Declaration Of War Or A Vote For Peace

"St Michael and the Dragon" by Raffaello c. 1505, Musée du Louvre, Paris

 

Israel has made a sound choice. It can only be hoped that others will now respond in kind.

So it would seem. But let's first look at Ehud Olmert's path to power:

• 1945: born Sept 30 in what was then Palestine. His Russian-born father and Ukrainian-born mother fought for the foundation of Israel, a homeland for Jews, in 1948.

• 1973: aged 28, becomes Knesset's youngest member and swiftly earns reputation as an anti-corruption campaigner.

• 1977: opens own law office, specialising in lucrative corporate work.

• 1992: although a rising star, he loses out to Benjamin Netanyahu in fight for Likud leadership.

• 1993: becomes mayor of Jerusalem, sitting on sidelines as Netanyahu's star burns bright and then begins to fade.

• 2003: persuaded to leave Jerusalem mayor's office and join prime minister Ariel Sharon as deputy.

• 2005: fiercely supportive of Sharon's plan to withdraw Israeli presence from Gaza, Olmert is one of the first to join Sharon's new party, Kadima.

• 2006: moves seamlessly into the position of acting prime minister when Mr Sharon is stricken by a stroke.

Now that Kadima is elected, an extraordinary feat in itself, all eyes are of course on the Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas. Mr Olmert used his victory speech to address him:

"We are ready to compromise, to give up parts of the beloved Land of Israel … and evacuate, under great pain, Jews living there, in order to create the conditions that will enable you to fulfil your dream and live alongside us," [...]

"It is time for the Palestinians to change their ethos, to accept compromise as soon as possible. If they manage to do this soon, we will sit and work out a plan. If not, Israel will take control of its own fate, and in consensus among our people and with the agreement of the world and US President George Bush, we will act. The time has come to act."

I think we will see more of this kind of Alan-Greenspan-type rhetoric; highly diplomatic, purposeful, suggestive and devoid of any concrete threats. To be sure, these two short paragraphs contain enough  'food' for every faction to get both excited and at the same time outraged about. It mirrors Olmert's campaign style: say as little as possible and keep the powder dry.

In short, it's hard to tell what he'll do. Labor's strong performance (20 seats out of the 120-seat Knesset) and likely coalition partner with Kadima (28 seats), will certainly have a strong say in the way forward. 48 seats is however still 13 seats shy of the majority, but Olmert has some options and is expected to form a majority coalition.

My guess is that Olmert will place the ball firmly into Hamas' court. True, he waited to drop the political bombshell until polling day when he outlined his plan to withdraw all 80,000 settlers from the 'Occupied Territories':

"We are not going to be able to fulfil all our dreams," Mr Olmert wrote. "We will fix the route of the security barrier beyond which we will no longer remain. The time has come to take one more step to shape our identity and assure the longevity of the State of Israel as a Jewish state with a clear Jewish majority.

But it would seem that he immediately makes this conditional on the willingness of Hamas to reciprocate with their acceptance of Israel as a permanent state, which of course he knows isn't going to happen anytime soon.

"If our neighbours continue to miss every opportunity to reach an accord, Israel will take its destiny in hand and unilaterally carve out its identity as a Jewish and democratic state."

Hamas' very existence is based on bringing about Israel's destruction.

We will just have to sit back and wait how Olmert will act in the face of an unrelenting Hamas, which, true to form, didn't waste any time to confirm to the world, that the return of the 'Occupied Territories' isn't nearly enough, that anything short of handing over the keys to Jerusalem and all of Israel's territories will not suffice:

Israel's  new government-in-waiting last night came under immediate attack from Hamas.

Hours after the Islamist group was itself confirmed as the new Palestinian government, a spokesman said that the Israeli electorate’s choice of Ehud Olmert as the new Prime Minister could escalate the conflict.

The hardline Hamas government is due to be sworn in within 48 hours after the Palestinian parliament yesterday voted 71-36 to approve Ismail Haniya’s 25-member Cabinet and Islamist programme.

Sami Abu Zohri, a Hamas spokesman, said: “The initial results show that the Israelis voted for Olmert’s plan, which is a declaration of war on the Palestinians and the liquidation of Palestinian rights [namely their right to liquidate the state of Israel in its entirety]. The occupation is pushing the area towards greater escalation.”

Mark Regev, an Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman, said: “I hope the sort of remarks we heard today help to dissolve any possible illusion that might exist as to the true character of this new Palestinian leadership.” [emphasis added]

Hear Hear!

It is hard to imagine a wider gulf between Israel's right, who believe the "Olmert plan sounds the death knell for the Zionist project of a Jewish homeland covering every inch of biblical Israel" and Hamas, who declare it as "a declaration of war on the Palestinians and the liquidation of Palestinian rights".

