The Jerusalem Report Magazine: Columnists : Columnists Article

Click for Contents

Click here to subscribe to The Jerusalem Report

P.O. Box 1805,Jerusalem 91017
Tel. 972-2-531-5440,
Fax: 972-2-537-9489
Advertising Fax:
972-2-531-5425,
Email Editorial: [email protected]
Subscriptions: [email protected]
Web site: http://www.jrep.com

Hirsh Goodman: The Disengagement Party

It is perhaps better that the Likud membership did not vote for pulling out of Gaza

Ariel Sharon list his bid to have the Likud membership endorse his plan to unilaterally withdraw from Gaza and a few outlying settlements on the West Bank. In a decision that cost him dearly and makes a mockery of democratic principle, he agreed to have the issue decided only by registered Likud voters, about half of whom turned up to vote, leaving the country�s immediate future in the hands of just over 2 per cent of the general electorate.

Sharon lost, but not all is lost. On reflection, it is perhaps better for the cause of disengagement that the Likud membership did not vote for pulling out of Gaza. Had they done so, the right wing, the settlers, the Uzi Landaus and Natan Sharanskys and other Likud ministers who fought Sharon tooth-and-nail, would never have accepted the decision as legitimate. They would, with the same vocal tenacity they displayed in getting the Likud rank-and-file to vote against the pullback, have claimed that a minority cannot decide the fate of the majority, that it was undemocratic, unconstitutional and unfair. They would have taken to the barricades and claimed, correctly, that one party's membership has no right to make fateful decisions for an entire nation. The illegitimacy of the decision would allow them to legitimately resist evacuation and would give them the support of people, like myself, who do not agree with them ideologically.

This is not an issue for one party's membership to decide. We have a Knesset and live by rule of law. Sharon tried to pervert normative democratic procedure, lost and justly so.

But now it is time to move on, and what the Sharon maneuver has brought to the fore and tangibly put on the table in a very distinct way is that the country is clearly divided into two camps over what to do with a commonly perceived problem : the lack of a Palestinian partner for negotiations. Do we consolidate, not risk losing a Jewish majority, not jeopardize the country�s democratic values and minimize security risks by building a fence, among other things? Or do we continue with the status quo until either a miracle happens or Israel ceases to be a Jewish democratic state?

Every single poll taken gives those wanting to consolidate a significant majority, somewhere over 65 per cent in most cases. These people cross party lines. Some voted for Shinui, others are central characters in the historic Likud like Dan Meridor and Absorption Minister Tzipi Livni, and others come from the classic Left. They include peaceniks from the kibbutz movement and industrialists who see the economic benefits of consolidation and stability, generals who understand the need for consolidation and people who have no experience in strategy but do not want to do any more reserve duty in Gaza - or Hebron, for that matter.

What this unified but diverse group needs is leadership and a new political framework before it can express itself. Given the country's bad past experience with new centrist parties, it would be healthiest for all if both that leadership and that framework would emerge from the existing Knesset, without new elections. This theoretically could be achieved by those in the Likud who support Sharon's idea, Labor, Shinui, elements of the National Religious Party and the former Meretz, now called Yahad, getting together on a disengagement platform that would posit that Israel withdraw from Gaza and certain settlements on the West Bank that are too costly to defend. Each of the parties may have a disparate view on the final settlement, if and when the opportunity for one comes up, but what they agree on is that in the interim Israel has to consolidate behind logical borders. Fewer than 8,000 Jews living on one-third of the land of Gaza, with its population of 1.2 million, makes no sense anymore and, apparently, that's what most Israelis now believe.

Sharon did a great service by putting the issue firmly before the country. Unfortunately, he chose the wrong audience to play it to. Knowing Sharon, he will not give up on the idea. The big question before him is how to win and on what battlefield. He should take on the task of building the Disengagement Party from within the current Knesset, without subjecting the country to an unnecessary election at this time, and get the job done. In the first round, the other side won, but the idea was too good, and has too much support, to be left on the shelf.