Israeli politics

Can the doves take off again?


See article

Readers' comments



Some suggested Parties to vote for.
1 Arabs don't get cross when you steal their land.
2 Americans can be persuaded to believe Exodus.
3 Money around Senator elections works wonders.
4 Foreign correspondents never see sniper rifles
5 Here is a photo of our new friendly bulldozer.
These need acronyms, of course, and translation into Arabic.

Reluctant Polluter

@ newmansm:








Jehuda, what Rabin offered, just like all other Israeli politicians ever offered, was not a sovereign Palestinian state, which is the minimum any self-respecting human being would accept. What they offered was a bantustan.

And the most tragic of it is that, eventually, Palestinians accepted all these humiliating demands. Al Jazeera has just begun publishing a formidable trove of secret papers, documenting in detail the negotiations between Israel and Palestine during the Annapolis process. Here are some of their highlights:

"The Palestinian Authority proposed an unprecedented land swap to the Israeli government, offering to annex virtually all of the illegal Israeli settlements in East Jerusalem.

Not only did the Israeli government offer no concessions in return, but – as The Palestine Papers now reveal – it responded with an even more aggressive land swap: Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert wanted to annex more than 10% of the West Bank (including the major settlements in Ma’ale Adumim, Ariel and elsewhere), in exchange for sparsely-populated farmland along the Gaza Strip and the West Bank."


"The Palestine Papers, then, underscore the seeming impossibility of resolving the status of settlements like Ma’ale Adumim and Ariel: Palestinian negotiators cannot accept them, and Israeli negotiators cannot dismantle them.

There is a third option, which Palestinian negotiators raised in several meetings: those Jewish settlements could be allowed to remain as part of the future Palestinian state. Ahmed Qurei made that suggestion to Tzipi Livni several times in 2008, including this exchange in June:

Qurei: Perhaps Ma’ale Adumim will remain under Palestinian sovereignty, and it could be a model for cooperation and coexistence.

Livni: The matter is not simply giving a passport to settlers.

The Israeli foreign minister refused to entertain the idea. “You know this is not realistic,” she told Qurei in May.

Asked about Qurei’s offer earlier this month, residents in Ma’ale Adumim reacted with a mix of laughter and disbelief. Some wrote it off as a political impossibility; others worried about their safety, claiming that they would be killed.

There is, in other words, seemingly no mutually acceptable policy for Ma’ale Adumim, Ariel, and other major West Bank settlements within a two-state solution – a fact the Bush administration was willing to acknowledge in July 2008.

Rice: I don’t think that any Israeli leader is going to cede Ma’ale Adumim.

Qurei: Or any Palestinian leader.

Rice: Then you won’t have a state!"

Jehuda Ben-Israel


Jehuda Ben-Israel

Let us not forget, the late Mr. Yitzhaq Rabin, Israel's former prime minister and the chairman of Labour, and a man dubbed worldwide as the Prince of Peace outlined the contour of a future Palestinian state:

1) Jerusalem will remain united under Israeli sovereignty

2) Major settlement blocs will be incorporated into sovereign Israel

3) The Jordan Valley must be viewed in the widest sense of the term, and it will remain under Israel's rule

4) A future Palestinian state will not be a regular state, e.g. it will be demilitarized, Israel will control its airspace as well as its border passes - land, sea and air.

Mr. Rabin, a leftist, was indeed a man of peace, one who combined his desire to achieve an accommodation of peaceful coexistence between Arab and Jew, between the Muslim-Arab world, local and regional, with the nation-state of the Jewish people, Israel. His thinking, unlike that part of Labor that has not evaporated yet, however, was pragmatic and patriotic.

Rabin, a leftist, was in that sense not unlike Mr. Binjamin Netanjahu today who hopes to achieve an accommodation of peaceful coexistence with the Arabs, but not at Israel's security expense and its national and security vital needs.


BilboBilbo wrote:
Jan 20th 2011 7:57 GMT
"Interesting to note that the Economist chose not to publish an article about the fall of the Lebanese government by the hands of Hezbollah.
I guess that is less important than a party split in Israel."

Hmm, that is interesting. Oh, wait:

"The resignation of 11 ministers in the 30-member cabinet prompted the collapse."

Well I guess you were wrong. I guess it's only fair considering all the attention it got, seeing as how there were only 4 comments on it.

Wait a second...

The first commenter on that report was none other than BilboBilbo himself.





Al Redwood




jouris - old account

I suspect that what would make the biggest shift in Israeli politics and opinion would be a clear indication that American patience is starting to run out. Not just statements from government officials, but something a bit more noticeable. Suppose a resolution came up in the UN Security Council condemning Israel for the settlements (but including nothing else) . . . and instead of vetoing it as usual the United States either abstained or voted Aye. Which, actually, would be in line with expressed US foreign policy.

Such a resolution, in itself, would have no practical effect. But I think the impact on Israeli public opinion and politics would be huge.


Who cares? If the Europeans, who are lined up behind the Israelis or cowed by the US to support the Israelis, want to dip their hands into yet another war, then they should just sit on their hands and watch as events unfold out of control. EIther way there is not much anyone in the West can do. The recent democratic upheavals among the Muslims in the Middle East will do for Israel. They democratically come to settle scores. Much better that way.


Despite the Economists dire wish to bring post-zionists to power, it will simply not happen. Once more the economists fails to understand Israeli politics which are not driven by the biased western media accounts, but by the reality in Israel. The left has been thoroughly discreted because it supported the oslo terror process, which brought more than 1,000 civilians to their deaths.

