|
Thursday Jan 03, 2008
In preparation for the publishing of the final Winograd Report on the Second Lebanon War, the legitimate demand from Labor Chairman and Defense Minister Ehud Barak to announce that he intends to leave the government if and when Prime Minister Ehud Olmert remains in his position is resurfacing.
I admit that it is not easy to deal with the simplistic and popular catch-phrase which argues that those who failed should "take responsibility" and go home, as if we are talking about a soccer coach or a government clerk who erred.
The attempt to portray the issue as if it were Olmert's personal matter buys him wide leverage in the battle with many who turn a blind eye to the dramatic consequences of such a move.
Replacing a PM is not a personal quest to man one position over another. Unlike replacing a GOC (General Officer Commanding) or the military chief of general staff or even the defense minister, the removal of a prime minister is a dramatic process which has many consequences for all aspects of life within the country and for regional stability as well.
In the current state of affairs, the removal of Olmert will bring about general elections, a paralysis of the political system for a period between half a year and a year, government instability and the halting of all processes that the government has been involved in for the past two years, especially Annapolis.
Even the most outspoken cynics and skeptics cannot ignore the fact that for the first time since 2000, there is direct dialogue and direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. All three leaders - Bush, Olmert and Abbas - have made a commitment to the success of the process and the attainment of a permanent agreement within a year. The interruption of negotiations due to a governmental collapse would only play into the hands of the extremists on both sides and would put the nail in the coffin of Annapolis.
The Israeli Right would have a new opportunity to participate in early elections and to crown Binyamin Netanyahu as head of state while Hamas will cheer the failure of Annapolis and complete its take-over of the Palestinian Authority.
There is no doubt that as a result of the improper and inexperienced actions of Olmert, many soldiers paid with their lives and the security of the country suffered severe damage. However, should Barak respond to the calls to leave the coalition after the Winograd Report is published, it will only play into the hands of the Israeli Right on the one hand, and of Hamas, on the other.
A high price for the failures of the Second Lebanon War has already been paid; the removal of Olmert will only cause the country and its citizens to suffer needlessly and pay a heavier price for the war's failures.
Barak should not give in to the temptation of responding to the popular but irresponsible calls to leave the government. He should carefully examine and contemplate what is best for Israel's future.
The Labor party should take advantage of Olmert's weakness following the report, to sharpen and hone Labor's demands and conditions for staying in the government and accelerate the peace process. It is in the best interests of the country and it is national responsibility.
1 | Marsha-USA, Thursday Jan 03, 2008
Ohlmert is heading towards being written in Jewish history as the worst Prime Minister (as far as the Jewish people are concerned, anyway, he's been great for the arabs) of all time. Hopefully, the Israeli electorate wakes up and removes him before he can do further damage to the State and the Jewish people by groveling to the world and giving away not only our land, but our united capital.
2 | when in fear people generally blame or, Friday Jan 04, 2008
condemn one person. bush is demonized for merely carrying longstanding u.s. foreign: to expand by any means. surely,2 atom bombs thrown on civilians prove that amers ( or ab. 10% of its popul)will stopp at nothing in order to expand by proxi or even direct control like in iraq and afghanistan. u.s. will establish, i believe, permament bases iniq&afgh.since the planet is getting daily poorer,u.s. is speeding up land grab. but we can already say we are onplanet u.s. there is no one to stop it. idf behaves the same way. u.s. cannot at this time ok dispersal. chomsky believes that id
3 | JKF-Canada, Friday Jan 04, 2008
For building bridges the fiundamentals must be correct. ABBAS=1 a long standing terrorist 2 is not an honest person 3.does not have the support of his people 4. FATAH, is currently competing with Hamas to see who can commit more crimes against Israelis (look at the missile laboratory in the WB) 5. is doing the bidding for Syria; 6. Not one single issue has shown that he can be a positive force 7. is barely holding to power. Under the situation you can only build a very unsafe bridge. Stop the delusion!
