FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Sharon’s Victory

The contest between Binyamin Netanyahu and Ariel Sharon in the Likud Central Committee resembled a duel between two gladiators in the Roman arena. The more so since many of the Committee members behaved like the Roman rabble who screamed, rioted and demanded blood.

In this fight, Netanyahu resembled the Retiarius, a gladiator who had nothing on but a short tunic and who sought to entangle his opponent with a cast-net held in his right hand and, if successful, to dispatch him with the trident that he carried in his left. Sharon was like the Secutor, who wore armor and carried a sword. The former had the advantage of mobility and agility, the other moved clumsily but was well protected.

Many heaved a sigh of relief when Netanyahu was defeated at the last minute, contrary to expectations and polls. Since Netanyahu had positioned himself on the extreme right, supporting the settlers and opposing any withdrawal, he made Sharon look like the Man of Peace. But that is, of course, an illusion. The difference between the two, if there is one at all, is negligible. If Netanyahu were Prime Minister, he would behave exactly like Sharon, and in opposition Sharon would behave exactly like Netanyahu.

Sharon is now making both peace-loving and war-like declarations – depending on the audience he is addressing. Before the UN General Assembly and the Americans he sings hymns to peace, but he vows to the Likud that he will not give up another inch. All these declarations are not worth a garlic peeling, to use a Hebrew expression. One should not believe a word he says, only his actions count. In the meantime he builds the Separation Fence, enlarges the settlements, initiates provocations, bombs and arrests.

On the face of it, therefore, nothing that has happened in the Likud Central Committee has any impact on the chances of peace. Just a duel between two gladiators in the arena, much ado about nothing. But that is an optical illusion.

In fact, peace has won a great victory in the Likud arena.

This has nothing to do with the personality or intentions of Sharon, but everything with the substance of the decision.

In theory, no ideological matter was at stake. The committee members were voting, officially, only on a technical point: whether to hold the primaries for Party Chairman early, next month, or at their scheduled time, in half a year. Big deal.

But what was really at issue was whether to throw Sharon out, because he has uprooted the settlements and withdrawn from the Gaza Strip. The attacks on him were focused on this point. His opponents claimed that he had betrayed the Likud principles, that the Likud opposes the ceding of any part of the “fatherland” to the “Arab enemy”, that the evacuation of any settlement is a crime. That’s what the battle was all about.

The decision was therefore of historic importance. The Likud is the present incarnation of the Revisionist Party, which was founded some 80 years ago under the slogan “The Jordan has two banks – one belongs to us and the other one too.” Its very name reflects this claim. The founder, Vladimir (Ze’ev) Jabotinsky wanted to annul the 1920 decision of the British government to separate Transjordan (the present Kingdom of Jordan) from Palestine. That was the “revision” he strove to attain.

Even when the party, in its successive incarnations, in practice gave up the claim on Transjordan, it insisted vigorously on “The Whole of Eretz-Israel” between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River. In order to achieve this, it promoted the settlements in all the occupied territories, denied the very existence of the Palestinian people and obstructed every step that could have led towards peace.

And now, on Monday, September 26, 2005, the Central Committee of this party has voted for a leader who evacuated and destroyed 25 settlements, has used the Israel Defense Forces to “drive out Jews” and has officially given up a part of Eretz Israel. From this day on, the Likud is not what it used to be.

Some people make light of this victory because of the tiny margin – 52% against 48%. But that is not important. The astounding thing is that any committee members at all voted for the man who did this.

It is being said that this decision was not ideological, but jobological. The committee members voted against their convictions in order keep the Likud in power and save their government jobs. The polls have shown that the Likud would lose the elections if Sharon were thrown out. The head overcame the heart, the greed for power was stronger than the ideology.

If that is true, the victory is even more important. The 3060 members of the Likud Central Committee come from all parts of Israel. They come from all social strata, not just from the “elites”. They sense the mood of the general public. If they have arrived at the conclusion that loyalty to the settlements and Greater Israel will lose them the elections, this has far-reaching significance.

I wrote recently that “the center has held”. Now it is also clear that the right wing has remained loyal to Sharon. His opponents, the Loyalists of Greater Israel, are in a state of collapse. After their rout in the Central Committee, they are foundering among the 100,000 party members. Polls show that a large majority of these now support Sharon. The Likud ministers and Knesset members behave like soldiers of a defeated army after the cry “sauve qui peut” is sounded.

