The support of Ariel Sharon in Israel, from both the left and right, is a disturbing delusion, argues Sefi Rachelevsky in today's Haaretz:
"...the contrary political path that perpetuates the idea that "only the Likud can do it" is ironically what will allow the Likud to reunite after the disengagement from Gaza, and to gather around the flag of "protecting the real interests of Israel" in the elections that take place right after the withdrawal."
The essential failure of Israel's left over the last four years to construct a convincing argument has led to this most unfortunate situation, whereby many on the left support Sharon because he appears to want withdrawal from Gaza and then they argue, as I heard frequently during my recent travels in Israel, "only a right-winger can bring about such a radical shift here."
Gideon Levy recently wrote a fiery piece entitled, "Good morning to the Israeli left." He argues that the Israeli left have almost uniformly joined the ranks of Sharon supporters and fallen silent whilst the brutality of the occupation continues:
"...the silence was the greatest failure of all. It is impossible not to ask now where everyone was for the 346 children that Israel killed. What prevented them from protesting when 112 wanted men were assassinated without trial and another 521 innocent passersby were killed at the same time? The demolition of half of Rafah, the uprooting of olive trees in the West Bank, the erection of the wall, the apartheid roads for Jews only, the imprisonment of an entire nation behind checkpoints for years - none of it awakened most of the artists or the "coalition of the majority." They were silent. They were afraid. They were complicit."
Speaking out in times of national trauma is what distinguish the brave from the cowardly. So few Israelis have campaigned against the direction that Israel is taking, essentially wanting to remake Gaza as a large prison camp and consolidate a tight grip over the West Bank. All the while, settlement expansion continues. And the West thinks the Israeli government is serious about peace?
"...the contrary political path that perpetuates the idea that "only the Likud can do it" is ironically what will allow the Likud to reunite after the disengagement from Gaza, and to gather around the flag of "protecting the real interests of Israel" in the elections that take place right after the withdrawal."
The essential failure of Israel's left over the last four years to construct a convincing argument has led to this most unfortunate situation, whereby many on the left support Sharon because he appears to want withdrawal from Gaza and then they argue, as I heard frequently during my recent travels in Israel, "only a right-winger can bring about such a radical shift here."
Gideon Levy recently wrote a fiery piece entitled, "Good morning to the Israeli left." He argues that the Israeli left have almost uniformly joined the ranks of Sharon supporters and fallen silent whilst the brutality of the occupation continues:
"...the silence was the greatest failure of all. It is impossible not to ask now where everyone was for the 346 children that Israel killed. What prevented them from protesting when 112 wanted men were assassinated without trial and another 521 innocent passersby were killed at the same time? The demolition of half of Rafah, the uprooting of olive trees in the West Bank, the erection of the wall, the apartheid roads for Jews only, the imprisonment of an entire nation behind checkpoints for years - none of it awakened most of the artists or the "coalition of the majority." They were silent. They were afraid. They were complicit."
Speaking out in times of national trauma is what distinguish the brave from the cowardly. So few Israelis have campaigned against the direction that Israel is taking, essentially wanting to remake Gaza as a large prison camp and consolidate a tight grip over the West Bank. All the while, settlement expansion continues. And the West thinks the Israeli government is serious about peace?
4 Comments:
The expansion merits a few paras in 'World News', in heroically muted prose, as if it were an article on the current account deficit.
The next disco or bus to be blown up will garner a bit more attention and a lot more emotion.
But the first action causes the second.
When I reach the endgame of MidEast argument with some of my Likudnik interlocutors and they demand to know how I'd react to the suicide bombers, I say 'I'd get off their land... why don't you try that'?
It stumps them.... oh they normally carry on with some sub-racist academic claptrap about the lack of a Palestinian state (as if there's always been an Israel!) but they offer nothing worthwhile.
The expansion merits a few paras in 'World News', in heroically muted prose, as if it were an article on the current account deficit.
The next disco or bus to be blown up will garner a bit more attention and a lot more emotion.
But the first action causes the second.
When I reach the endgame of MidEast argument with some of my Likudnik interlocutors and they demand to know how I'd react to the suicide bombers, I say 'I'd get off their land... why don't you try that'?
It stumps them.... oh they normally carry on with some sub-racist academic claptrap about the lack of a Palestinian state (as if there's always been an Israel!) but they offer nothing worthwhile.
The expansion merits a few paras in 'World News', in heroically muted prose, as if it were an article on the current account deficit.
The next disco or bus to be blown up will garner a bit more attention and a lot more emotion.
But the first action causes the second.
When I reach the endgame of MidEast argument with some of my Likudnik interlocutors and they demand to know how I'd react to the suicide bombers, I say 'I'd get off their land... why don't you try that'?
It stumps them.... oh they normally carry on with some sub-racist academic claptrap about the lack of a Palestinian state (as if there's always been an Israel!) but they offer nothing worthwhile.
Sorry for double post.
Post a Comment
<< Home