A leftist's work is never done
Election results show public fed up with Arabs, ready for two-state solution
Following an election that flew in the face of the conventional wisdom regarding Israeli behavior at the polls, there is no escaping the need to take a good look at the most prominent trends – particularly the confidence expressed in the eclectic Kadima, the comeback of Lieberman's Israel Our Home, and the meteoric rise of the one-dimensional Pensioners Party – and consider what they say about Israeli society and where it is heading.
True, Kadima fell short of the sweeping victory predicted by early polls, but 29 Knesset seats is no small achievement for a party born out of Sharon's disgust with the Likud rebels, the trouncing of Peres' ego by Amir Peretz, and the calculations of a host of others who realized that their best chance of holding on to their seats was to turn their backs on their “homies” and hook up with the new-old kid in town.
The public has indeed had its say – and this includes both those who chose to say something at the polls as well as those who sent a message by turning their backs on the process. The big question now is what did they tell us.
Many of my colleagues on the left claim that the public told us it is fed up with the occupation and ready to accept a two-state solution, even if it means the division of Jerusalem. In other words, they believe that the public has finally accepted what the left has been saying for years but that this didn't translate into votes because its agenda was "stolen" by the center.
A closer examination of the election results yields a very different conclusion. The public has shown us that it is fed up with the Arabs and ready to accept a two-state solution even if it means placing the Palestinians behind a concrete barrier so that we won't even have to see them anymore.
'Arabfrei' Jewish state
There are many signs that the public mood is one of disaffection and not conciliation. One of these is the terminology used by Sharon and Olmert, his heir, to convince the public that the time has come to reduce – though not relinquish -- Israel's hold on the Palestinian territories. Sharon sold the idea of disengagement, and Olmert is marketing convergence. The commonality in the two notions is that of isolationism, with the first calling for segregation and the second for circling the wagons.
Another is the unbearable lightness with which Avigdor Lieberman's idea of transfer-lite through exchanges of population has become a legitimate part of the public discourse despite the fact that its implementation would violate international law and defy the moral standards of any civilized country. The concept of a homogeneous Jewish state that is Arabfrei won the support of more than 280,000 Israelis who granted racism a firm foothold in the 17th Knesset.
And then there are the almost 200,000 Israelis who thought they could afford the luxury of voting for a party that prides itself on having no position on the Arab-Israeli conflict. Not that the welfare of the elderly is not a worthy cause, but let's not forget that the issue is featured in the platforms of every major party along with other items of national concern. That so many chose to take a stand on only the narrowest of issues is yet one more sign that we are sinking into national autism.
Those on the left who think the time has come for integration with the center would do well to take note of these dangers and realize that their work is far from done.
Susie Becher is a member of the national executive of Meretz-Yahad
