|
The
Bang and the Whimper
by
Uri Avnery
"To
every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the
heaven: / A time to plant and a time to pluck up that which is planted;
/ A time to break down and a time to build up . . . ." The book of
Ecclesiastes has no truer follower than Ariel Sharon.
Witness,
Sharon himself set up the settlements in the Gaza Strip, and now he has
destroyed them with his own hands. He created the Likud, and
now--hopefully--he is burying it.
For
those who need a reminder: the creation of the Likud was the exclusive
achievement of Ariel Sharon.
In
1973, before the Yom Kippur war, he was compelled to leave the army when
the other generals blocked his path to the office of Chief-of-Staff.
They detested him because he was insufferable as a colleague,
insubordinate to his superiors and disloyal to his peers--traits he
retained all his life and that may be typical of leaders who aspire to
autocratic power.
One
of his admirers at the time coined a phrase that became famous:
"Those who don't want him as Chief-of-Staff will get him as
Minister of Defense."
Sharon
was looking for a crane that would hoist him to that position. Since he
did not find one ready made, he created one--the Likud
("Unification").
The
idea was simple: unify the right wing. True, the two bigger right-wing
parties--Herut and the Liberal party--had already established a joint
parliamentary bloc (called Gahal). But there were also two right-wing
splinter parties.
Sharon
used his new public prestige and compelled them--almost against their
will--to unite.
I
asked him, at the time, about the purpose of this exercise, since Herut
and the Liberals were already united, and the two splinter parties had
nothing to add. It is necessary, he told me, to create the impression
that the entire Right is uniting. That will attract the public. No one
should be left outside.
And,
indeed, it worked. In 1969, the Gahal bloc had won only 26 (of 120)
seats in the Knesset, exactly the same as four years before. But in
1973, the new Likud already won 39 seats, and in 1977 it became the
ruling party with 43 seats.
As
is his wont,
Sharon
quarreled with his new colleagues almost immediately after establishing
the Likud. He left and set up a new party of his own, Shlomzion
("Peace of Zion" and the name of a Hasmonean queen). When he
failed miserably at the polls in 1977, he drew the obvious conclusion
and rejoined the Likud at lightning speed. But Menachem Begin refused to
appoint him Minister of Defense and gave him only Agriculture. "If
he gets the chance, he'll surround the Knesset with his tanks,"
Begin said only half in jest, and appointed Ezer Weizman instead.
But
four years later, after Weizman had resigned in pique,
Sharon
was finally appointed Minister of Defense. The rest of the story is well
known: the invasion of Lebanon, the Sabra and Shatila massacre, the
Kahan commission, Sharon's dismissal from the Defense Ministry, Begin's
fading away, Sharon's quarrels with Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir,
Sharon's quarrels with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, and
Netanyahu's election rout, which left the Likud with a miserable 19
seats.
Sharon
took over the ruins and became Prime Minister. At the last elections, in
2003, he achieved a memorable victory: 38 seats (to which Natan
Sharansky added his two), as against the mere 19 seats of Labor.
Sharon
became the uncontested leader of Likud and the state.
And
two and a half years later, he's in a situation where the Likud, his
creation, is threatening to oust him from power and put in his place a
crooked and failed politician. What happened?
The
immediate reason is, of course, the dismantling of the settlements in
the Gaza Strip and the North of the
West
Bank
.
On the face of it, this completely contradicts everything
Sharon
stands for. After all, he was the one who put them up in the first place
and declared "What's true for Tel-Aviv is true for Netzarim."
Now he has sent the bulldozers to demolish Netzarim, house after house,
on camera. He "betrayed the Likud principles," he "is
implementing the plan of the Leftists" and "tearing the people
apart."
That
is only partly true. True,
Sharon
did create a historic precedent by dismantling Jewish settlements in the
historic
land
of
Israel
.
He has scuttled the right-wing vision of "the Entire-Eretz-Israel"
and turned the partition of the land into a fait accompli. But behind
the left-wing façade, there hides a right-wing plan: sacrificing
Gaza
in order to annex a large part of the much more important
West
Bank
and to prevent the establishment of a viable Palestinian state. Even
after the "disengagement," he is now enlarging the
West
Bank
settlements and building the "Separation Fence," the real
purpose of which is to fix unilaterally the borders of an enlarged
Israel
.
