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
