large amount of the anti-american, anti-Israel crowd. All department heads should be aware of this and try to counter it with balanced coverage."

At the time, public opposition to the plans of London and Washington was about 75%. This shows quite passionate hatred for democracy, again, as should be expected.

The above has nothing to do with the flap, because that happened after this advice was distributed. The flap was largely inane in any case, and the 'judicial' outcome was even more outrageous, at least to anybody with a memory of free speech and democracy.

[hellboy]

5. Henry Kissinger is part of that neoright wing cabal. It's amazing

that he was never tried for war crimes for his carpet bombing of Cambodian civilians.

[tinnypriv]

6. Yeah

That or East Timor.