"The public is sick of politics, and is awaiting a statement of public integrity, and a fresh breeze of consistency and adherence to principles." So said NRP party leader Effie Eitam last night to his party's Central Committee, just before it voted down his proposal and resolved not to quit the government at present.
The Committee voted by almost a 2-1 margin to adopt Minister Zevulun Orlev's proposal stipulating under what conditions the party should leave the government. The party thus turned down Eitam's proposal to leave the coalition as early as next week, when the government might possibly begin paying compensation to residents.
The Orlev proposal that was approved states as follows:
1) The NRP totally negates the disengagement plan, and will not be a partner in a government that uproots Jewish communities.
2) The NRP Central Committee [states that there] must be a referendum on the disengagement plan, to be decided by a special majority [generally understood to be 60%].
3) The NRP will quit the government if any one of the following conditions applies:
a. The government and Knesset approve the uprooting of Jewish communities in Gush Katif and northern Shomron.
b. The Knesset completes the legislation of laws for evacuation and compensation for the sake of the implementation of the disengagement plan.
c. The Labor Party joins the current coalition. [If Labor joins together with another religious party, however, the NRP will not quit.]
d. The 2005 budget does not provide for the regular operation of religious services and institutions, or if the status and functioning of the religious Zionist educational network is harmed, such as with a shortening of the school week.
e. A referendum is not held on the disengagement plan. To quit the coalition under this clause, the Central Committee must be convened, by recommendation of the NRP Knesset faction.
4) The party leadership must maintain its unity, and must honor and fulfill all the decisions of the authorized party organs.
Over 72% of the party turned out to vote on what was considered both a cardinal issue for party policy and a matter of personal politics between the party's two highest-ranking leaders. Before the vote, Eitam warned the members that the "wrong" vote could cost the party dearly on Election Day: Don't be surprised if, because of the decision to take the road of deal-making and political maneuvering, [the people] no longer view us as their representatives.
Referring to the tens of thousands who attended the pro-Gush Katif rally in Jerusalem this week, Eitam said, "Between bombs and bullets, these people came out to represent truth and fortitude. It was not extremists or a hostile takeover of the party, but the voices of the younger generation who still have ideology. They spoke to us with pleading and with tears that cause a lump to rise in ones throat. They are not angry; they are simply waiting for us. The 60,000 demonstrators who came to Zion Square yesterday - among them our children - told us to leave this evil coalition. They delivered a clear message: you cannot continue to sit in the government if you wish to be our representatives."
Eitam explained that the approval of advance compensation payments to residents slated for uprooting is the critical core of Sharon's disengagement plan. That itself is the disengagement plan, stressed Eitam, saying that Sharon's Bureau Chief Dov Weisglass "met with me just days ago, assuring me that there would be no need for a large-scale expulsion of Jews from Gaza, because, he said, 'We will buy them all out with money - only a few isolated crazies will stay, and we will deal with them.'
We made one huge mistake as a party, said Eitam. The original sin was that we agreed to be part of a coalition with Shinui, which hates everything Jewish and holy, and agreed to be with the Likud, which is shattering everything that is precious to us. The NRP has now unwittingly become the fig-leaf for the policies of both.
Eitam, who knew that his position as party leader might be dependent on the vote, reminded his audience under what conditions he took over the party: When there was a danger, a year and a half ago, that the NRP would not even reach the required minimum percentage [to be represented in the Knesset], you turned to me - and, with naive integrity, I came. You can now tell me to go. These remarks caused a measure of pandemonium, with some activists calling out, What have you done for the party anyway? and opposing committee members arguing furiously with each other.
Other speakers included MKs Rabbi Yitzchak Levy and Sha'ul Yahalom. Levy, an ally of Eitam's who briefly supported Orlev's proposal, came out strongly in favor or quitting the government immediately. We must not be partners to the evacuation in any form," he told the Central Committee. "Evacuation is evacuation is evacuation - we must bring about the weakening of Sharon. 'Do not stand idly by your brothers blood' - the residents [of Gaza and the northern Shomron] are calling out to us and expecting salvation. We must not allow a situation in which one resident will accept compensation and one will not, leading to tension within our ranks. We must therefore act now, before the pain caused by advance compensation is institutionalized.
Orlev did not speak, but his main ally, MK Sha'ul Yahalom, did. He told the committee that the NRP had indeed been successful in carrying out its "fighting from within" strategy: Sharon is a commander, and was planning to move swiftly. He fired the National Union ministers, threatened to bring in Labor when he saw that Eitam had quit, and went to speed up the timetable and carry out an ultra-disengagement. We knew this from the start, and stopped the blitz and shock-strategy [by staying in the government], thus fostering a rebellion within the Likud.
It is not yet known if Eitam will resign as party head and/or from the Knesset. He may wait for further developments, hoping that the party will quit the coalition under the new proposal sooner that expected. Political analyst Chanan Crystal, however, feels that Orlev's achievement is that the party will not have to quit until next February or March, after the Knesset is expected to vote on the final readings of the disengagement law, and will thus bring about new elections.
