The Road Map! How did we get here? A proposed Road Map towards a state for the sworn enemies of Israel bordering on Israel?s main population centers, and approved by the Israeli Cabinet! Bad policy is seldom the product of the actions of one lone group of individuals. The recent decision by the Israeli Cabinet to accept the Road Map is not an exception. The following people have had a direct contribution towards that grievous decision.
President George Bush has contributed to the Road Map. Setting out to pursue his repeatedly stated vision of two states, Israel and Palestine, coexisting side by side, the President is calling for statehood for a Palestinian entity, which has employed the very tactic he has been working so hard to prevent -terrorism. The president has repeatedly endorsed the notion of statehood for a population that espouses hatred, and glorifies murder. President Bush already orchestrated the overthrow of two regimes that support the use of terror against the West, and has now skewed his message. After 9/11, the president declared war on all who practice terrorism, yet today he is endorsing statehood for the very same ilk he has been fighting since 9/11. In pursuit of his vision and the implementation of the Road Map, he has exerted massive pressure upon the Israeli government to accept the Road Map.
Members of the Israeli cabinet have also contributed. Reluctant as they may be, the cabinet approved the Road Map. Members of the Likud party that had rallied the Israeli public upon a platform of increased security misrepresented their voters by approving a plan that will do the opposite. The response of the cabinet members, regardless of how they voted, has been, at best, sullen. Deputy Prime Minster Ehud Olmert, who voted in support, told Israeli Radio, ?I think the document is not a good one, but we have to choose when we battle the U.S., and now is not the time.? Justice Minister Tommy Lapid, who also voted in support, stated, ?I think the plan is bad at its core, but with the Israeli reservations, it has improved a bit.? Some ministers voiced their expectations that the Palestinians will eventually once again violate all their agreements, causing its failure. Minister-Without-Portfolio Gideon Ezra, speaking to the Voice of Israel, stated that he is confident that if the Palestinian Authority does not honor its commitments, then Sharon will end the Road Map. Education Minister Limor Livnat, who had initially spoken out against the plan, and then abstained from the vote, offered more provisions to protect Israel?s security interests - that have not yet been voted upon. Minister Uzi Landau, who opposed the Road Map, called it a ?sugar coated cyanide pill.?
With Israel relying upon financial bailout plans from the United States to relieve some of the devastating effects of Palestinian terrorism on the economy, there is no doubt the pressure upon the Israeli government has been enormous, but the Road Map, which poses serious security threats to Israel, was nonetheless approved by the cabinet.
Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has also contributed. The old general rallied support and overwhelmed labor candidate Amram Mitzna at the polls, as he constantly repeated and emphasized the phrase ?security.? Mitzna?s pro-Palestinian State and anti-settlement stand was untenable to the vast majority of Israelis, whose frustration has exacerbated over the past two years. Sharon?s stunning victory now seems moot. The differences between the two now seem to be one of semantics. All the campaign promises of security are of little meaning in light of his endorsements of the Road Map. If Sharon were still a member of the opposition, he would be speaking out against it as he did after the approval of Oslo almost ten years ago. Sharon has once again proven that it is far easier to be the loyal right wing opposition in the Israeli government then to be the prime minister and take a stand contrary to the position of the United States administration and State Department.
Then there are the voters of Israel, who voted for the right and have a government with left-wing policies. They too have contributed. Why did they vote for Sharon? Why did his Likud party win thirty-eight seats, nineteen seats more then in the prior election? Did the voters really believe his vague slogans of ?peace and security?? They should have thought twice about Likud.
Sharon is not an aberration to his party?s list of recent past prime ministers, who broke with the party line when faced with American pressure. It was Menachem Begin who publicly pledged his loyalty to Israeli sovereignty over Sinai and then gave it over to a still very hostile Egypt, while accepting phrases in the Camp David accords that called for Palestinian rights, and it was Begin who pulled Israeli forces out of Lebanon to allow the PLO to fight another day. Mencahem Begin entered office declaring the sovereign rights of the Jewish State, but then answered to Jimmy Carter and then Ronald Reagan, when the American administration opposed his policies. It was the next Likud Prime Minister Yitzchak Shamir who followed the dictates of George Bush senior and went to the Madrid summit with representatives of Arab nations to discus Middle East peace plans. One might remember at that time Secretary of State James Baker?s well-publicized comments to an A.I.P.A.C. conference that Israel should give up its dream of a ?Greater Israel? (Baker should have taken a look at the map of the Middle East). Also, it was Arafat (then known as a ?moderate?) who at that time had uttered the ?magic? words of recognition for Israel (remember how smitten the world was?). Then it was Netanyahu, six years later, who was pressured by Bill Clinton to attend the Wye summit and sign the Hebron accords. They all passionately espoused the Likud party line at length regarding Israel?s right to secure borders and Israel?s territorial integrity. They all waxed on about the dangers of Palestinian Statehood - a terror base in their own backyard - but when the pressure mounted, they often relented.
