Pressure is building in Israel for Olmert to step down. Assume he does.
Who and what fills the void? What direction will this lead Israel?
Many of us had hoped that Kadima would follow through with what I have called the “snapping turtle approach” - unilateral disengagement to a highly defensible nearly Green Line position with openness to further concessions as a real negotiating partner surfaces, if one ever does - but Olmert instead prosecuted a war beyond that approach and did so, in the minds of many, badly. Is there any hope that a next administration will embrace that strategy? Will the hard Right re-emerge instead? What else is left as a viable force?
Please, let us not turn this thread into another general Israel vs Arabs bash. Focus on this narrow question please.
This was just the interim report by the Winograd committee. cite.
The full report is scheduled for release in August.
I strongly doubt Olmert will step down before the final report is released. Unless there is another war this summer (:eek: ) I suspect that he will have to step down after the full report.
Tzipi Livni is already preparing to take over from him in Qadima… but I doubt another government can be formed based upon the current Knesset – I suspect there will be new elections. If only because that will buy Olmert another 6-9 months.
In that case, expect to see Netanyahu as PM sometime in 2008.
simple answer: it doesnt matter who steps up or who resigns. There’s nothing left to hope for.
Don’t be confused by the sensationalism of the Israeli media , blasting black headlines of doomed politicians and new alliances between parties. It’s not such a big deal: the Israeli public doesnt really care, because there are simply no other options to look forward to. No new personalities, and no new ideas. So nothing will change.
This isn’t like America where half the population is a chomping at the bit for a chance to defeat Bush, because they want a major change in the goverment’s policies. .
Isrealis have learned that it doesn’t make any difference any more what the Israeli policies are, or who the Israeli prime minister is. So there’s no reason to get excited about dumping Olmert. Kadima was founded as a party with a mission, but the mission turned out to be unattainable, so the Israeli public is not excited with the idea of new elections
(hijack warning ahead, even though I’m replying directly to the OP )
your hopes sounded nice two years ago. But now we know that all 3 of your ideas didn’t work out.
there is no such thing as a “defensible green line”–the barrages of rockets from both Lebanon and Gaza are fired freely whenever the Arabs feel like it.
the only partner who might want to negotioate (M. Abbas) doesn’t really try, and can’t deliver anyway
3)waiting for a peace-loving leader is no longer realistic. this would require a massive sea change in mid-eastern Arab culture, and cannot happen within the next generation.
The “snapping turtle” concept would have entailed a brief response … destroy tunnels in Gaza, short foray into Lebanon and destroy a few Hezbollah sites … accepting the Lebanese leadership’s quick (but everyone knew impotant) promise to bring order in the South themselves … and then back in the shell. Someone can always poke a stick inside a turtle’s shell, and the turtle tries to make the sticker regret that they did it … but the turtle does try to kill its attacker, espcially when it knows that it cannot. It doesn’t stick its neck out too far or for too long.
There really are only worse options. The wait for a partner may be a while, in the meantime you talk to your enemies even while disengaging. You disengage to remove yourself from use as a prop. Without any easy target to divert the attention of the masses PA leadership must eventually turn to the question of responsible governance. Sooner or later … and yes, later is more likely … the realization will dawn that working regionally with Israel is in their best interests.
Short of genocide the Palestinians are not going away. One state is the death knell for a Jewish charactered state. Continuing the status quo, with no defensibility and placing Israelis in the most vulnerable of locations, is unacceptable … for all involved.
These ideas did not work out because Olmert fell back onto his habits. Respond with a big fist. Acting like the 500# gorrilla chasing a rat through a briar patch was poor policy. Even though the rat bit the gorrilla hard. Consistent measured hard but quick strikes in reponse followed by a show of restraint “out of respect for the world community’s requests” would have a less adverse outcome.
Noone really? Bibi really might be back? That simian? I was afraid that would be the likely outcome. Any chance that Livni could gain enough support? I know that Labour is now of the past …
I really don’t think that Israel did such a bad job with the assault on Hezbollah
they demonstrated that firing missiles from S Lebanon is not a good idea
they killed remarkably few people and their losses were low
they were edging in for the ‘end game’ but got called off, which is fair enough
I’ve only heard about the ‘report’ on the radio, but one thing made me sit up and wonder.
It sounds as if the ‘report’ says one of the supposed objectives was to recover the two kidnapped troops, well anyone who thought that remotely likely must have been smoking something rather strange - the objective was to stop those rockets and to make darn sure people think twice about cross border assaults in the future.
