Israel's Right Wing in Power

by Dr. Abdul-Sattar Kassem

Arab regimes and some Western states with an interest in the success of the negotiating process currently under way in the region are apprehensive about the rise to power of the right, or of religious parties, on either side, because of their ideological positions toward the ongoing conflict. Political circles have trembled before — at Netanyahu’s victory to head the Israeli government in the last decade of the past century, and at Sharon’s victory several years later. They also trembled when Hamas won the Palestinian legislative elections, and placed it under siege, without exempting the Palestinian people.

There is concern now that Netanyahu and his partners will further complicate a negotiating process that is already complicated, and that they will work to implement policies that could do away with the single most important idea in the whole process: the idea of two states for two peoples. This would draw the region into a new vortex, adding to the vortexes already under way, after which hopes would shrink, expectations would recede, and the clang of weapons would rise above the cooing of doves.

Netanyahu’s Thinking

Netanyahu, in his writings — foremost among them his book A Place Under the Sun — has set out what he believes, and I mention here some of the ideas most relevant to our subject today. Netanyahu believes that the Land of Israel must be that which the World Zionist Organization demanded before the League of Nations, which includes Mandatory Palestine, the strip west of Transjordan, part of southwestern Greater Syria, and southern Lebanon. He says that the land on which Israel was established in 1948 amounts to only 15% of the territory demanded. But because of political circumstances he tells the Arabs that the West Bank and Gaza amount to only 5% of the land, and that they should not begrudge Israel’s annexation of this area, since they had already stolen 80% of the land of Israel under the terms of the Mandate.

As for the population, Netanyahu believes that the Palestinian Arabs are latecomers upon the Holy Land, who took charge of its affairs during the absence of its rightful people, the Jews, and that now the Palestinians must leave because the Jews have returned. He believes what the Torah relates about the necessity of purifying the Holy Land of those it describes as impure, who continually anger the Lord. He favors the expulsion of the Palestinians, whether those present in the land occupied in ‘48 or that occupied in ‘67.

But political circumstances do not allow him to say such things openly now, and we are bound to hear from him phrases that align with the idea of negotiation and peaceful solutions, for the sake of appeasement and avoiding provocation. But we expect to see actions that, in the end, serve his goals and the goals of those he allies with in the governing coalition. It is important to note, however, that Netanyahu’s allies among the purely religious parties are more extreme than he is, and some of them openly espouse forced transfer. He may well try to take measures that allow him to remain prime minister without undermining his ability to deal with the world, while carrying out what he wants smoothly and with the least possible noise.

A Previous Experience

Netanyahu has previously held the post of Israeli prime minister, and before that, during his election campaign, he had declared that he did not agree with the agreements concluded with the PLO, and said that he would not meet with Arafat, nor sign agreements with him. Yet he telephoned Arafat directly after forming his government, later sat down with him, and signed the Hebron Agreement with him. His government continued to deal with the Palestinian Authority just as the governments led by the Labor Party had done, and contacts continued over various civil and security matters.

His government continued to carry out the same familiar aggressive measures against the Palestinian people, without any clear distinction — or any distinction of significant statistical value — from what previous governments had done. Land confiscation continued, as did settlement construction, arrests, the erection of checkpoints, the restriction of livelihoods, the uprooting of trees, and the demolition of homes. Israel’s security and military policy continued at the same pace as before, and policies of civil restriction remained in force as well. The Labor Party had itself previously pointed out publicly, challenging the Likud, that it (the Labor Party) had expanded the settlements more than the Likud had.

What Will the Expected Israeli Government Do

There are a number of issues that will occupy the mind of the coming government, and a number of expected measures that will occupy the minds of many Arab regimes and Western states, and this state of anticipation will persist for as long as this government holds the reins. I list the following among these issues:

First: Netanyahu is now trying, during the process of forming the coalition, to ease as much as possible the pressure of the religious parties upon himself by bringing in coalition partners from the Labor and Kadima parties. It is true that Netanyahu agrees a great deal with Yisrael Beiteinu and with the religious parties, but he certainly does not prefer to remain a captive of these parties, and will try to broaden his coalition in a way that places checks on the appetites of the religious. For this reason he met repeatedly with the leading figures of Labor and Kadima, and in the end secured Labor’s agreement to join.