One
of
Sharon
's
big problems is rooted in his character. After winning his great
election victory, he did not trouble to hide from his party, and indeed
from the public at large, his disdainful attitude. The 3,300 members of
the powerful Likud Central Committee, most of them small politicians
with big appetites, feel (quite rightly) that he despises them (also
quite rightly).
Sharon
never took the trouble to explain his motives for undertaking the
Disengagement. One could only guess. The military preparations were
meticulous, the public relations preparations were nil. In spite of
this, the general public did support the plan, either out of loyalty to
the democratic order or out of hope for peace, or both. But even this
did not generate a big, rousing public movement in support of the
Disengagement.
Now
the Likud is in a state of rebellion. The situation borders on the
absurd: The ruling party threatens to oust its own Prime Minister, even
at the risk of losing power. The Knesset Members, who won their lofty
position only thanks to
Sharon
,
threaten to dissolve the Knesset, knowing full well than many of them
have no chance of being reselected as candidates. The whole political
system is in a state of anarchy.
Public
opinion polls show a confused picture: in the Likud Central Committee,
the decisive institution, there is a big majority against
Sharon
and for Netanyahu. Among the Likud members, too, there is a majority
against
Sharon
.
But among the Likud voters,
Sharon
has a majority, and among the voting public at large
Sharon
has a commanding lead over Netanyahu.
In
this odd situation, what are the possibilities?
Option
1:
Sharon
will triumph.
The Likud Central Committee will indeed convene and decide to hold party
primaries, but at the last moment the members will shrink back from
ousting
Sharon
,
out of fear of losing power. The thousands of party hacks, whose fat
jobs stem from their party affiliation, will prefer power with the hated
Sharon
to going into opposition with Netanyahu.
Sharon
will continue as Prime Minister until the regular elections in November
2006, with a good chance of being reelected for another four years
(until the age of 81).
Option
2:
Sharon
will be thrown out.
The Central Committee will decide on early primaries, Netanyahu will be
elected as Likud leader. He may set up a new nationalist-religious
coalition in the present Knesset. Or, the Knesset will be dissolved and
new elections will take place, with Netanyahu leading the united Likud.
Sharon
will return to his farm. This would be a resounding victory for the
settlers, proving that anyone dismantling settlements is committing
political suicide.
Option
3: the Small Bang.
Sharon
will lose the Likud primaries, the Likud will split into two,
Sharon
will take with him about a third of the Likud Knesset faction. He will
set up a new coalition with the left-wing and Orthodox parties and
continue to govern. If he wins the general elections in November 2006,
he will continue to govern as the leader of Likud B.
Option
4: the Big Bang. The Likud will split as above, but
Sharon
will set up a new party together with members of the Labor Party and
Shinui. The Knesset will disperse and the new party, led by
Sharon
,
will--as public opinion polls now indicate--win by a landslide. This is
widely known as “the Big Bang.”
President
Bush is doing everything in his power to facilitate Option 1. He is
working hard to help
Sharon
achieve spectacular political successes, such as a meeting with the
President of Pakistan, welcoming the King of Jordan to
Jerusalem
,
and suchlike. But it is doubtful if this will really help
Sharon
before the Likud Central Committee.
As
far as the peace process is concerned, it would be better for new
elections to take place as soon as possible, so as to avoid a long
interim period when everything is frozen, the settlement activity goes
on and a third intifada may well break out. One cannot rely on
the Americans to prevent such a freeze.
But
the main interest of the peace camp is in the rearrangement of the
entire political system. For years now the situation in
Israel
has verged on the grotesque: with hardly any connection between the
distribution of opinions among the general public, as continuously shown
by all polls, and the division of forces in the Knesset. The Labor Party
is a walking corpse, without a common philosophy, a political plan or a
leadership worth speaking of. The Meretz party is pale and ineffectual. The
many voters who are longing for peace have no real representation in
parliament.
The
country needs a political earthquake that will make mountains out of
valleys and valleys from mountains. If the present crisis brings about a
complete change in the political landscape, that would be a blessing.
T.
S. Eliot prophesied: "This is the way the world ends / Not with a
bang but a whimper." The fate of the Likud may well be the
opposite: it may end not with a whimper, but with a bang.
|