Probably without those rockets, Israel would have restricted itself to limited reprisals, but the rockets changed the game - and Israel demonstrated that it can, and will, turn a place into a toilet if people go too far.
This kidnapping of the BBC reporter Johnston is getting interesting … I’m not sure what to make of it.
She’s trying… it appears she’s just about ready to go for the showdown against Olmert (who is effectively a lame, if not dead, duck now). She still has to fend of Peres, however, who still thinks he can lead a political party to electoral victory :rolleyes:.
However, I don’t think Qadima has large enough a support base to stop Likud from winning the next elections
Labor may be able to pull a phoenix out of the ashes if they show Peretz the door (or, preferably, the window) during their own internal elections later this month. If Ayalon wins, he could actually turn them back into a viable political force. I’m not holding my breath, however… I have never seen such a group fo political suicide artists anywhere, anytime, ever!
Trying to destroy Hizballah was good policy. The majority of the Israeli public is angry at Olmert not for trying, but for failing. Not for going in, but for going in blindly, half-assedly, without a real plan. It’s as simple as that. Maybe we should have responded with a short airstrike, but onhly as a prelude to a slow, massive military buildup and formulation of creative, comprehensive battle plans.
The “snapping turtle” concept is a pipe dream. It reminds me of the Simpsons episode where Homer had a nail removed from his skull, sauddenly making him smart. It ended up with Moe hammering a new nail up his nostril, returning him to his natural state of happy stupidity:
[Moe hammers in nail]
Homer: Extended warrenty! I’ll take it !
Moe: Almost there…
[Hammers some more]
Homer: DE-FENSE! DE-FENSE!
You never win by playing defensively. Sooner or later, your enemy will come up with an attack you can’t afford to absorb.
So long as Hizballah exists, and Iran still wants to be a regional superpower, they’ll keep on trying to hurt us. Playing defensively won’t work. Proportional responses won’t work. Last summer was the first campaign of a pan-Middle Eastern war.
Ah well. Hijack away. Can’t be helped in this kind of thread I guess and I contributed to it myself.
A conventional sort of war response to Hizbollah is like using rat poison to fight off your termite infestation. Throwing more rat poison down isn’t going to help. It’ll just get your kids picking some of it up and getting poisoned themselves. Or to switch to your oh so sweet metaphor, the answer is not to use a bigger hammer but to open a different toolbox.
Nevertheless I fear that the Israeli public is indeed of a mindset similar to yours and that your desired (!?!) “pan-Middle Eastern war” will occur under a Bibi tenure. He is nothing if not the king of the use a bigger hammer approach. Thing is that such an approach will isolate Israel from those freinds she has, even the US, and in no case result in security for Israel even if it occurred with support of the entire West. The big hammer approach is exactly what serves the needs of the Islamist terrorist groups interests best.
I am not Jewish or Israeli, but I must confess that I am biased, something to do with working for you guys since about 1991.
Going in was a mistake - you should have Dresdened the place without invasion, however it is easy to make mistakes - and with the loss of 100 Israelis - heck it might have been worth it. You were pulled off the bone by the collar (like a Pit Bull) - and that made you look responsive.
You have struck terror into Syria (who I consider Ok) and probably made Iran wonder about their stupid A Bomb stuff.
What really annoyed me most was a platoon of Israeli soldiers carrying back a dead guy - and the UK press had them as ‘singing’ - the silly sods did not see who they were carrying. That really annoyed me.
Noone thank you for the edification and the on topic posts … the other two of you … well you scare me.
Large scale frontal attacks on Hizbollah create a recruitment bonanza for them. Iran will remain with their desires to be the regional superpower. Short of being worse than the monsters that the enemies of Israel claim she is, these are the facts. These facts can be dealt with. Hizbollah can, and was being marginalized. Iran can lose regional influence and eventually have to face its own people’s discontent at failing to deliver economically. The forces of modernity can slowly gain ascendency in the Arab world. But stupid ass rhetoric, posturing, and even worse, actually acting the part, these are the same sort of mindsets that have doomed the Palestinians to their hopelessness.
I can’t speak for Alessan (or a least, I shouldn’t…) but I think you’re misunderstanding him somewhat.
Very few Israelis want an all-out mid-east war. Oh, they exist, but they’re marginal. However, the current public opinion here – and what I think Alessan is echoing – is that this large-scale pan-Mideastern war is rapidly becoming *inevitable *and unavoidable. And that since this is the case, we might as well
Be prepared for it. AND
Fight it on our own terms, and on our own time; launching it ourselves if need be.
