?Israeli sources revealed that Ariel Sharon, the Israeli prime minister, was preparing himself secretly for future negotiations with the Palestinians. The sources claim that Sharon is convinced that this year - most probably after a war with Iraq - the Americans will turn to Israel and will force any Israeli government to reach a peace settlement with the Palestinians.
?The sources said Sharon met recently with top Palestinian officials including Mahmoud Abbas, better known by his nom de guerre of Abu Mazen, who is the deputy of President Yasser Arafat of the Palestinian Authority.
?The meeting took place at Sharon's farm in the Negev desert. Sharon told the Palestinians he was willing to talk with anyone except Arafat.
?According to a well-placed Middle Eastern informant Sharon ?knows very well that after the war with Iraq the USA will have to ?compensate? the Arabs and Israel will have to pay at least some of the price.?? - Jane?s Foreign Report
If you?ve seen Mel Brooks? hysterical spoof Blazing Saddles, you?ll remember the following scene: The good-hearted gunslinger?s (Gene Wilder) services are desperately needed to save the town from the bad guys, but since he is now a hopeless drunk his shooting skills are badly eroded. After a few days of drying out, our hero proudly displays his rock-steady right hand to the relieved citizenry, only to raise his wildly quivering left arm a few seconds later and sheepishly admitting, "but this is my shootin? hand."
This is what Israel?s election campaign has been all about. Taking the people?s eye off the ball, diverting attention to the nonsense of competing scandals and assorted mishegas, so no one will notice that, in the end, they?re going to be left unprotected. Only, this is no spoof. This is not a drill, it?s the real thing. Nothing less than the lives of Israelis and their children are on the line, as is the shape and future of the State of Israel.
Let?s be achingly, prosaically clear. Here?s the plan: In the next few months, George Bush of Texas is going to destroy the regime of a major Arab-Muslim oil-producing country, then install a new government and micro-manage the place for the foreseeable future. Simultaneously, the president is going to try to do a makeover of the Palestinian Authority, take Hamas, Fatah and the al-Aksa Martyrs out of fatigues and put them in well-tailored suits. He?ll want us to believe he can?t do any of that without either the continuing cooperation or acquiescence of the rest of the Arab-Muslim world; the same Arab-Muslim world that considers Israel a festering sore. Sooner or later, it?s going to be payback time. Guess who pays? Right, it?s 1991, Desert Storm and Madrid on steroids.
Whoever the next leader of Israel?s government is, after Saddam, he?s going to come under enormous "pressure" to relinquish territory to create a new Muslim country west of the Jordan. Why either Mitzna or, more likely, Sharon should have to be "pressured" will never be made entirely clear, since both already agree that a "Palestinian state" is "inevitable" and the only way Israel can achieve peace with its neighbors. It?s their stated goal, so why would they have to be forced into it by the American president? The answer is simply to provide Israel?s leader with a skirt to hide behind in order to neutralize domestic opposition: "I?ll make the best deal I can, but we have no choice, Israel?s great friend, protector and benefactor demands it." A reasonable proposition, no?
Now that?s the true objective of the election sideshows and red herrings. It?s to scatter the votes more evenly among the parties than they normally would have been given the rude reawakening of the electorate in the aftermath of the Left?s Oslo debacle. Divide and conquer. With the Arabs dressed in full war paint, it was unrealistic to expect the Left to hold its ground. But, by spreading the votes thin and funneling some right-leaning support to clean-cut "centrists," at least the strength of any true nationalist opposition to the establishment?s next suicide mission could be minimized. Lost in the soup. With no party, faction or ideology gaining a clear mandate, Mr. Sharon will have all the justification he needs to cast the widest net to form his "unity" government. All things then being equal, he emerges as the strongman. Anyway, that?s the theory.
Will Israelis fall for this sophomoric scam? Will you flock to see the egress? Or will reality trump showbiz and the country wake up at the last minute to shore up the wall on its right, the only stronghold left in its line of defense against history repeating itself? I?m a Jew who loves Israel and a New Yorker who hates to be suckered. But if past performance is any guide to future results, I don?t think I?m going to like the answer. Right now, it looks like it?s back to Oslo, the town Quisling called home.
