Lieberman not the solution
What Olmert needs is progress on diplomatic front, not a right-wing extremist whose vision of progress is forced population transfers
With his political fortunes waning, Olmert is now intent on bringing Avigdor Lieberman’s Yisrael Beitenu into his coalition. The Prime Minister is apparently convinced that the additional eleven Knesset seats will provide his government with the stability it needs to govern effectively. Yet bringing Lieberman into the government is likely to have the opposite effect.
What Olmert needs in order to govern more effectively is progress on the diplomatic front, not a right-wing extremist whose vision of progress is forced population transfers (though he refrains from using the word “transfer”). Lieberman and progress are, in fact, mutually exclusive. Indeed, his track record on issues affecting peace diplomacy is unambiguous.
Lieberman has opposed every diplomatic initiative with any Arab party. His stated agenda concerning the Arab-Israeli conflict is at odds with the guidelines of the present governing coalition. He openly favors the unilateral withdrawal of towns with Arab citizens for the purpose of strengthening the Jewish majority in Israel – a shamefully racist position.
His Yisrael Beitenu party fervently supports settlements in the West Bank and opposes even the dismantling of illegal settlement outposts. In short, this man and this party are not partners to a government committed to peace.
Olmert's choice
Olmert has a choice. He can pursue an expanded coalition with Yisrael Beitenu, which would send the wrong message to Israel’s neighbors and prevent any hope for diplomatic progress. Alternatively, he can pursue the current opportunities that exist to end years of stalemate with both the Palestinians and the Syrians. It seems that Olmert is set to make the wrong choice.
While Olmert has paid lip service to the moderate leadership of Abu Mazen, he has failed to engage him in meaningful talks that could potentially reignite the moribund peace process.
It is not clear how long Abu Mazen will remain President of the Palestinian Authority, and it is far from certain that his eventual successor will be as pragmatic as he is with regard to resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. By giving Abu Mazen the cold shoulder, and thus weakening his standing among Palestinians, Olmert has simultaneously nurtured the standing of Hamas and the other Palestinian rejectionist groups.
Northern front
Olmert’s policy vis-à-vis Syria is even more perplexing. His outright rejection of President Assad’s public call for peace talks is myopic. Israel has waited for years for Damascus to demonstrate an interest in resuming peace talks, and the elusive Bashar Assad has finally uttered the magic words. That he has done so for less than pure motives is hardly a legitimate reason to refuse his entreaty.
By forging a breakthrough with Syria, Olmert can help to re-shape the Middle East in Israel’s favor. Peace with Syria would crack the perilous Iran-Syria nexus, which will become even more deadly once Iran acquires nuclear weapons – an outcome that seems increasingly likely.
Peace with Syria would also deal a decisive blow to Hizbullah, which is dependent on Syrian logistical support; and it would precipitate the completion of the “circle of peace” surrounding Israel. As Maj.-Gen. (res.) Uri Saguy has noted, if Israel fails to engage Assad in a diplomatic process, Syria is liable to use force to achieve other goals. The stakes are too big for Olmert to simply say “No.”
Prime Minister Olmert is correct in recognizing the need to strengthen his government. To do so, however, he will need to produce a diplomatic achievement – one that will also strengthen his country. Bringing Lieberman into the government will thwart these goals.
Guy Ziv is a doctoral candidate in political science at the University of Maryland. Currently residing in Israel, his dissertation focuses on hawkish decision-makers who turn to dovish policies
