Print        

What Israeli Leaders Say about Disintegration, Irreparable Gaps

Saturday, November 22, 2008

Mohammad Bakhshandeh

When Ehud Olmert, successor of Ariel Sharon told his colleagues at a cabinet session of the Zionist regime that they should give up the ambition of Greater Israel, certain circles easily passed by and overlooked this historic confession with the attitude that the Israeli prime minister has said this to justify his incapability and at the time of his political bankruptcy.

However, pundits on the Occupied Palestine situation know it by experience that Olmert’s statements have roots in important events: events that only just partially surfaced on that day in the disorganized and disturbed image of Olmert’s government. Olmert tried that day to convince the new generation of Israeli rulers that if he sustained a catastrophic defeat in the Lebanese front or failed to overcome the phenomenon of Kassam missiles in the Gaza Strip or restore calm to the Zionist settlements by overthrowing the revolutionary Hamas government, these failures were not only the result of the cabinet weakness or his wrong decisions. In fact, head of the party ruling over Tel Aviv attracted attentions to the structural crisis of the Zionist system.

Now, almost two months after that incident, the crisis inside the structure of the Zionist establishment is once again mentioned by one of the founders of the occupying government.

Shimon Perez, the veteran officer of the Arab-Israel bloody wars who has now taken over the position of presidency of the Zionist regime, announced at a ceremony commemorating Yitzhak Rabin’s assassination anniversary that differences and gaps inside the government are leading the Israeli regime to collapse.

A more interesting point is that Perez compares the current situation of the Israeli society with the situation of the communist systems of the former Soviet Union and says clearly that if the regime officials do not find a solution, Israel should expect a wave of downfall similar to those of Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia and the like.

It is clear why Perez makes this historic confession at Rabin’s assassination anniversary ceremony. The assassination tale of the former Zionist regime’s prime minister Yitzhak Rabin, who signed the first compromise pact with the late PLO Leader Yasser Arafat, has turned into a symbol of internal conflict of this regime in the history of the occupied Palestine and this incident was the bloodiest political settlement between the two spectrums of advocates of negotiation and opponents of compromise in Tel Aviv.

The interesting point is that the political current which shot Rabin (an ally of Perez) to send the idea of Arab-Israel negotiations to the gallows, has gained momentum in Tel Aviv during the past decade. The advocates of the idea that stopped Rabin’s compromise project at gunpoint, still have deep influence in the army and political parties of the ruling regime, just as the plan to form a new government by Tzipi Livini after the fall of Olmert was disturbed by this very same thought.

Yet, the statements of Perez contain warnings beyond factional clashes and power struggle among Israeli parties. These remarks should be taken as a second copy of historic confessions of Ehud Olmert and even something beyond that.

Olmert said that day that the leaders of the regime should give up the ambition and dream of greater Israel and Israel should withdraw from the West Bank, give up Zionist settlements and officially recognize Beit ul-Moqadas as the joint capital with Palestinians in order to hammer peace with Palestinians.

However, the prominent point when comparing the confessions of these two Zionist officials is that Olmert based his warnings on the foreign failures of the Zionist government and army versus Palestinian and Lebanese combatants and announced explicitly that the war machine of the regime is no more able to carry out expansionist operations. Olmert’s statements were important from the point that his government was the first victim of the historic defeat of the Israeli army against the Lebanese Resistance.  But, Perez considers the gaps and differences inside the regime as the source of danger for the survival of this regime. One manifestation of the conflict Perez has been talking about can be seen in the fact that for almost two months Tel Aviv has been engulfed in the crisis of having no government.

And after the fall of Olmert, the absence of a deep power gap has swallowed up the Israeli government and even interference of Perez and other veteran leaders has failed to solve the problem.

Therefore, the internal disputes of the Israeli government seem to be that at present Kadima Party led by Livini has reached an impasse in attracting support of parties like the Labor Party led by Ehud Barak and religious party of Shas in forming a government.

On the other hand, the Likud Party is not ready to cooperate due to its opposition with the viewpoints of Kadima leaders on compromise with Arab and Palestinian sides.

Perez, however, warns of occurrence of a catastrophe by reminding the era of the former Soviet Union’s satellite countries. He describes conditions that no parts of the political, economic and social affairs of the occupied Palestine are going to improve. From political point of view, the first generation of the regime leaders is on the verge of extinction. Sharon as the symbol of this generation is in coma and Perez has lost his previous influence and the torn apart system of Israel is surrounded by management and political leadership crisis in its true sense.

This crisis and the state of indecision have overshadowed the army of the regime after the government. It would suffice to look at the resignations and dismissals after the Vinograd Commission report. On the one hand, most projects launched by the Army in Gaza or Ramallah after the defeat against Lebanese resistance have backfired to the extent that the media published in Tel Aviv have written repeatedly that the military balance inside the occupied Palestinian borders is not to the interest of Israel.

In recent days, these media have been relating the warnings of Perez with a harsher tone to the rulers of the regime that if the West too diminishes its support for Israel then the regime’s army would not have any power element to administer the broad war fronts.

The regime’s effective divisions are not limited to the status of the army or the power struggle among the parties. As many researchers in the Middle East have stressed the political system in Israel in its 60th year is faced with a set of irreparable conflicts. What has shaken the Israeli establishment and community is not manifested in the statements of Perez but in opinion polls carried out by Jewish institutes to the effect that the residents of the occupied land have lost their self-confidence. According to these polls, Israeli citizens are totally disappointed to the extent that after the 33-day war with the Hizbollah, Isareli youth are reluctant to volunteer for participation in war.

Under such an atmosphere, all the three rifts within the Israeli society which had remained unnoticeable until now, have surfaced:

•    The ethnic rift between Arabs and Jews residing on  the two sides of Beitul Moqaddas, which has now spread even to the Knesset

•    The class hiatus of the two spectrums of Jewish immigrants and settlers, particularly poor immigrants from the east, with tribes of European origin

•    The division of Jewish hardliners and religious persons and rabbis who want to ideologize the society with secular youth who have no commitment to the propaganda values of Jewish fathers

Recalling a theory by a famous American linguist and critic after some presence in Lebanon and the Middle East would perhaps clarify the dimension of the crisis Israel is faced with. Noam Chomsky, in a book he wrote after conducting a research visit to the Middle East, says the belligerent nature of Israel would eventually lead to its collapse. Chomsky recalls his writing a few decades earlier that those who regard themselves advocates of Israel are in fact supporting the moral decay and possible eventual disintegration of the regime. The Israeli leaders by rejecting all the proposals and recommendations of Islamic states and world public opinion refused to stop their expansionist policies and any system insisting on such inhuman logic is doomed.

Source: http://www.iran-newspaper.com/

طراحی و توسعه آگاه‌سیستم