Self-fulfilling prophecy? Perhaps. But not the blood-thirsty “We want war!!” chant you seem to think you are hearing.
I don’t see who would be involved in a ‘pan-Mid-Eastern war’
Jordan, Egypt and Iraq would not be involved
Lebanon barely exists
Syria is scared after last year - and anyway they are capable of being negotiated with
Saudi, Kuwait, Qatar etc have never really figured in things militarily
The only real contender is Iran - personally I reckon a few accidents in their oil fields would cripple them financially.
She had a press conference yesterday, in which she called for Olmert’s resignation, but did not resign herself.
Most political correspondents / commentator regard this as a bad move. She failed to show courage, hence loosing many “points”.
It seems inevitable that Olmert will sooner or later fire her, ending as the petit “winner” in this conflict.
Other than that I totally agree with Noone Special – Olmert will hold on until August, followed by a new election in which the Likud headed by Net&Yahoo will win.
As for the Labor Party, I don’t really think it matters whom they’ll elect to head them. Ayalon has no real experience as a politician (it is his first term in the Knesset, he is not part of government). Barak is experienced, but I think many, many people hold a grudge against him.
I don’t want a war. However, so long as Hizballah exists it will continue to attack Israel, because they have no other reason to exist. They have no real demands from us, nothing to discuss in any potential peace deal, and nothing we could do to mollify them. The only entity capable of holding them back is Iran.
And Iran, in its turn, sees conflict with Israel as a matter of state policy. Not because they consider armed conflict as an alternative to negotiations, but becasue they need conflict *qua *conflict as a means of achieving their goal of Mideastern dominence. Therefore, any talks of peace conferences, of detant and of compromise are ultimately futile, because other than the utter destruction of Israel - and barring any sort of terminal damage of Iran itself - they won’t find it profitable to stop fighting.
That’s the pan-Middle Eastern war I was talking about. It may just stay a “cold” war, fought largely with proxy forces, but it won’t end so long as the balance of power in the region stays as it is.
In short, what happened last summer will happen again, and again, so long as Hizballah stays in existance and Iran stays ambitious.
@Allessan So Iran is behind it, no great news, so go for Iran you know where their centrifuges are, not that they matter that much, they have pipe lines and oil wells.
Cripple Iran economically and then they cannot finance Hezbollah and Hamas, cut off the oil, you then cut off the dollars.
Personally I would start with a few unexplained tanker accidents, they could be attributed to the British (we owe them a kicking) - and follow up with some really global warming oil fires. Non attrituatable - but vicious.
Okay. I better understand your POV. But I question some of your assumptions.
Hizbollah exists for many reasons. Power for a few. A sense of rightous purpose in serving the cause of Islamism for others. Animosity towards modernity. Hatred towards Israel is probably low on the list but it serves the cause so very well. Their power is contigent upon having an other to rally people against. You fight that least well by providng the prop any more than you absolutely have to. Look back at the start of the Lebanese fiasco, before Israel did more than a few measured responses. There was real dissent in the Arab ranks. Heads of Arab states were daring to condemn the kidnappings and bombings. World opinion was clearly in Israel’s court. Hizbollah was at a low point in Lebanese public opinion and foreign influences were gradually being pushed out of the country. A snapping response would not have squandered that while still making Hizbollah sting. Without an infidel to unite against they would have been forced to deal with the oppression that they impose upon each other.
Iran? It doesn’t want to destroy Israel. Like Hizbollah it needs Israel like Big Brother needed his Goldberg. It needs the state of never-ending conflict. No question, Israel will need to take a nuclear threat seriously and action may be required. But the reality is that an Iran that gradually enjoins the modern world and develops real influence and broad economic ties is an Iran that needs the distraction of neverending conflict less and one that has more to lose by risking isolation.
The forces of modernity will eventually win in the Arab world. It may take decades but they will prevail and the less the West provides an easily exploitable other to rally against the sooner modernity will succeed. Bibi’s way, like Bush’s way, retards that slow progress. That way has no hope. It ensures that Iran remains a country bent on regional influence by conflict qua conflict and that Hizbollah remains a regional force bent on harming Israel. It offers no chance of providng security.
To be sure there is much to be pessimistic about and my “snapping turtle” “pipe dream” has little likelihood of showing results on a timescale of a few years or less. But it has “every reason for not failing” over a longer timecourse. And a slim chance is infinitely better than none at all.
)