Now, comes the latest by-product of American pressure: the Road Map. Since Oslo, (remember all the security provisions and guarantees then, too) well over eleven hundred Israelis have been murdered, many more thousands have been injured, and Israel?s economy has been reduced to shambles.
Did the Israeli public not see for which policies they were actually voting? Perhaps the masses of Likudniks, Shasniks, Agudaniks, and NRP loyalists who have no delusions regarding the intentions of the Palestinians begrudgingly accepted the political cost of American support, as they chose Likud leadership over the alternative of a ?far? right-wing candidate in the last direct prime ministerial elections? If so, then they, too, have a role in the acceptance of the Road Map.
Then, of course, there is American Jewry. Despite some local community events and parades in Jewish communities throughout America and one major rally in Washington well over a year ago, the support level of American Jewry for Israel has been disproportionately low considering the nature of the threats Israel currently faces. Whether political, or financial, the levels of support have been way too low. The issue goes far beyond the drastic ebb in tourism to Israel. More active political support for Israel would have prompted greater understanding by the American public and their political representatives of Israel?s present concerns regarding the Road Map. Greater financial support so urgently needed could have helped to alleviate the reliance of the crippled Israeli economy upon the United States. Harming Israel?s economy was also no doubt part of the strategy of the Arab terrorists. American Jewry has failed to inject the level of crucial support needed by Israel at this moment.
No individuals alone are to blame. For the debacle of the Road Map, there are few individuals who can look themselves in the mirror and truly say that they bear no share of the responsibility.
--------------------------------------------------------
Larry Domnitch is an author and educator who resides in Efrat.
President George Bush has contributed to the Road Map. Setting out to pursue his repeatedly stated vision of two states, Israel and Palestine, coexisting side by side, the President is calling for statehood for a Palestinian entity, which has employed the very tactic he has been working so hard to prevent -terrorism. The president has repeatedly endorsed the notion of statehood for a population that espouses hatred, and glorifies murder. President Bush already orchestrated the overthrow of two regimes that support the use of terror against the West, and has now skewed his message. After 9/11, the president declared war on all who practice terrorism, yet today he is endorsing statehood for the very same ilk he has been fighting since 9/11. In pursuit of his vision and the implementation of the Road Map, he has exerted massive pressure upon the Israeli government to accept the Road Map.
Members of the Israeli cabinet have also contributed. Reluctant as they may be, the cabinet approved the Road Map. Members of the Likud party that had rallied the Israeli public upon a platform of increased security misrepresented their voters by approving a plan that will do the opposite. The response of the cabinet members, regardless of how they voted, has been, at best, sullen. Deputy Prime Minster Ehud Olmert, who voted in support, told Israeli Radio, ?I think the document is not a good one, but we have to choose when we battle the U.S., and now is not the time.? Justice Minister Tommy Lapid, who also voted in support, stated, ?I think the plan is bad at its core, but with the Israeli reservations, it has improved a bit.? Some ministers voiced their expectations that the Palestinians will eventually once again violate all their agreements, causing its failure. Minister-Without-Portfolio Gideon Ezra, speaking to the Voice of Israel, stated that he is confident that if the Palestinian Authority does not honor its commitments, then Sharon will end the Road Map. Education Minister Limor Livnat, who had initially spoken out against the plan, and then abstained from the vote, offered more provisions to protect Israel?s security interests - that have not yet been voted upon. Minister Uzi Landau, who opposed the Road Map, called it a ?sugar coated cyanide pill.?