--------------------------------------------------------
Dovid Ben Chaim writes from New York. He can be reached at dbc@myway.com.
?The sources said Sharon met recently with top Palestinian officials including Mahmoud Abbas, better known by his nom de guerre of Abu Mazen, who is the deputy of President Yasser Arafat of the Palestinian Authority.
?The meeting took place at Sharon's farm in the Negev desert. Sharon told the Palestinians he was willing to talk with anyone except Arafat.
?According to a well-placed Middle Eastern informant Sharon ?knows very well that after the war with Iraq the USA will have to ?compensate? the Arabs and Israel will have to pay at least some of the price.?? - Jane?s Foreign Report
If you?ve seen Mel Brooks? hysterical spoof Blazing Saddles, you?ll remember the following scene: The good-hearted gunslinger?s (Gene Wilder) services are desperately needed to save the town from the bad guys, but since he is now a hopeless drunk his shooting skills are badly eroded. After a few days of drying out, our hero proudly displays his rock-steady right hand to the relieved citizenry, only to raise his wildly quivering left arm a few seconds later and sheepishly admitting, "but this is my shootin? hand."
This is what Israel?s election campaign has been all about. Taking the people?s eye off the ball, diverting attention to the nonsense of competing scandals and assorted mishegas, so no one will notice that, in the end, they?re going to be left unprotected. Only, this is no spoof. This is not a drill, it?s the real thing. Nothing less than the lives of Israelis and their children are on the line, as is the shape and future of the State of Israel.
Let?s be achingly, prosaically clear. Here?s the plan: In the next few months, George Bush of Texas is going to destroy the regime of a major Arab-Muslim oil-producing country, then install a new government and micro-manage the place for the foreseeable future. Simultaneously, the president is going to try to do a makeover of the Palestinian Authority, take Hamas, Fatah and the al-Aksa Martyrs out of fatigues and put them in well-tailored suits. He?ll want us to believe he can?t do any of that without either the continuing cooperation or acquiescence of the rest of the Arab-Muslim world; the same Arab-Muslim world that considers Israel a festering sore. Sooner or later, it?s going to be payback time. Guess who pays? Right, it?s 1991, Desert Storm and Madrid on steroids.
Whoever the next leader of Israel?s government is, after Saddam, he?s going to come under enormous "pressure" to relinquish territory to create a new Muslim country west of the Jordan. Why either Mitzna or, more likely, Sharon should have to be "pressured" will never be made entirely clear, since both already agree that a "Palestinian state" is "inevitable" and the only way Israel can achieve peace with its neighbors. It?s their stated goal, so why would they have to be forced into it by the American president? The answer is simply to provide Israel?s leader with a skirt to hide behind in order to neutralize domestic opposition: "I?ll make the best deal I can, but we have no choice, Israel?s great friend, protector and benefactor demands it." A reasonable proposition, no?
Now that?s the true objective of the election sideshows and red herrings. It?s to scatter the votes more evenly among the parties than they normally would have been given the rude reawakening of the electorate in the aftermath of the Left?s Oslo debacle. Divide and conquer. With the Arabs dressed in full war paint, it was unrealistic to expect the Left to hold its ground. But, by spreading the votes thin and funneling some right-leaning support to clean-cut "centrists," at least the strength of any true nationalist opposition to the establishment?s next suicide mission could be minimized. Lost in the soup. With no party, faction or ideology gaining a clear mandate, Mr. Sharon will have all the justification he needs to cast the widest net to form his "unity" government. All things then being equal, he emerges as the strongman. Anyway, that?s the theory.
Will Israelis fall for this sophomoric scam? Will you flock to see the egress? Or will reality trump showbiz and the country wake up at the last minute to shore up the wall on its right, the only stronghold left in its line of defense against history repeating itself? I?m a Jew who loves Israel and a New Yorker who hates to be suckered. But if past performance is any guide to future results, I don?t think I?m going to like the answer. Right now, it looks like it?s back to Oslo, the town Quisling called home.
--------------------------------------------------------
Dovid Ben Chaim writes from New York. He can be reached at dbc@myway.com.