More recently however, the Israeli left simply wishes to ignore the reality that the peace porcess has in fact not gone anywhere entirely becuase of palestinian intrasigence. Whereas Israel made repaeated concessions in camp david, taba, and during Olmert-Livni government the Palestians failed to recipricate even an inch of ground and adhede to their maximalist positions.

Why have not the Palestinians given up on the right of return, which everyone (including the economimst) knows is simply a non-starter? Why have they continued to nametheir public squares after terrorists (and to support a militant vision of Saladinism)? Why have they continued to ignore basic facts of history by denying the very deep Jewish history/prescense in the land of Israel (denying Rachel's Tomb, the Tomb of the Patriachs and the most egregiously the Temple Mount)?

Until the Israel far left (and the EU) has answer's to these troubling questions it will continue to be viewed by the vast majority of Israelis and a quisling party, ready to serve European governments (and even Arab governments) who support and finance them (through NGOs). The solution of the Israeli left/EU to blame the Israeli Likud government for the failure of a real peace without mentioning the Pals, only works to further erode their support in the Israeli electorate as a loony fringe that serves foreign interests.

As for Ehud Barak, despite an intesive media campaign agaist him, he will likely receive more votes in the next election the far left Meretz party. Even in the Israeli media, the ploy by Barak has been viewed as a very sharp move, single-handedly pushing the Livni's Kadima party into a deep chasm of post-zionism, while regaining the traditional support of Zionist left outside of trendy Tel Aviv.

What about Bob

Palestinians are not monolithic and thus large segments of their population doesn't want peace, but to destroy Israel and the Jews, even though in Koran recognizes that the Jews should be living there.

Kinda hard to have peace when the other side will only accept it after they have killed everyone.

Israelis don't want peace. It is to their benefit to keep up the mirage of wanting peace to keep stupid Westerners appeased but the status quo or even a two state solution means Israel wins, because any Palestinian state is going to be a welfare state dependent up on aid and most likely Israel, as Israeal will have all the productive lands and water sources.

In fact a two state solution will even be better for Israel, since they can lay blame on it for failure to control the radicals and thus do whatever they want, even excluding Palestinians.

so basically the Palestinian state, if it every really comes into existence, is going to be a pure puppet/vassal state, but everyone will recognize it for such, thus hostilities will not end.

peace will not come about until one side or both sides are really tired of the situation, and to be honest, this is not going to happen because groups like hamas are in control. But Israel is for the most part very safe and secure as they have expelled almost all the non-citizens and have setup walls/fences/barriers to separate themselves from the incapable currupt palestinians.


I want the glistening dove to at least blast off away from tensions and violence. Mr Benyamin Netanyahu should review his stance over Palestine. The era of scaremongering about Palestinian gruesome terrorist attacks should slowly usher to a more peaceful time.

Len S

I am still waiting for an article on Israel that is fair and balanced. You write about the Palestinian as if they followed Gandhi's philosopy. The reality is that the Palestinian Authority still publishes Anti-semetic articles and claims against all historical evidence going back to Josephus that the western wall is not from Harrods temple. They still glorify muderers of civilians as heros and honor them. They have made no effort to educate their children that the Jews are an indiginous people to Israel for well over two millinium and not imperialist settlers.
Hamas the rulers of Gaza philosopy is rooted in the Muslim Brotherhood and is a vile anti-semitic group. I keep waiting for you to turn your spotlight on the Palestinians with the same intensity you have done with Israel. Finally I truly wish o see the Palesinian people have a state of ther own that wants to live in peace and harmony with Israel


This recent split in Israel's Labour party may probably give the left a new lease of life. However, this lease may be so thin and slim that I see no genuine advancement of a peace process in the coming weeks. The political situation is too entangled and fraught with antithetical forces that try to win over each other that we might not glimpse at any improvements in a foreseeable future. I'd like to witness a deux ex machina -surely not America- descending in the region and donning the garb of holier-than-thou lauding peace and morphing mentalities in a bid to sort out this vast muddle.


I really hope that the split in the Labour party will shift mentalities in Israel. the Palestinian predicament is increasingly unsustainable. The stability is to be gained incrementally and I hope rather peacefully. Efforts have to come from both sides of the frontier.

However, in 2010, there was an extended 6-month moratorium over settlements implemented by the Israeli government in order to appease Palestinians heating plight. They spurned yet another negotiation process, though the colonialism march was to a standstill. They overtly shunned any talks to set forth the manifold issues and thrash them out alongside Israelis. Oddly, Palestinians did not snap up the occasion to secede and claim independence this time. Do they concretely gear up for a self-government experience ? Do they fret about the fallout of the secession or the yoke exerted by the Hamas ? As we cannot perceive the grounds of their chronic denial and naysaying gait, we don't really have the substance to comprehend Palestinian mindset. Whether they purport to be the fiercest claimant for independence or they fare a huge shutdown and "national" retrenchment, its guesswork knowing precisely what the Palestinians really want. In this context of doubt and hesitation, its time of procrastination. In this case, the last-ditch effort to hasten a split has to come from Israel rather than Palestine. The American stomping presence in the region didn't really make doves fluttering faster. Their presence doesn't bring much of recomfort in Israel nor in Palestine. Obama-led talks were a cruel loss of time last year. Would the hegemonic tough cop the world fail to do his usual job this time ?


Although doves are coming from the Labor party ramps, still hawks hold sway in Israel and tower above the Palestinians. If hawks eventually hit the trail, another wave of hawkish heirs will succeed steadfastly and keep up the yoke installed by their predecessors.



Products and events


Take our weekly news quiz to stay on top of the headlines

