The Vision of Shaul

Yisrael Harel
Haaretz
12 November 09

According to Shaul Mofaz, only an Israeli peace plan will prevent terrorism (and we have given the Palestinians a permanent exemption from needing to present plans of their own). After all, everyone knows that the outbreak of the longest and cruelest period of terror ever to hit Israel (lasting about 10 years) stemmed from the absence of the Oslo initiative (and the subsequent Oslo agreement). Similarly, the terror of rockets on the western Negev stemmed from the absence of the disengagement plan (and its subsequent implementation).

Since today, due to the absence of a plan, relative quiet prevails in the south, it is necessary to again take the initiative. Only another plan will extricate the people of Israel from the unfamiliar, abnormal tranquillity they have had to contend with since the army's Operation Cast Lead in Gaza.

Mofaz's diplomatic plan is a stew of rehashed ideas, most of which are either irrelevant or will never be implemented, that various people have tossed into the political debate in recent years. The reason the diplomatic "meditations" of the chairman of the organization of truthful politicians even deserves consideration stems from the positive, sometimes even enthusiastic, response with which the initiative has been received.

Only in Israel could a former chief of staff who failed both ethically and operationally in a long war on terror, and then became a hapless defense minister (who predicted that the disengagement would bring an end to the Qassam rockets, and then contended with such impressive success with the thousands of missiles of "peace and quiet" that were fired at Negev residents), be taken seriously by the public rather than being seen as a political adventurer. Only in Israel could a politician who cheated his party and his voters (saying that Likud was his home and then defecting to Kadima) almost win the leadership of another major party and then vie for the prime minister's crown ("as prime minister, I will have the right to implement the plan").

The torchbearers of Mofaz's prophetic vision (who, in their prior incarnations, embraced the visions of eminent seers like Ariel Sharon, Ehud Olmert, Ehud Barak and others) tell the public that well-known experts reinforced his sense of urgency (we need the courage to change before disaster strikes) about coming out with a "peace plan." The position papers from which his plan derives were prepared by think tanks. It would be interesting to know who those think tanks are - because think tanks worthy of the name would make their case with facts and figures and show the prime ministerial aspirant that suicide bombers and Qassam rockets exploded in our midst in the wake of "peace plans," not because of their absence.

There is almost no important detail in Mofaz's innovative plan that has not been discussed in the past with the Palestinians and rejected out of hand. Genuine research would have revealed that. Such research would also have discovered that in response to every one of the "plans" conceived in Israel with the goal of avoiding "diplomatic stalemate" (plans whose guiding principle always involved concessions on Israel's part), the Palestinians only hardened their stance. Instead of seeing these plans as a demonstration of Israel's sincere desire for peace, they viewed them, and with justification, as a product of weakness.

More than once, the Palestinians have reacted to these plans with outbursts of lethal terror. And why should they respond to them in any other way, when they know that rejecting these plans, and certainly if coupled with violence, will lay the groundwork for the next concession-filled plan, including the absurd idea (which Mofaz includes in his plan) of giving the Palestinians territory within the Green Line?

Judging by the reception Mofaz's plan has won, those who didn't want him as chairman of the Kadima party could get him in the future as prime minister. Then Israel, not America, would be known as the land of unlimited opportunity, at least for politicians without backbone. But given the stringent demands the public makes of its leaders - integrity, vision, adherence to goals, leadership skills and strategic understanding - actually, why not Mofaz?
.

The Golden Rule and Democratic Process

By Moshe Feiglin
15 Av 5769



The main excuse that the soldiers who expelled their brothers from their homes in Gush Katif used to justify their actions was that if they would not carry out their orders, Israel's democracy would collapse, it would be impossible for the government to govern and the state would essentially crumble away. So it made no difference whether the soldier agreed with his expulsion orders or not. He was brainwashed to believe that not carrying them out would guarantee destruction on an even greater scale.

Obviously, the factor that completely destroyed public faith in Israel's democratic process was the political unscrupulousness that paved the way for the destruction of the Land. Entire books can be written about the callous scorn for the law and democratic process emblematic of the way that the Oslo Accords became law in Israel. Yossi Beilin, Shimon Peres, Prof. Hirschfeld, Dr. Pundak and the entire Oslo pack deserve to be behind bars for many years to come.

There used to be a basic law in Israel that prohibited a prime minister from appointing more than 18 ministers to his government. But a short while after Oslo (in the elections of 1999), Ehud Barak was elected and revised the law to fit his political needs. "That is the price of peace," his spin doctors explained. "If we want to see progress in the peace process, we have to pay the price of more ministers for all the parties in the coalition." The media – democracy's "watchdog" – went along with the farce. After all, proper democratic process and public faith in Israel's democratic political system may be important – but for destruction of the Land ("peace") those values can surely be sacrificed.

Sharon followed in Barak's footsteps. His government also boasted more than 18 ministers. He destroyed Gush Katif with all sorts of blatant manipulations. The Eviction Compensation Law that passed the Knesset would not have made it past the average student council. It entirely contradicts all the civil rights that former Chief Justice Aharon Barak worked so hard to legislate. But there is one golden rule that overrides all others: It is permissible to change the law as necessary as long as it promotes the Left's agenda. That rule triumphed in Gush Katif.

It is obvious that no self-respecting court would have authorized Netanyahu to change the rules of the game in the middle of the Likud primaries. But the Golden Rule prevailed. Netanyahu needed to rid himself of the Feiglin trouble and to pave the way to destroy the Land of Israel by means of the votes of the Right. When Netanyahu had me demoted to the 36th slot and Michael Ratzon appealed to the Supreme Court against the move (that also demoted him to an unrealistic slot on the roster), the Supreme Court could not manage to comprehend what the District court and the citizens of Israel clearly understood. The Supreme Court rejected Ratzon's appeal. The general rule is that the Supreme Court will only change the decision of the District Court in extreme cases. It seems that the fact that Moshe Feiglin was legally elected to a high place on the Likud roster was just such an extreme case.

Netanyahu has gotten used to manipulating the law and the democratic process for his political purposes. His latest breach of democratic process is the Mofaz Law, which makes it easier to split Knesset factions and is a prelude to the defection of Kadimah MKs to the Likud and the eventual destruction of settlements, G-d forbid. The leftist opposition MKs put on a good show of being shocked by the rude violation of democratic process that this law exemplifies. But in truth, it was no more than a show. The Golden Rule concept was born to feed the insatiable Oslo monster. Changing the law to foster the destruction of settlements and settlers is an old leftist trick.

No matter. Everybody knows that the hilltop youth and the settlers are the real danger to democracy.
.