# Israeli election: Likud out, Qadima in. Now what? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 29, 2006, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-election-likud-out-qadima-in-now-what/350391 "2006-03-29T13:17:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![FWorld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/5daacb/32.png) [@FWorld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FWorld)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2006, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-election-likud-out-qadima-in-now-what/350391/21 "2006-03-29T17:35:06Z")
> [@SentientMeat](#): > > … Israeli jets won’t have the option of keeping the region [awake for days](http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,1607450,00.html) with sonic booms as a lesson without subjecting their _own_ to the same. Wusses. Back in Lebanon we’d just turn in bed and say ‘ayree b Isra’aeel’ then go back to sleep. **JC** , I’m not sure I agree with you on the weakness of Arafat. Keep in mind that until the election of Ariel Sharon, the Palestinian Authority’s security services were capable of keeping Hamas et al relatively in check. Then again, given how quickly Marawn Barghouti broke from Fatah and formed the Al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, you have a point. Still, presenting himself as the one who ended occupation would’ve strengthened Arafat, not weakened him. Going back to Qadima, I agree with you that a shake-up is in order. But I’m not sure the people now in office, on both camps, have what it takes to make peace. But the others were tried and failed. And, the extremes on both sides declaring the end of the conflict de-legitimatises anyone still fighting. If Israel were to withdraw, I doubt that it would leave the settlers to their fate. For one thing, the Palestinians are going to want to reclaim much of the land and water that the settlers now use exclusively, and I doubt the settlers would allow them to do that peacefully and miss their chance to drag the Israeli Army back in. For another, I doubt that the Palestinians would ask nicely in the first place. Effective negotiation tactic though. **Brain Glutton** , why distinguish between occupied territories in East Jerusalem and elsewhere in the West Bank? Under international law Israel has no right to any land occupied in 1967. ---
**Author:** ![Noone\_Special](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/noone_special/32/2863_2.png) [@Noone\_Special](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Noone_Special)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2006, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-election-likud-out-qadima-in-now-what/350391/22 "2006-03-29T19:43:48Z")
Given the very shaky nature of the _Qadima_ victory, it is **way** too early to make any even semi-educated guesses as to how things will proceed from here. Even Olmert, in his acceptance speech yesterday, began to sway towards (re)considering **bi** lateral negotiations. You have to realize that the Palestinian question is only part (albeit a very important part) of a more general struggle very much resembling the Blue/Red strugge in the US (that is, liberal-nonreligious-left leaning/Conservative-religious-right leaning). I’ll call it “Blue/Orange” rather than “Blue/Red”, because, well, the religious right in Israel has adopted Orange rather than Red… Basicly what happened yesterday, in a nutshell, was: 1. The Israeli public voted “blue.” (some 59/120 Members of Knesset are recognizably “blue”, while only about 51 are recognizably “orange”) 2. This “blue” vote was **far far less** overwhelming than previously expected. 3. 59 is less than 120/2 – no clear-cut “blue” majority. Which means Olmert has something resembling a mandate for compromise/concessions _vis-a-vis_ the Palestinians, but less than expected. I, for one, an not willing to wager how things will turn out – certainly not from a distance of less than 24 hours from the closing of the polls. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2006, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-election-likud-out-qadima-in-now-what/350391/23 "2006-03-29T19:57:22Z")
> [@FWorld](#): > > **Brain Glutton** , why distinguish between occupied territories in East Jerusalem and elsewhere in the West Bank? Under international law Israel has no right to any land occupied in 1967. Because Jerusalem as their capital obviously is one point on which the Israelis absolutely will not compromise, and they can’t really consider it “theirs” if there’s national boundary running right through the middle of the city, which is why they annexed East Jerusalem in the first place. Art of the possible, you know. ---
**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2006, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-election-likud-out-qadima-in-now-what/350391/24 "2006-03-29T21:19:01Z")
Good to see you here, **Noone**. Kadima will clearly have to seek a coalition partner, and Labour seem the obvious choice. What was Labour’s position on, say, Ariel? (The settlement, not the sleepyhead). Is “evacuate Ariel” a possible demand from Labour as a condition for coalition? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2006, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-election-likud-out-qadima-in-now-what/350391/25 "2006-03-30T01:02:00Z")
> [@Noone Special](#): > > Given the very shaky nature of the _Qadima_ victory, it is **way** too early to make any even semi-educated guesses as to how things will proceed from here. Even Olmert, in his acceptance speech yesterday, began to sway towards (re)considering **bi** lateral negotiations. **Bi** lateral as opposed to what? Every negotiation has **at least** two sides. ---