One thing we can be sure of, Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert would have plotted their vision for Isreal's future some time ago, certainly prior to last year's controversial evacuation of Jewish settlers, and certainly in anticipation of Hamas coming to power. A masterful strategist, Sharon's fingerprints are all over every move Olmert makes. Both men are painfully aware of the West's obsession with the 'Occupied Territories' and its bias towards the Palestinian cause (irrespective of Hamas' declared genocidal goals), and as a result, the need for Israel to constantly battle for good-will amongst its supposed allies. They knew, that nothing was likely to shore up more international good-will and support then the withdrawal from the rump West Bank and Gaza, and that a declaration to follow up with a further evacuation from the 'Occupied Territories' would firmly put the spotlight on the Palestinians.

We will now see, whether in light of Hamas' crude rejection, the West will finally recognize that the so called struggle for liberation was nothing but a smokescreen, that their true goal is nothing less than the removal of every last Jew from so-called Arab land.

As the London Times concludes: "It can only be hoped that others will now respond in kind."

Check Iris, if you need to catch up on live blogging the elections, and read up on a post-mortem reality check compiled by my friends over @ The Vital Perspective:

The precise makeup of the coalition government can only be speculated on at this point, but several things are immediately clear. There will be a centrist government and Olmert will have an opportunity to implement his vision of a secure Israel with a Jewish majority. There won't be any immediate changes, and before any measures are taken, four steps need to be undertaken:

   1. Completion of the security fence
   2. Reestablishment of deterrence on all levels with terror organizations
   3. Preparation of the Israeli public for a West Bank disengagement
   4. Marshalling the support of the international community for the establishment of Israel's final borders

Michael van der Galien has an interesting post giving us a European liberal perspective on the issues.

And now for something completely different.

Previously on ATB:

The Myth Of Palestine Part II
The Myth Of Palestine Part I
Abbas Is A Popular Front For The Liberation Of Palestine
The Lesser Of Two Evils'
A Dark Victory
Rebel With A Cause' Sharon Suffers A Stroke
Sharon Is Out And Hamas Is Still Out
Can We Get Over It Already

Comments

[Dan Collins]

Wonder what PETA would have to say about St. Michael's behavior. And aren't dragons endangered? Dreadful.

[epaminondas]

My point is that while arab rejectionism is the output of the idea of the waqf, there is nothing to talk about between jews and arabs (who happen to be in the wet bank and gaza). There is no peace possible.

Is Hamas legitimate? Absolutely. WHich means, as I have said sicne the 2002 poll which showed 58% palestinians wanted Israel to die even if it meant there would NEVER be a palestinian state, that it isthe Palestinians THEMSELVES who wish no Israel and are prepared to act in that manner, and are RESPONSIBLE for their choice.

I always thought the palestinians the most poorly led people on earth in the 20th century. But if you are familiar at all with what is taught in palestinian schools, broadcast on palestinian KIDS tv (let alone adult), glorified every day, and taught via religious authority then what is happening should not be a surprise.

To HAMAS Israel is a muslim waqf. No secular suthority can alter this eternal status. No negotiation can change that. The people of a palestine to be have cloakes themselves in that mantle. Therefore the is NOTHING to discuss at this time.

So long as jews are the 'sons of apes and pigs' as the Hadith says, and the Stone and the Tree forms the cornerstone of future desires, and religious belief with regard not just to Israel but jews, there is nothing to discuss becuase the arabs cannot alter what they have been taught god has declared.

When can something different be taught?
When the Stone and the Tree is regarded by arabs as racist hate speech and incitement to murder.
It's that simple.

[North by Northwest]

Epaminondas, oh most noble and able of all the Hellenes;-)

You've got the heading wrong, me thinks. No talk of hope in your context anywhere in A's post. Plenty of talk about Hamas' charter and intentions, so not sure why you point out as if unmentioned above? No talk of legitimacy of Hamas either, so, again not sure why mention "Hamas was voted in freely"?

"When hate and racism is no longer taught in the schools...", duh!!! And that is, umh, in response to exactly what in A's post?!?

I am scratching my head here...especially when reading "That's all there is to it." Oh really. That's all, is it? Mind telling us your equally 'easy' way to get us there or how many generations we are away from the one where no more hate is taught?

Joking and early morning sarcasm aside, I particularly loved Alexandra's title, for it perfectly summarizes the total disconnect of realities: The West's at best gullible and at worst anti-Semitic and covertly malevolent infatuation with Palestinian's propaganda of the oppressed and illusions of their quest-for-peace; Hamas' unequivocal confirmation of their genocidal intentions--I mean where are we coming to, a nation is defending its borders against those who seek its destruction, preposterous, quite preposterous...

[Mike Andreyakovich]

Filou: That proposition sounds more pessimistic every day, especially in light of such persons as Umm Nidal.

[Filou]

Alexandra,

I am doubtful that others will “respond in kind to the sound choice Israel just made”. When presented with historical opportunities to negotiate a peace agreement (e.g. Camp David II, Gaza withdrawal), Palestinians seem to always choose the path of violence.

As Golda Meir said, “Peace will come when the Arabs will love their children more than they hate us”.

[epaminondas]

Be smart Alexandra, don't hope.
Given the HAMAS charter, there is simply nothing to talk about.
Hamas was voted in freely.
If there is no regional war, that will have to do.

When hate and racism is no longer taught in the schools, we will be one generation from peace.

That's all there is too it.