No government without realignment

This isn't the time for new dramas that would split the nation, and besides, says Olmert, the prime minister is supposed to manage the country – who said this agenda isn't serious enough?

Olmert's close associate, journalist Dan Margalit who in the past did not hide his support for realignment, went even further – he is now convinced the mandate given the government has expired, and if they still want to go for it, they must call for elections first.

You know what? It sounds convincing. But why stop here? Kadima promised us a little more compassion, Peretz promised not even one poor child in the country, and Shas must have also promised something to someone. But Nasrallah forced a war on us – so we must again call for elections.

A long school day? Warm meals at schools? A stronger police? Cleaner streets? No way, before we hit the polls again. Sounds exaggerated? Maybe. But when we stop and think, using our mind and not our gut, the connection between the last war and the realignment plan is no less coincidental.

Demographic bomb still ticking

Because what is the realignment plan after all? It means evacuating the vast majority of settlements beyond the Green Line, keeping most settlers in the large blocs, and withdrawing from most of the West Bank. "An agreement is preferable," Olmert told us, "but we won't wait for them forever – if no partner is found on the other side, we'll take our fate into our own hands."

The argument was never philanthropic: The demographic bomb is ticking, the aspiration for a Jewish majority within defensible borders, the danger to democracy and morality in the shadow of the ongoing occupation – all those were the basis for the idea, and brought Kadima, a fluffy pudding-like party who enlisted candidates from all over the place, to power.

If the unilateral concept indeed collapsed, it collapsed after the Gaza and northern West Bank disengagement, and with no relation to Nasrallah and his missiles. If the exit from Gaza failed, this happened back with the first Qassam rocket attack, and certainly with the tunnel dug under the fence and used to smuggle abducted IDF soldier Gilad Shalit.

Yet Olmert did not eulogize the grand plan back then. After all, on the eve of the war he was still traveling through world capitals and attempting to market it, and at the height of fighting he declared – in an unprecedented miserable timing – that the victory will boost realignment.

So what changed since then? What led him to admit to his ministers that realignment has died and tell his interviewers that a prime minister who manages and rehabilitates is good enough? 

'No vacuum in this conflict'

Why do we actually need to shelve the plan? Because Hizbullah abducted soldiers? Because we embarked on a just yet rash war and it didn't quite work out for us? Because the government disappeared, the IDF Home Front Command evaporated, and the north was abandoned? After all, all those things happened alongside our demographic, moral problem in the Territories, not instead of it.

And besides, since when does this country have "time to rest"? Will the Palestinians wait for us to regain our composure? Will the world give us one week of grace? There, right now we already see international initiatives springing up like mushrooms after the rain:

The Saudis are back, Blair vows to dedicate the remainder of his tenure to this bleeding region, the Egyptians are already here, and UNIFIL's spokesman in Lebanon is already setting his sights on the Territories.

Just like Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni told Nahum Barnea in Yedioth Ahronoth's weekend edition, "When we don't initiate solutions, the world comes up with its own solutions. As a lawyer I always preferred to send the contract I drafted to the other side, rather than wait for a contract drafted by someone else."

But the world is not the only impatient party. It's enough to be present in two living-room conversations and another Shabbat dinner to realize that the national mood has hit the floor.

Outgoing Supreme Court President Aharon Barak said it during his farewell ceremony. It's also the war, and also the fear of Ahmadinejad's doomsday, but most of all it's the feeling of losing our way, of beating around the bush, and of darkness at the end of the tunnel.

True, we're feeling hurt and cheated, ready to break the rules of the game, after we "gave back land, tore up the nation, and got Qassam rockets in return." Yet the sense of being stuck in place and the absence of a plan that aims to extract us out of the mud are even more difficult for us. This was the case at the height of the Intifada, when the Geneva initiative, Nusseibeh-Ayalon document, and Saudi initiative emerged.

"There's no vacuum in this conflict," Livni said. Sharon realized this when he hit a nadir in the polls – and announced the disengagement.

Even if the unilateral concept collapsed, the need to divide the country still exists. Demography continues to tick, our control over another people is continuing to corrupt, and the army continues to perform police missions in the Territories instead of preparing to storm fortified targets.

And it's difficult to hear this, but perhaps, just maybe, we may have a partner: Palestinian leader Abbas is more determined than ever to progress, while Hamas is willing to allow him to do this – and submit any document to a national referendum. At the very least, this option should be looked into, instead of announcing the premature death of a plan.

Yet if you already declared this, and to paraphrase Dan Margalit's demand, then you must again turn to the people, because the people who voted Kadima voted for realignment.