**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2006, 8:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-election-likud-out-qadima-in-now-what/350391/26 "2006-03-30T08:44:46Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > **Bi** lateral as opposed to what? Every negotiation has **at least** two sides. Remember the [wall](http://www.gush-shalom.org/media/seperationmap_eng.swf)? This is the mechanism of _uni_lateral border-setting on Israel’s part. If Hamas refuses to negotiate, Israel will simply annex the vast majority of the fertile land and water resources behind the [$2.5M per mile](http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2003/1103mair.html) wall. On the other hand, if the future autonomous state is carved up by large settlements like Ariel, Palestinians would surely be justified in asking whether that’s really any _better_ than the current situation. Are you any less of a prisoner if the guard stands in your tiny (dependent) cell with the door ajar than if he locks the door behind him? ---
**Author:** ![FWorld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/5daacb/32.png) [@FWorld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FWorld)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2006, 10:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-election-likud-out-qadima-in-now-what/350391/27 "2006-03-30T10:24:27Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Because Jerusalem as their capital obviously is one point on which the Israelis absolutely will not compromise, and they can’t really consider it “theirs” if there’s national boundary running right through the middle of the city, which is why they annexed East Jerusalem in the first place. > > Art of the possible, you know. So your reasoning is that the Israelis want it more? Well the Palestinians want it much, much more, so there. That’s why we have international law. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2006, 1:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-election-likud-out-qadima-in-now-what/350391/28 "2006-03-30T13:37:25Z")
> [@FWorld](#): > > So your reasoning is that the Israelis want it more? Well the Palestinians want it much, much more, so there. The difference is that the Israelis **have** it. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2006, 1:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-election-likud-out-qadima-in-now-what/350391/29 "2006-03-30T13:40:39Z")
As for what boundary line would be proper under international law – that’s a big enough question to warrant its own thread. Remember, international law, as developed after WWII, rejects wars of aggression as illegitimate, but I do not think it entirely rejects the legitimacy of taking territory by force, where the party doing so can plausibly claim not to have been the initiator of a war of conquest; and Israel would be on solid ground there (in the Six-Day War, Syria, Jordan and Egypt were clearly the aggressors). If you think otherwise, please provide a cite. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2006, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-election-likud-out-qadima-in-now-what/350391/30 "2006-03-30T13:52:26Z")
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli\_settlement#Legal\_status\_of\_territories:](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_settlement#Legal_status_of_territories:) > [@](#): > > The annexations of East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights have both been deemed illegal by the UN Security Council (resolutions 267 and 497 respectively), and have not been recognized by other states. > > Israel has signed peace treaties with Egypt (removing all Israeli settlements and returning the Sinai Peninsula to Egyptian sovereignty), and Jordan (returning small sections to Jordanian sovereignty); there are currently no peace treaties governing Israel’s borders related to the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and the Golan Heights. Israel therefore asserts that the armistice lines (known as the Green Line) of 1949 have no other legal status. > > Palestinians object to this view as the Israel-Jordan peace treaty was not to alter the status of any territories coming under Israeli control during the hostilities of 1967 (article 3(2) of the Israel-Jordan peace treaty [18]). Things are seldom simple, and this is clearly not one that is. ---
**Author:** ![akohl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/6a8cbe/32.png) [@akohl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/akohl)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2006, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-election-likud-out-qadima-in-now-what/350391/31 "2006-03-30T14:15:37Z")
> [@Noone Special](#): > > Basicly what happened yesterday, in a nutshell, was: > > 1. The Israeli public voted “blue.” (some 59/120 Members of Knesset are recognizably “blue”, while only about 51 are recognizably “orange”) > 2. This “blue” vote was **far far less** overwhelming than previously expected. > 3. 