That is not the end of it. On the contrary, we are facing a hard year. Sharon will try to freeze everything, except the building of the Fence and the enlarging of the settlements. The pretext will be the need to wait for the results of the Palestinian elections, in January 2006, in order to know “with whom we are dealing”. After that, the Israeli election will take place, probably in November 2006, and “nobody can expect Sharon to take unpopular steps before elections”. President Bush, who is also a political animal, will surely understand that. The prolonged freeze may cause new disasters.

In spite of this, the long march towards peace has taken another step. A small step, but an important one.

And that in the Likud Central Committee, of all places. Who would have believed it.

URI AVNERY is an Israeli writer and peace activist with Gush Shalom. He is one of the writers featured in The Other Israel: Voices of Dissent and Refusal. He is also a contributor to CounterPunch’s hot new book The Politics of Anti-Semitism. He can be reached at: avnery@counterpunch.org.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

More articles by:

URI AVNERY is an Israeli writer and peace activist with Gush Shalom. He is a contributor to CounterPunch’s book The Politics of Anti-Semitism.

January 16, 2019
Patrick Bond
Jim Yong Kim’s Mixed Messages to the World Bank and the World
John Grant
Joe Biden, Crime Fighter from Hell
Alvaro Huerta
Brief History Notes on Mexican Immigration to the U.S.
Kenneth Surin
A Great Speaker of the UK’s House of Commons
Elizabeth Henderson
Why Sustainable Agriculture Should Support a Green New Deal
Binoy Kampmark
Trump, Bolton and the Syrian Confusion
Jeff Mackler
Trump’s Syria Exit Tweet Provokes Washington Panic
Barbara Nimri Aziz
How Long Can Nepal Blame Others for Its Woes?
Cesar Chelala
Violence Against Women: A Pandemic No Longer Hidden
Kim C. Domenico
To Make a Vineyard of the Curse: Fate, Fatalism and Freedom
Dave Lindorff
Criminalizing BDS Trashes Free Speech & Association
Thomas Knapp
Now More Than Ever, It’s Clear the FBI Must Go
Binoy Kampmark
Dances of Disinformation: The Partisan Politics of the Integrity Initiative
Edward Curtin
A Gentrified Little Town Goes to Pot
January 15, 2019
Patrick Cockburn
Refugees Are in the English Channel Because of Western Interventions in the Middle East
Howard Lisnoff
The Faux Political System by the Numbers
Lawrence Davidson
Amos Oz and the Real Israel
John W. Whitehead
Beware the Emergency State
John Laforge
Loudmouths against Nuclear Lawlessness
Myles Hoenig
Labor in the Age of Trump
Jeff Cohen
Mainstream Media Bias on 2020 Democratic Race Already in High Gear
Dean Baker
Will Paying for Kidneys Reduce the Transplant Wait List?
George Ochenski
Trump’s Wall and the Montana Senate’s Theater of the Absurd
Binoy Kampmark
Dances of Disinformation: the Partisan Politics of the Integrity Initiative
Glenn Sacks
On the Picket Lines: Los Angeles Teachers Go On Strike for First Time in 30 Years
Jonah Raskin
Love in a Cold War Climate
Andrew Stewart
The Green New Deal Must be Centered on African American and Indigenous Workers to Differentiate Itself From the Democratic Party
January 14, 2019
Kenn Orphan
The Tears of Justin Trudeau
Julia Stein
California Needs a 10-Year Green New Deal
Dean Baker
Declining Birth Rates: Is the US in Danger of Running Out of People?
Robert Fisk
The US Media has Lost One of Its Sanest Voices on Military Matters
Vijay Prashad
5.5 Million Women Build Their Wall
Nicky Reid
Lessons From Rojava
Ted Rall
Here is the Progressive Agenda
Robert Koehler
A Green Future is One Without War
Gary Leupp
The Chickens Come Home to Roost….in Northern Syria
Glenn Sacks
LA Teachers’ Strike: “The Country Is Watching”
Sam Gordon
Who Are Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionists?
Weekend Edition
January 11, 2019
Friday - Sunday
Richard Moser
Neoliberalism: Free Market Fundamentalism or Corporate Power?
Paul Street
Bordering on Fascism: Scholars Reflect on Dangerous Times
Joseph Majerle III – Matthew Stevenson
Who or What Brought Down Dag Hammarskjöld?
Jeffrey St. Clair - Joshua Frank
How Tre Arrow Became America’s Most Wanted Environmental “Terrorist”
Andrew Levine
Dealbreakers: The Democrats, Trump and His Wall
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Que Syria, Syria
Dave Lindorff
A Potentially Tectonic Event Shakes up the Mumia Abu-Jamal Case
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail