July 9, 2000 Barak's Coalition Disintegrates As Partners Quit Over Summit By DEBORAH SONTAG JERUSALEM, July 9 -- Prime Minister Ehud Barak's government disintegrated today, as one right-leaning party after another quit in protest of anticipated concessions to the Palestinians, leaving him on unsteady ground on the eve of his departure to the Camp David summit meeting. Ignoring Mr. Barak's pleas for unity, three parties, including the ultra-Orthodox Shas, defected to the previously weak opposition, upsetting the political balance of power in a single afternoon. Mr. Barak lost his parliamentary majority, and his broad coalition, which was constructed precisely to build a stable foundation of support for difficult peace moves, shriveled into a weak center-left government. In an address to the nation, Mr. Barak defiantly said that the collapse of his coalition would not affect his trip to Maryland, which he said was backed by a mandate from the Israelis who elected him by an overwhelming majority on a peacemaking platform. Mr. Barak asserted that, as a life-long soldier and fledgling politician, he had a direct bond with the voters that existed in a kind of extra-political space. "Citizens of Israel, approximately one year ago I was elected by you to be the prime minister of Israel in order to lead the state of Israel to a safer reality and in order to create a better future for our children," Mr. Barak said. "I did not receive my mandate from the politicians or from the parties. I received my mandate from each one of you." Experts say that by adding new small parties to his government and relying on the support of Arab parties, Mr. Barak could still win a parliamentary majority for any deal that might be reached at the summit meeting. But it would not be the "Jewish majority" that he originally sought in hopes of moving toward peace without deepening divisions that could destabilize not just his government but also the country. Mr. Barak repeated that he would rely on a popular vote, in the form of a referendum on an agreement, to try and salve those rifts. And his office predicted tonight that any agreement he achieved at Camp David would be ratified by a significant popular majority. It is hard to imagine that the new Israeli political reality will not alter the dynamic of the three-way, retreat-style summit meeting, where the goal will be to end a 52-year conflict and resolve the most divisive issues between the Israelis and Palestinians. But precisely how is uncertain. Palestinian negotiators could now perceive Mr. Barak as a weakened leader unable to deliver on his promises. While Mr. Barak could face a strengthened opposition, he may also feel free to make concessions without worrying which political partner he might lose. In any case, Palestinian officials said tonight that they would try and shut out the Israeli political convolutions and, although they were skeptical even before today's events, focus on trying to achieve an agreement. Some Palestinian officials also said that they were suspicious that Mr. Barak was engineering his own political difficulties so that he could hide behind them at the bargaining table. "It's not the first time that we have witnessed such a show on the stage of Ehud Barak," said Abdul Ahmed Rahman, the secretary general of the Palestinian Cabinet. "This is not credible. If Barak thinks that he can manufacture the impression that he is restricted, well, such maneuvers will be transparent to the Americans as well as to us." Kicking off the snowballing dynamic of the day, Foreign Minister David Levy told Mr. Barak this morning that in protest at what he labeled the Palestinians' hard-line positions and threats of violence, he would not join the delegation traveling to Camp David. He did not speak publicly about his decision, but associates said that he was pessimistic that anything would come of the high-level talks, which are supposed to start on Tuesday. Political analyst Yaron Dekel said he saw this as "a slap in the face" to Mr. Barak and a no-confidence vote in Mr. Barak's policy. Then Interior Minister Natan Sharansky, leader of a small Russian immigrant party, resigned, saying that Mr. Barak had obstinately refused to divulge his positions in advance and to build the internal support needed for what could be difficult concessions ahead. Mr. Sharansky had been pushing Mr. Barak to form a unity government with the rightist Likud Party. "You are arriving at the summit in the United States weakened, without red lines, without the support of the government and without the support of most of the people," Mr. Sharansky wrote in his resignation letter to Mr. Barak. "Under these conditions," he continued, "the agreement that you will be able to reach is dangerous from a diplomatic point of view and has the potential to cause a split in the people, a split from which, God forbid, there will be no turning back." Several hours later, the Shas party, whose balkiness has unsettled the government since it took office last July, finally walked out for good. Shas is a religious party that doubles as an ethnic pride movement for working class Jews of Middle Eastern origin. In its routine threats to quit, it was perceived to be maneuvering for