59 is less than 120/2 – no clear-cut “blue” majority. > > Which means Olmert has something resembling a mandate for compromise/concessions _vis-a-vis_ the Palestinians, but less than expected. Fine, but the real news is the success of the ak list, the penioners that is. All this talk about a “mapatz,” explosive change in the political landscape regarding Kadima, is a bunch of bull. The Likud and Kadima together got around what the Likud got last time. Labor around the same as last time. Now that Netanyahu is on the ropes in the Likud, well, if he gets ousted, the likud will join a Kadima co-alition. So where’s the change? The same people representing the same centrist realpolitic views are represented in the Knessest and probably the government in the same numbers as before, basically. The pensioners is a welcome change. People recognized that the big parties are only pretending to represent an ideological view and will do whatever they want with watever ideological mandate they are given like Sharon, who betrayed his mandate by pursuing the disengagement against the will of his ideological constituency. So they voted for a party that represents a most undeniable truth - you just gotta take care of your old people. You have to feed them and give them the medicines they (we, that is - gettin there soon) need. ---
**Author:** ![FWorld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/5daacb/32.png) [@FWorld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FWorld)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2006, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-election-likud-out-qadima-in-now-what/350391/32 "2006-03-30T17:31:32Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli\_settlement#Legal\_status\_of\_territories:](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_settlement#Legal_status_of_territories:) > > Things are seldom simple, and this is clearly not one that is. You’re telling me man. I call that place home. (Well, Lebanon, which is just as complicated only prettier) ;j ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2006, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-election-likud-out-qadima-in-now-what/350391/33 "2006-03-31T01:57:32Z")
> [@SentientMeat](#): > > Good to see you here, **Noone**. Kadima will clearly have to seek a coalition partner, and Labour seem the obvious choice. What was Labour’s position on, say, Ariel? (The settlement, not the sleepyhead). Is “evacuate Ariel” a possible demand from Labour as a condition for coalition? According to the very convenient maps of the proposals of various parties published in my newspaper, the labor supported not to annex Ariel, but to nevertheless keep it until a definitive peace plan could be drafted with the palestinians. So, the labur would have no reason to make such a demand. Theonly party envisionning to give back Ariel to the Palestinians was apparently the Meretz-Yahad, a pacifist, leftist, sionist party (though I’m not sure what the “sionist” part refers to. Is there any “non-sionist” Israeli party?) ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2006, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-election-likud-out-qadima-in-now-what/350391/34 "2006-03-31T04:35:05Z")
> [@clairobscur](#): > > Is there any “non-sionist” Israeli party?) Well, there are a couple of Arab parties – Balad, United Arab List. And a Communist party, which recognizes Israel but officially rejects the link between the state and the Jewish Diaspora. [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_political\_parties\_in\_Israel](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_political_parties_in_Israel) ---
**Author:** ![astorian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ad7895/32.png) [@astorian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astorian)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2006, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-election-likud-out-qadima-in-now-what/350391/35 "2006-04-02T15:18:55Z")
> [@FWorld](#): > > Depending on [who you believe](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_David_2000_Summit) , Barak offered 70-95% of the West Bank, while leaving parts of East Jerusalem in Israeli hands. If Barak \*did \*give a dream offer, why would Arafat refuse? > Second, who would’ve believed the Likud government would’ve made peace with Egypt in 1978? It can be the same with Hamas. Because the Arab “dream” has never been a small independent state on the West Bank. The dream has been to drive the Jews into the sea, and eliminate the state of Israel. Did Arafat really believe in this dream, deep down in his heart? Probably- but let’s say he’d become something of a realist in his old age. Let’s say he’d finally come to understand that Israel was there to stay, and the best the Arabs could hope for was an independent state controlling most of the West Bank. His problem was, after decades of proclaiming to his people that he was going to exterminate the Jews, he’d have been dead meat if he came to them and said, “Good news, my people we have won! No, we aren’t detroying Israel. No, we won’t be returning to our ancestors’ homeland. No, none of the things the PLO promised you will ever happen. But we’re getting 90% of the West Bank and a sliver of East Jerusalem as a capital!” Arafat would’ve been murdered by his own people (a la Michael Collins) in short order, if he delivered them less than he’d led them to expect. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2006, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-election-likud-out-qadima-in-now-what/350391/36 "2006-04-02T18:27:51Z")
> [@astorian](#): > > Because the Arab “dream” has never been a small independent state on the West Bank. The dream has been to drive the Jews into the sea, and eliminate the state of Israel. But don’t you think even Hamas, now that they’re actually responsible for running things, might learn to accept the reality of Israel’s permanent existence? ---