Second: Israel’s greatest concern is Iran, and Netanyahu will work to prepare for an attack on its nuclear facilities, and to press the United States to help or to take part. Naturally he will focus on the likely Iranian response and the military precautions Israel must take should what is possible actually occur. The United States will try to restrain Israel from carrying out a military operation against Iran, given the predicaments and problems it is already suffering, but the nuclear issue will remain high on the list of priorities.

Third: Netanyahu will pay lip service to the two-state solution, but he will follow the same path as those Israelis and Americans who came before him in treating the Palestinian cause as a problem of individuals searching for a loaf of bread, rather than the problem of a people insisting on a homeland. There are those now lamenting their fate on the assumption that Netanyahu does not believe in the two-state solution, and that he will spoil the entire negotiating process and strip it of any meaning or substance. Practically speaking, this lament is unfounded, because the two-state solution was never actually taking shape, and there was never any seriousness at all about reaching it, neither on the part of the Arabs, nor on the part of the Americans, nor Westerners in general.

To this day, no one on the international stage has defined what establishing the Palestinian state actually means; they speak of the matter in loose, general terms without specifics. What is this state? Will it be sovereign? Will it have an army, and open borders with the Arab countries? Will it have free diplomatic representation? All we have understood so far, from the practical measures carried out on the ground, is that Israel, together with America, is working to establish a Palestinian entity that functions solely as a security agent for Israel, in exchange for a loaf of bread. We have observed, over the preceding years, that Israel focuses only on offering conveniences in the daily life of the Palestinian people in exchange for the security duties required of the Palestinian Authority. Naturally, Israel continually complicates daily life so that it remains the focus of negotiation instead of the Palestinian people’s legitimate and lawful national rights. I believe Netanyahu will continue at the very same pace.

Fourth: financial pressure on the Palestinian Authority will continue, in order to keep it performing its security duties, and the siege on the Gaza Strip will continue, to soften Hamas’s position on the question of recognizing Israel. The Western and Arab states will remain Israel’s partners in this task.

Fifth: Netanyahu will work to expand the settlements with a degree of insolence and bravado. Here he will clash with the United States, but it will be a clash of loved ones, not a clash of adversaries. The new American administration needs a kind of relaxation regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict, given its many troubles at home and abroad, and it is concerned not to further embarrass the Arab regimes that orbit within its sphere. For this reason, the two states may well find themselves in a situation similar to the one that arose during Shamir’s premiership, when America refused, for a time, to provide financial guarantees to Israel. But one should not be excessively optimistic about America’s position, because it does not, in fact, support the establishment of a genuine Palestinian state, and fears Palestinian sovereignty over even a single inch of the land of Palestine. The Americans spin a soft thread with the Palestinians for the purpose of gaining time until the Palestinian people are fully subdued to the interests of particular individuals — that is, if they can.

Conclusion

Preoccupation with the Israeli and American elections, and with the administrations that may result from them, is one of the crude manifestations of Arab and Palestinian impotence. We have been waiting for decades for the results of these elections, hoping they will produce someone who will solve our problems for us. Historically, whoever waits for someone else to solve his problems does not actually want those problems solved; he merely remains attached to that other party as a justification for his own incapacity and helplessness. It is true that outside powers have influence, but the first cause of defeat or victory, success or failure, progress or decline, is myself — or my own inner capacities, which I deploy according to a scientific methodology, scientific thinking, and precise application. My assessment is that as long as we keep searching for a penny in someone else’s pocket, we will remain slaves to that penny.

The solution for confronting Netanyahu is to work toward self-reliance. This is not an easy matter, but we must try, for the higher the degree of our own freedom rises, the more Netanyahu’s freedom to act successfully against us will shrink.

Source: Translated from the original Arabic, “يمين إسرائيل في الحكم” by Dr. Abdul-Sattar Kassem.