|
Tuesday Feb 24, 2009
Building Bridges: 'Right Now' government Posted by Yariv Oppenheimer
Comments: 6
The concern expressed by smaller right-wing parties over the inclusion of Kadima in a unity government is unfounded. Paradoxically, a wide government that includes Kadima head Tzipi Livni, Kadima MK Meir Sheetrit and MK Haim Ramon would serve the interests of the settlers and their supporters more than any narrow right-wing government with 65 'orange' MKs. In fact, the heads of right-wing parties must insist that Labor or Kadima join the coalition and appoint their leaders to senior positions within the government.
A narrow right-wing government supported by the National Union, Jewish Home and Shas parties would have a difficult time gaining public legitimacy to lead significant processes, for instance, settlement construction, outpost building and embarking on military operations and wars. We can only imagine the public's reaction had Likud leader and Prime Minister-designate Binyamin Netanyahu been prime minister during Operation Cast Lead. We can assume that a protest against excessive use of force and massive loss of life would not have remained the domain of the radical left and even Kadima and Labor members would have taken to the streets. But when Barak or Livni sit at the security cabinet table, we can embark on two wars and bury any chance at a peace agreement without having to deal with significant public scrutiny. In the 'settlement construction' field, a unity government is preferable for the Yesha Council and for the 'settler public'. A narrow right-wing government would find it difficult to reach decisions on settlement construction and every new outpost would induce criticism from the opposition; Kadima, Labor and Meretz. However, a wide unity government would rather easily approve building plans in the territories arguing that it is for natural growth purposes only or for settlement blocs only. The Olmert government proved that settlement construction can continue, that not evacuating outposts and shirking responsibility for any commitment to peace without provoking a wave of public protest can only continue when Kadima and Labor MKs are party to the process. The past three years have proven that policy does not dictate public opinion but that the identity of the people who sit around the government table does. Additionally, as far as international public opinion in concerned, a narrow right-wing government would have difficulty gaining legitimacy and would be forced to contend with the cold and suspicious shoulder of world leaders, especially the Obama administration. The assumed basic working plan of any government in Israel must be committed to the two-state solution and any step a right-wing government would make would be perceived as an attempt to take a step back and torpedo any future agreement. If Netanyahu, Israel Beiteinu head Avigdor Leiberman, Jewish Home MK Uri Orbach and National Union leader Yaakov Katz are the faces of the Israeli government, we can expect a loss of patience towards Israel and anything related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Any minor process by the government will see a wave of worldwide condemnation and protest and intentional pressure will make it difficult for said right-wing government to fulfill its ideological path. Therefore, in the coming days and following the elections loss, those who fear for the political process and the future of Israel in the Middle East must hope for a right-wing government, without Kadima and Labor. Such a government would find it difficult to wage wars and ostentatious military operations. Such a government will have to deal with widespread public protest, locally and internationally, and will be busy trying to prove to the public and the world that a responsible and sane government sits in Jerusalem. A right-wing government is the least destructive option for Israel and the region.
1 |
Chaim - Israel,
Wednesday Feb 25, 2009
Is Oppenheimer ever correct about anything? In the first place, the "peace process" is supported by only a tiny segment of Israelis. The recent Jerusalem Post poll showed about 10% concerned with the "peace process" versus a whopping over 80% (properly) concerned about security. The election itself was a resounding defeat for those who think like Oppenheimer. May their numbers continue to dwindle. After decades of the "peace process", which cost us tens of thousands of dead and wounded civilians and countless thousands of rockets, Israelis are justifiably fed up with the destructive fraud.
2 |
Mark Perry Israel,
Wednesday Feb 25, 2009
I am deeply moved by oppenheimer's concern over what would be best for the "right-wing". I am touched that he cares so deeply about us achieving our goals that he has given us his sage advice. I also believe in santa claus & the tooth fairy! Why on earth would we allow the recent victory of the RIGHT-wing to be diluted by aligning ourselves with those that hold opposite views from ours?!? Does oppenheimer really think the right is so simple-minded as to think his advice to us is motivated by anything other than furthering HIS warped goals? I suppose he DOES think that. We know you yariv!
3 |
Tim,
Thursday Feb 26, 2009
"Narrow right wing..." Huh? If 80% is narrow, then what is broad or mainstream? If the people want peace, but not at the expense of land, ongoing rocket and mortar attacks, and the Damocles sword of Iran over them, which type of government would they choose? They spoke and the rightists now lead. For conscience the centrists should govern together to moderate the right and move away from the politics of appeasement of the leftists who would let anyone roll over them in the name of peace. These leftists should be happy staying in Iran. Israel is being surrounded by its enemies, not friends!
4 |
Nechama Friedman, Israel,
Thursday Feb 26, 2009
Israeli politics are really complicated.I am not a citizen here and therefore cannot vote. However, if I was voting I would more likely vote for a government that is dedicated to upholding my safety, even if it means killing my enemy and whoever they hide behind, than I would vote for a government that would willingly allow a Palistinian woman to blow herself up because she is an "innocent woman who did no harm." In the end, having someone [ Link to page ] ." rel="nofollow">pray at the Western Wall for 40 days for the safety of all of Israel may be the best idea.
5 |
Nimrod Tal,
Thursday Feb 26, 2009
I dont think Oppenheimer would have had as hard a time with the Gaza war if the victims were named Oppenheim, Wertheim, or Ochs, instead of Abitbol or Perez. Unfortunately for us, not too many Oppenheims, Wertheims, or Ochs live in Sderot. Before I take Mr Oppenheimer seriously, he needs to demonstrate that he values the quality of life of a Perez equally to that of a Wertheim
6 |
Joseph, New York City, USA,
Friday Feb 27, 2009
Oppenheimer, you are right about political affiliation driving anti-war protests. For all the protests against the Iraq war, no one is suggesting we pull our troops out of the Balkans. A military operation starteded by liberals is considered legitimate no matter how long the troops stay there. If I had to bet on it, I would wager that Obama will start at least one new military engagement during his term and that the peaceniks will not speak a word of protest against it.
|
Top Rated Posts
Tags:Blogroll |