its party's interests, particularly the financial health and independence of its religious school system. If Shas was satisfied, the common wisdom said, Shas would support peacemaking based on its spiritual leader's religious ruling that territory could be conceded if lives would be saved as a result. But analysts repeatedly predicted that Shas, whose constituency leans to the right, would get the jitters when a crucial moment arrived. Indeed, by day's end, when it became clear that it would be the only right-leaning party left in the government, Shas made the decision to quit. "Shas entered the coalition because the peace process is very important to us and we would have expected to have been genuine partners," said Eli Yishai, Shas's political leader. "But to be partners on the road taken one needs to know the road. And we don't. We don't know Barak's red lines. The red lines that he demarcated and presented to the people are obscure and unclear." Mr. Barak's office, in a statement, countered that his red lines -- which the Palestinians regularly and glumly cite as evidence that an agreement will be difficult to achieve -- have been well-known since his campaign. The statement said that revealing them in greater detail would weaken Israel's negotiating position. The statement reiterated Mr. Barak's absolutes: no return to 1967 borders; "a united Jerusalem under Israeli sovereignty; no foreign army west of the Jordan River; a majority of the Jewish settlers to remain in settlement blocs; and no Israeli recognition of legal or moral responsibility for creating the Palestinian refugee problem." Officials of the leftist Meretz Party, who recently resigned their Cabinet positions so that Shas would stay in the government, were furious. "All through the years we heard of the moderate stand taken by Shas because Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, their leader, he puts foremost the saving of lives -- that saving lives is more important than territories," said Ran Cohen, the former Trade Minister. "Now Barak comes along and with tweezers goes over every detail, every settlement, every road, every section, measures exactly as possible in order to save lives, to prevent returning to the killing of Jews and Arabs in a continuation of 100 years of war, and the Shas people, the moment they stand before the most important diplomatic, ideological, test of principle, they say they are about to quit? For what? Do they want to return to the intifada?" After Shas's resignation, the National Religious Party, which represents religious Zionists and the settlers, said that its central committee had voted unanimously to pull out of the government. All three parties that quit were part of the rightist government of former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, which fell after Mr. Netanyahu concluded an interim peace agreement with the Palestinians. Mr. Barak faces a no-confidence motion in his government on Monday, which was submitted by the Likud party on the basis of his supposed "capitulation" to Mr. Arafat. Analysts predict that Mr. Barak will survive it, but his office said tonight that he had changed his travel plans to return to Israel from a trip to Egypt on Monday so that he could be present in the Parliament later in the day. Then he will proceed to the United States. The parties' resignations will reduce Mr. Barak to a 42-member government in a 120-member Parliament. He could bulk up to a heftier minority government of 58 members by pulling in three other small parties: a small, liberal Russian immigrant faction, a secularist party and a trade unionists' party. But it would be an unstable political base for running the government, and it remains to be seen how Mr. Barak will handle either a success or failure at Camp David. Political analysts consider new elections likely. As a leader routinely accused of haughtiness and autocratic behavior, Mr. Barak's bid to ignore the political system and appeal directly to the people is a risky one. "Had I been forced to listen to all the prophets of doom -- the very same prophets who are now speaking at large -- I suppose that our children would still be in the Lebanese mud," he said, referring to those who predicted that the Israeli troop withdrawal from southern Lebanon in May would lead to war. "No one will teach me what security is." He continued: "I have to rise above all of the political disputes and above all party considerations and exhaust all of the possibilities on the way to a peace agreement that will put an end to the bloody conflict between us and our neighbors. Put an end to it at the negotiation table and not in the battlefields and in terror stricken streets." ================================================================= Kadosh, Kadosh, Kadosh, YHVH, TZEVAOT FROM THE DESK OF: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> *Mike Spitzer* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ~~~~~~~~ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> The Best Way To Destroy Enemies Is To Change Them To Friends Shalom, A Salaam Aleikum, and to all, A Good Day. ================================================================= <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om