With Israel relying upon financial bailout plans from the United States to relieve some of the devastating effects of Palestinian terrorism on the economy, there is no doubt the pressure upon the Israeli government has been enormous, but the Road Map, which poses serious security threats to Israel, was nonetheless approved by the cabinet.
Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has also contributed. The old general rallied support and overwhelmed labor candidate Amram Mitzna at the polls, as he constantly repeated and emphasized the phrase ?security.? Mitzna?s pro-Palestinian State and anti-settlement stand was untenable to the vast majority of Israelis, whose frustration has exacerbated over the past two years. Sharon?s stunning victory now seems moot. The differences between the two now seem to be one of semantics. All the campaign promises of security are of little meaning in light of his endorsements of the Road Map. If Sharon were still a member of the opposition, he would be speaking out against it as he did after the approval of Oslo almost ten years ago. Sharon has once again proven that it is far easier to be the loyal right wing opposition in the Israeli government then to be the prime minister and take a stand contrary to the position of the United States administration and State Department.
Then there are the voters of Israel, who voted for the right and have a government with left-wing policies. They too have contributed. Why did they vote for Sharon? Why did his Likud party win thirty-eight seats, nineteen seats more then in the prior election? Did the voters really believe his vague slogans of ?peace and security?? They should have thought twice about Likud.
Sharon is not an aberration to his party?s list of recent past prime ministers, who broke with the party line when faced with American pressure. It was Menachem Begin who publicly pledged his loyalty to Israeli sovereignty over Sinai and then gave it over to a still very hostile Egypt, while accepting phrases in the Camp David accords that called for Palestinian rights, and it was Begin who pulled Israeli forces out of Lebanon to allow the PLO to fight another day. Mencahem Begin entered office declaring the sovereign rights of the Jewish State, but then answered to Jimmy Carter and then Ronald Reagan, when the American administration opposed his policies. It was the next Likud Prime Minister Yitzchak Shamir who followed the dictates of George Bush senior and went to the Madrid summit with representatives of Arab nations to discus Middle East peace plans. One might remember at that time Secretary of State James Baker?s well-publicized comments to an A.I.P.A.C. conference that Israel should give up its dream of a ?Greater Israel? (Baker should have taken a look at the map of the Middle East). Also, it was Arafat (then known as a ?moderate?) who at that time had uttered the ?magic? words of recognition for Israel (remember how smitten the world was?). Then it was Netanyahu, six years later, who was pressured by Bill Clinton to attend the Wye summit and sign the Hebron accords. They all passionately espoused the Likud party line at length regarding Israel?s right to secure borders and Israel?s territorial integrity. They all waxed on about the dangers of Palestinian Statehood - a terror base in their own backyard - but when the pressure mounted, they often relented.
Now, comes the latest by-product of American pressure: the Road Map. Since Oslo, (remember all the security provisions and guarantees then, too) well over eleven hundred Israelis have been murdered, many more thousands have been injured, and Israel?s economy has been reduced to shambles.
Did the Israeli public not see for which policies they were actually voting? Perhaps the masses of Likudniks, Shasniks, Agudaniks, and NRP loyalists who have no delusions regarding the intentions of the Palestinians begrudgingly accepted the political cost of American support, as they chose Likud leadership over the alternative of a ?far? right-wing candidate in the last direct prime ministerial elections? If so, then they, too, have a role in the acceptance of the Road Map.
Then, of course, there is American Jewry. Despite some local community events and parades in Jewish communities throughout America and one major rally in Washington well over a year ago, the support level of American Jewry for Israel has been disproportionately low considering the nature of the threats Israel currently faces. Whether political, or financial, the levels of support have been way too low. The issue goes far beyond the drastic ebb in tourism to Israel. More active political support for Israel would have prompted greater understanding by the American public and their political representatives of Israel?s present concerns regarding the Road Map. Greater financial support so urgently needed could have helped to alleviate the reliance of the crippled Israeli economy upon the United States. Harming Israel?s economy was also no doubt part of the strategy of the Arab terrorists. American Jewry has failed to inject the level of crucial support needed by Israel at this moment.
No individuals alone are to blame. For the debacle of the Road Map, there are few individuals who can look themselves in the mirror and truly say that they bear no share of the responsibility.
--------------------------------------------------------
Larry Domnitch is an author and educator who resides in Efrat.