**Author:** ![Sevastopol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cdc98d/32.png) [@Sevastopol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sevastopol)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2006, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-election-likud-out-qadima-in-now-what/350391/37 "2006-04-02T19:21:39Z")
> [@astorian](#): > > Because the Arab “dream” has never been a small independent state on the West Bank. The dream has been to drive the Jews into the sea, and eliminate the state of Israel… after decades of proclaiming to his people that he was going to exterminate the Jews,… Cite? > [@astorian](#): > > …Let’s say [Arafat had] finally come to understand that Israel was there to stay… Like for example his recognising the state of Israel? Is that what you mean? ---
**Author:** ![astorian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ad7895/32.png) [@astorian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astorian)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2006, 5:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-election-likud-out-qadima-in-now-what/350391/38 "2006-04-03T05:56:55Z")
> [@Sevastopol](#): > > Cite? Tell you what- read the PLO charter and get back to me. ---
**Author:** ![Sevastopol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cdc98d/32.png) [@Sevastopol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sevastopol)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2006, 7:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-election-likud-out-qadima-in-now-what/350391/39 "2006-04-03T07:35:27Z")
> [@astorian](#): > > Tell you what- read the PLO charter and get back to me. Pathetic way to throw in the towel. Seeya. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2006, 11:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-election-likud-out-qadima-in-now-what/350391/40 "2006-04-03T11:21:25Z")
> [@Sevastopol](#): > > > [@astorian](#): > > > > Tell you what- read the PLO charter and get back to me. > > Pathetic way to throw in the towel. Seeya. [Official (annotated) PLO Charter in English:](http://www.iris.org.il/plochart.htm) > [@](#): > > Article 15: The liberation of Palestine, from an Arab viewpoint, is a national (_qawmi_) duty and it attempts to repel the Zionist and imperialist aggression against the Arab homeland, and aims at the **elimination of Zionism** in Palestine. Absolute responsibility for this falls upon the Arab nation - peoples and governments - with the Arab people of Palestine in the vanguard. Accordingly, the Arab nation must mobilize all its military, human, moral, and spiritual capabilities to participate actively with the Palestinian people in the liberation of Palestine. It must, particularly in the phase of the armed Palestinian revolution, offer and furnish the Palestinian people with all possible help, and material and human support, and make available to them the means and opportunities that will enable them to continue to carry out their leading role in the armed revolution, until they liberate their homeland. > [_Note, however, that the PLO’s translation sometimes deviates from the original Arabic so as to be more palatable to Western readers. For example, in Article 15, the Arabic is translated as “ **the elimination of Zionism** ,” whereas the correct translation is “ **the liquidation of the Zionist presence**.”_] > [@](#): > > Article 19: The partition of Palestine in 1947 and the establishment of the state of Israel are entirely illegal, regardless of the passage of time, because they were contrary to the will of the Palestinian people and to their natural right in their homeland, and inconsistent with the principles embodied in the Charter of the United Nations, particularly the right to self-determination. > [@](#): > > Article 21: The Arab Palestinian people, expressing themselves by the armed Palestinian revolution, reject all solutions which are substitutes for the total liberation of Palestine and reject all proposals aiming at the liquidation of the Palestinian problem, or its internationalization. > [@](#): > > Article 23: The demand of security and peace, as well as the demand of right and justice, require all states to consider Zionism an illegitimate movement, to outlaw its existence, and to ban its operations, in order that friendly relations among peoples may be preserved, and the loyalty of citizens to their respective homelands safeguarded. (bolding mine) **Sevastopol** , if you wish to argue that the PLO did not call for the elimination of Israel (and the Jewish people) over the course of its history, then I suggest that you provide citations that explain how the statements in this PLO charter do not mean what they say or how the intentions of various PLO speakers have changed over the years. Calling a direct reference to a widely known document “pathetic” is, itself, not a very strong argument. Had you pointed to the [ten year old renunciation](http://www.library.cornell.edu/colldev/mideast/plonc.htm) (accepted and rejected by successive Israeli governments) as an indication that the PLO had (at least publicly) changed its views, you would have a case. Pretending that calls for the destruction of Israel were never part of the PLO “dream” is silly and makes you appear to be debating in bad faith. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-election-likud-out-qadima-in-now-what/350391.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-election-likud-out-qadima-in-now-what/350391.md?page=3)