4 | Victor, Hod Hasharon, Friday Jan 04, 2008
There is no "popular" call for Barak to leave the government, responsibile or irresponsible.
Just a few politicians that latched on to some silly pronouncements that Barak made in the past. It takes a smarter man to reject his own past statements if they are wrong. Life is a long lesson in humility
5 | Michael Dar - Tel Aviv, Friday Jan 04, 2008
Mr. Oppenheimer says is that Olmert should stay in power, regardless of his failures, his many police investigations and the fact that the overwhelming majority of the citizens despise him and his policies. Real democracy..Peace Now style ! And that for the only reason that Mr. Olmert is trying to implement a policy which is Mr. Oppenheimer's cup of tea...process which he calls, as that other criminal and failed (Oslo) experiment a "peace process"...which is a deceit in itself.
6 | Danny Alexander, Tokyo, Japan, Friday Jan 04, 2008
Yariv Oppenheimer's arguments are worded as to leave little doubt that he sees moral equivalence between the "extremists on both sides," Israeli and Arab. His is a morally (dare I say psychologically) sick position, beyond the pale of any acceptable discourse. The JPost should suspend any further publication of his views until Oppenheimer issues a clarification and retraction. The practical implications of Oppenheimer's position are such that he would shed no tears if any Israeli of Bibi Netanyahu's political persuasion and Rightward were to be gunned down.
7 | Bertram, Friday Jan 04, 2008
Ha! How surprising is this- Oppenheimer arguing for concilatory Olmert to remain PM despite his corruption, anti-democratic trends, and conciliatory trends. Does anyone else remember the article of a few months ago that the left whitewashes PMs when they go for withdrawal? Oppenheimer is a shining example of this pathetic trend.
8 | abe usa, Friday Jan 04, 2008
If Oppenheimer wants Olmert, the rest of the Jewish world should not.
Israel keeps Olmert because Israel has become as weak and corrupt as Olmert. He is your face to the world, along with that other weakling, Peres.
This is what has become of the 6 Day War and Entebbe Israel.
I'm glad my father didn't live to see what you have become.
9 | Y. Kreminsky, Jerusalem ISRAEL, Friday Jan 04, 2008
Oppenheimer is part of the "Rape Israel" crowd. Olmert is the leader of the gang-rape of our country, and Oppenheimer insists that Olmert be allowed to go through with the crime.
10 | Philip R, Tel Aviv, Friday Jan 04, 2008
Removal of the current government - the first fully civil goverment of Israel would certainly play into the hands of radical elements on both sides of the barrier. It is clear that there are people on both sides who are not interested in peace. Hamas and Islamic Jihad are not interested in peace, neither is the Israeli military establishment or the right-wing parties. After peace is reached in Palestine they will loose their importance and legitimacy. Nobody will need Netanyahu, Lieberman or Haniya and Habash when true peace is established. These people have nothing to offer their people.
11 | Doug, Friday Jan 04, 2008
I disagree with you completely. If Barak cannot support Olmert, he should abandon the government immediately. Let the chips fall where they may. Hopefully the Olmert Government will fail quickly, completely, and some people who know how to stand up for their sovereignty will prevail.
12 | Rick, NYC, Friday Jan 04, 2008
Olmert is a small time anti-ZIonist political functonary and as such cannot decide the future of Israel. Abbas stands against Israel as the Jewish nation. Maybe the 'Zionist Entity' is more acceptable. Abbas is a Holocaust denier. Olmert fawns over Abbas as if he is a born again Sadat. Abbas' defense of Hamas is anti- Sadat thinking. So called Right of return to Israel is ultimate proof of his desire to destory Israel. Oppenheimer laments a period of one and a half years as too much time wasted. Let him consider the 3000 year histoy of Jews in light of that annoyance.