The Committee voted by almost a 2-1 margin to adopt Minister Zevulun Orlev's proposal stipulating under what conditions the party should leave the government. The party thus turned down Eitam's proposal to leave the coalition as early as next week, when the government might possibly begin paying compensation to residents.
The Orlev proposal that was approved states as follows:
1) The NRP totally negates the disengagement plan, and will not be a partner in a government that uproots Jewish communities.
2) The NRP Central Committee [states that there] must be a referendum on the disengagement plan, to be decided by a special majority [generally understood to be 60%].
3) The NRP will quit the government if any one of the following conditions applies:
a. The government and Knesset approve the uprooting of Jewish communities in Gush Katif and northern Shomron.
b. The Knesset completes the legislation of laws for evacuation and compensation for the sake of the implementation of the disengagement plan.
c. The Labor Party joins the current coalition. [If Labor joins together with another religious party, however, the NRP will not quit.]
d. The 2005 budget does not provide for the regular operation of religious services and institutions, or if the status and functioning of the religious Zionist educational network is harmed, such as with a shortening of the school week.
e. A referendum is not held on the disengagement plan. To quit the coalition under this clause, the Central Committee must be convened, by recommendation of the NRP Knesset faction.
4) The party leadership must maintain its unity, and must honor and fulfill all the decisions of the authorized party organs.
Over 72% of the party turned out to vote on what was considered both a cardinal issue for party policy and a matter of personal politics between the party's two highest-ranking leaders. Before the vote, Eitam warned the members that the "wrong" vote could cost the party dearly on Election Day: Don't be surprised if, because of the decision to take the road of deal-making and political maneuvering, [the people] no longer view us as their representatives.
Referring to the tens of thousands who attended the pro-Gush Katif rally in Jerusalem this week, Eitam said, "Between bombs and bullets, these people came out to represent truth and fortitude. It was not extremists or a hostile takeover of the party, but the voices of the younger generation who still have ideology. They spoke to us with pleading and with tears that cause a lump to rise in ones throat. They are not angry; they are simply waiting for us. The 60,000 demonstrators who came to Zion Square yesterday - among them our children - told us to leave this evil coalition. They delivered a clear message: you cannot continue to sit in the government if you wish to be our representatives."
Eitam explained that the approval of advance compensation payments to residents slated for uprooting is the critical core of Sharon's disengagement plan. That itself is the disengagement plan, stressed Eitam, saying that Sharon's Bureau Chief Dov Weisglass "met with me just days ago, assuring me that there would be no need for a large-scale expulsion of Jews from Gaza, because, he said, 'We will buy them all out with money - only a few isolated crazies will stay, and we will deal with them.'
We made one huge mistake as a party, said Eitam. The original sin was that we agreed to be part of a coalition with Shinui, which hates everything Jewish and holy, and agreed to be with the Likud, which is shattering everything that is precious to us. The NRP has now unwittingly become the fig-leaf for the policies of both.
Eitam, who knew that his position as party leader might be dependent on the vote, reminded his audience under what conditions he took over the party: When there was a danger, a year and a half ago, that the NRP would not even reach the required minimum percentage [to be represented in the Knesset], you turned to me - and, with naive integrity, I came. You can now tell me to go. These remarks caused a measure of pandemonium, with some activists calling out, What have you done for the party anyway? and opposing committee members arguing furiously with each other.
Other speakers included MKs Rabbi Yitzchak Levy and Sha'ul Yahalom. Levy, an ally of Eitam's who briefly supported Orlev's proposal, came out strongly in favor or quitting the government immediately. We must not be partners to the evacuation in any form," he told the Central Committee. "Evacuation is evacuation is evacuation - we must bring about the weakening of Sharon. 'Do not stand idly by your brothers blood' - the residents [of Gaza and the northern Shomron] are calling out to us and expecting salvation. We must not allow a situation in which one resident will accept compensation and one will not, leading to tension within our ranks. We must therefore act now, before the pain caused by advance compensation is institutionalized.
Orlev did not speak, but his main ally, MK Sha'ul Yahalom, did. He told the committee that the NRP had indeed been successful in carrying out its "fighting from within" strategy: Sharon is a commander, and was planning to move swiftly. He fired the National Union ministers, threatened to bring in Labor when he saw that Eitam had quit, and went to speed up the timetable and carry out an ultra-disengagement. We knew this from the start, and stopped the blitz and shock-strategy [by staying in the government], thus fostering a rebellion within the Likud.
It is not yet known if Eitam will resign as party head and/or from the Knesset. He may wait for further developments, hoping that the party will quit the coalition under the new proposal sooner that expected. Political analyst Chanan Crystal, however, feels that Orlev's achievement is that the party will not have to quit until next February or March, after the Knesset is expected to vote on the final readings of the disengagement law, and will thus bring about new elections.