Slate's Bizbox
foreigners: Opinions about events beyond our borders.

Flip a Coin in Israel It doesn't matter whether Bibi or Barak wins.

By Anne Applebaum
Posted Thursday, Dec. 14, 2000, at 9:00 PM ET

Does it matter who is prime minister of Israel? On the face of it, you would think so. For years now, the Israeli electorate has been divided almost exactly down the middle into a hawkish camp and a dovish camp. When the hawks are in power, the doves hurl vicious insults. When the doves are in power, the hawks speak darkly of Armageddon.

When power is up for grabs, they fight bitterly, which is precisely what they are doing at the moment. Since Ehud Barak tendered his resignation last weekend, triggering elections for prime minister—held separately from parliamentary elections in Israel—the entire political class appears to have disappeared into the haze of smoke-filled rooms. I will spare you the intimate details: You can read them in Ha'aretz, the normally approachable Israeli newspaper of record, whose political reporting has this week become so complex as to be unreadable. Suffice it to say that Barak's opponent may well be Benjamin Netanyahu, despite the fact that Bibi (who came rushing back from an American lecture tour to declare his candidacy) is neither a member of the Knesset, the Israeli parliament—a requirement for the prime minister—nor the leader of Likud, the main opposition party. For him to run, the Knesset has to change the Israeli Constitution and Likud has to hold special leadership elections, not exactly minor hurdles. Indeed, when you get into the various parliamentary deals and counterdeals that will be necessary to make Bibi a candidate—the involvement of the various small parties, the machinations behind the scenes—the whole thing becomes very complicated indeed. And until it is resolved, no one will be able to talk about anything else—not peace, not the Palestinians, not the future.

But I ask again: All this negotiating, all this politicking, all this activity—does it matter? Given the amount of energy that will be poured into these elections, a surprising number of people think it doesn't. Certainly a lot of Palestinians think it doesn't. According to the newspaper Al-Quds, "the difference between Likud and Labour, Barak and Netanyahu … is, in fact, a choice between two equally bitter alternatives." Hanan Ashrawi, the telegenic Palestinian negotiator, also thinks it doesn't matter: Barak's plans for the future of the West Bank, she told one newspaper, are no different from Likud's anyway.

Way over on the other side of the political spectrum, Daniel Pipes is of the same belief. Writing in the Los Angeles Times, Pipes, one of the best— and most conservative—of American Middle East commentators, dismisses the importance of the elections on the grounds that in either case, "voters will likely not have a real choice about the paramount issue: the way their government approaches the Palestinians." His view is that both Barak's government and Likud under Netanyahu have offered the Palestinians land without demanding anything concrete in return, in the (naive) hope that they will create good will all around.

In fact, although Ashrawi and Pipes couldn't be more different in their perceptions of the situation, their comments reflect the same reality: Whoever is prime minister of Israel will face precisely the same issues within precisely the same parameters. Whoever leads the country will have precisely the same unbelievably narrow space in which to maneuver. Both Bibi and Barak are extremely limited, both in what more the frustrated and angry Israeli public will allow them to concede and in what more they can demand from the frustrated and angry Palestinian leadership. If their plans for the future of the West Bank are the same, it's because they have to be the same. If their approach to the Palestinians is the same, it's because they have few other realistic options at the moment.

Certainly it isn't the case that either man could bring a truly fresh approach to the situation either. Plans to divide Jerusalem have been drawn up many, many times since 1967. Many more maps have been drawn of the West Bank. New maps—with new borders, miraculously acceptable to both sides—are not going to materialize out of the sky if Barak manages to scrape by and remain in office. Nor will the basic issues—which have been examined and re-examined, put in front of commissions, discussed ad infinitum in the Israeli press, the Arab press, everyone else's press—be in any way altered because Likud is back in charge.

For those in Israel or anywhere else who believe the return of Likud spells the end of peace, this might be a rather comforting thought: It doesn't matter who wins, peace is still possible.

But for those in Israel or anywhere else who hope a change of leadership will somehow bring an end to the terrible violence of recent months, this might be a rather depressing thought: It doesn't matter who wins, war is still likely.

Print This ArticlePRINTDiscuss this in The FrayDISCUSSEmail to a FriendE-MAIL
Share on FacebookPost to MySpace!Share with MixxDigg ThisShare with RedditShare with del.icio.usShare with FurlShare with Ma.gnolia.comShare with SphereShare with Stumble Upon
Anne Applebaum is a Washington Post and Slate columnist. Her most recent book is Gulag: A History.
Join the Fray: our reader discussion forum
What did you think of this article?
POST A MESSAGE | READ MESSAGES

Reader Comments From The Fray:


In Israel, neither faction has much room for maneuvering, but there is a difference in how the Israeli public responds. In 1993, an overwhelming majority of Israelis were against the establishment of a Palestinian state. Even more opposed dividing Jerusalem. These and other issues were simply not discussed. Today most support a state and, before the violence, a bare majority supported "sharing" Jerusalem. Meanwhile the Knesset may be against it. This is the difference between the right and the left in Israel. Barak and Bibi will both negotiate. Barak has more of a chance to bring the Israeli public with him. Bibi, on the other hand, enjoys the support of the left and his own party on any peace deal. He could negotiate a deal that would make it through the Knesset, much as the Hebron agreement did. But Bibi's philosophy of a cold peace also creates a cold peace process, in which the Israeli public believes it can extract more concessions and gobbles up rhetoric stating that it doesn't need to give much in return.

So, it does matter who wins. In the end, the hearts of minds of Israel will be more influential than the fractious Knesset, and so Barak's approach is more satisfactory. I would be wary of trusting the polls at this point; Barak still has a chance. His biggest obstacle is not the current violence--it's being the incumbent

--Elad

(To reply, click here.)


The Israeli public is solidly to the left. In the last Knesset election, for example, Barak and the left leaning parties held a substantial majority. The left even held the majority when Bibi was PM, too. The problem is the same problem that has existed since before Bibi was elected. The system was reformed to allow the citizens to cast two votes: one for PM and one for a parliamentary party. The end result is one moderate vote for the PM, and one nutty vote for a sliver of a fraction of a party. How else to you explain the racist party of Tommy Lapid, Shinui? Or Yisrael Beiteinu, the party of that thug Avigdor Lieberman? The proliferation of these small parties has been disaster for Israeli governments and will continue to be until that asinine law is changed. Now, instead of dealing with three or four coalition partners, a PM has to deal with 10 who each want their slice of the pie and are willing to topple the government if they don't get it. Goodbye stability. Hello Italy.

--Dutch

(To reply, click here.)


When leaders limit their options within parameters, oddly enough their options suddenly become limited by parameters. A leader that looks and acts beyond these darn "parameters" becomes a Visionary. Now wouldn't a leader with vision be just about perfect for Israel right now? Perhaps he or she could figure out a way to introduce a Bill of Rights for all Israelis and at the same time convince the fundamentalist Jewish elements to remove themselves out of the political fray

--Tony

(To reply, click here.)

(12/18)

Washington Post
The Washington Post
OPINIONS
Fiscal Drunkards, Dry Out
Ruth Marcus | Which candidate could lead us to economic sobriety?
Meyerson: Gods That FailedMilbank: Confidence Isn't Cheap