13 | sk, Saturday Jan 05, 2008
So, Oppenheimer frets about the inefficiencies and disruptions of keeping ilmert in power. I like how he cautions against catchphrases when his very organization's name is a catchphrase.
He grants that ilmert's ineptitude cost lives in Leb, but says that doing anything about it is crying over spilled milk. Of course, we must expect ilmert to do more inept things because HE IS INEPT.
14 | Amnon, Jerusalem, state of Lemmings, Saturday Jan 05, 2008
Oppenheimer and Olmert both should face trial or charges of Treason and Cowardice.
You can also add Self-Loathing, putting the interests of the enemy above those of your own citizens, and hate and disdain of Zionism as part and parcel of the charges..
15 | Gershon, Sunday Jan 06, 2008
Mr. Oppenheimer,
With all due respect, do you people actually believe (with all that history has to show us) that Olmert is operating in the best interest of
the Jewish peoiple. Unfortunately, the irony of history is that Jew's like yourself will not have the freedom to be left wing without a strong and stubborn Jewish Israel.
16 | Neil, Denver, Colorado USA, Sunday Jan 06, 2008
Nowhere does this writer mention that nobody has ever voted for Ohlmert for PM. The last vote Israelis had, they voted for Sharon when he was still taking a tough stand against terror in Judea and Samaria and had the support of the right. Ohlmert had the support of 9% at one point and not much more now. That vote also was long before Kadima corruption became as known.
17 | Neil, Denver, Sunday Jan 06, 2008
Missing from this article is the fact that Kadima is a party that will cease to be a major player after the next election. This writer doesn't even acknowledge that such a likelihood plays any part in his thinking. Sounds like something is being held back here. I can't read his mind, but I'll bet his own
political agenda is weighing a lot more than upsetting the voters with an election.
18 | Herbert Kaine Hebron, Israel, Sunday Jan 06, 2008
Oppenheimer is a longstanding advocate of a one state solution. He doesnt have the courage to explicitly state it, but the policies he espouses are all consistent with this aim. he reminds me of the late unlamented Yossi Ginnosar, who managed Arafat's finances even when he knew they were being used for terrorism. Im tired of NGO backed Israelis selling out our country. I hope Olmert is indicted for corruption along with his cronies and supporters. Even Al Capone was eventually indicted for tax evasion
19 | R.Alkalai, Monday Jan 07, 2008
May the Hand of HaShem's find you, Olmert, and his corrupt government for the harm brought upon Israel and the Jewish people.
20 | yona loriner new york, Sunday Jan 20, 2008
not only do i think olmert has to go.... but i think its the beginning of the downfall of the west if he stays in power!
|
 |
About this blog
Building Bridges
Peace Now General Secretary Yariv Oppenheimer lays out his visions on how to fulfill the Zionist dream.
|
Combined feed for all JPost.com blogs
Recent Comments
Chaya Gilburt - Brasil: The settlers are not thugs. They protest the right of Jews to live in safety in Hevron. Not defending these rights, which is what Oppenheimer suggests, will only embolden those who rather see Jews making a homeland in Uganda.
Elad (http://eladthegreat.wordpress.com): This blog has misconstrued many facts.
The settlers moved in legally and not sneakily or forcefully. No one was there when they moved in, a pretty good sign that they had actually bought the house.
While it is true that Peretz wanted to evacuate the house, the civil administration of Israel at the time ruled that people living in the house were living there legally.
As for the claim that the proof was possibly forged. Absolutely false. There are videos. Audio recordings. Contracts. They thoroughly documented everything.
Please at least get your facts straight, Mr Oppenheimer.
Dimitri in Ashdod: Wow, Oppenheimer really knows how to build bridges with such harsh language. It would be better if he actually read the evidence regarding the ownership of the building, the fact that 50 MKs from every spextrum support Jewish presence in the building and the recording conversations, instead of falling back on childish tactics of fear mongering and name calling.
|
|
Post your own comment
