Long term vs. short term goals (ISRAEL HAYOM OP-ED) Uzi Baram 06/06/12)
Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=2012
Israel Hayom
Israel Hayom Articles-Index-Top
Publishers-Index-Top
I recently attended an event at the Likud headquarters in Tel Aviv
commemorating the 35th anniversary of the 1977 political upheaval
(when the Likud rose to power, ending a nearly 50-year hegemony by
the Left). Most of the people in attendance were senior Likud
members — former and current ministers. I was there to represent the
opposing viewpoint.
We did not debate the importance of the 1977 revolution, with respect
to its value in teaching the nation about democracy, which is based
on changing governments among other things. But then their praises of
the revolution and its achievement began to go overboard. I told them
that from their perspective there may be room for self-
congratulations, but from my perspective, it looked like Israel´s
governments were systematically "selling out" the long-term goals in
order to achieve the short-term goals.
Obviously there was no agreement over the definition of long-term
goals or whether short-term goals really reflected shortsightedness,
but after that specific event I tried to discuss the issue further in
other forums.
My basic assumption is that we are a small, magnificently
accomplished Jewish country, located in the heart of an Arab, and
mostly hostile, Middle East. In order to establish our existence and
enhance our chances of survival, we have to derive most of our
actions from this point of view. Reconciliation with the Palestinians
is not a process that we are coerced by the U.S. and Europe to
undertake. We must view this process as having existential value
because it guarantees our future despite the unbearable geostrategic
circumstances.
Representatives of the Right can claim that this is the classic
debate between the Right and the Left and that their perspective is
different. If this is the case, however, then the Right must present
its long-term alternative, something which it has never done.
I believe that the leaders of the Right have pondered the long term
issues and have come up with a laconic answer. "Israel wants peace
but the Arab world refuses." This is a commentary, not an answer
based on leadership. It ignores the fact that intrinsically there is
no symmetry between Israel and the Arab world.
This is Kafkaesque policy. It is inflexible and lacks vision. A
direct result of this policy is the fact that the most burning issue
on our agenda right now is the Ulpana neighborhood in Beit El. The
prime minister knows he is dealing with a powder keg, and he is
trying to defuse the situation.
It is a mistake in public discourse to try to indoctrinate the entire
public in such a way that that will only bring us endless struggles
for survival, while there are no guarantees that the geostrategic
circumstances will ever change in our favor.
Obviously I believe that the settlement enterprise runs contrary to
Israel´s strategic interests in the long term, but it is an existing
fact that is impossible to ignore. Even our power of deterrence,
which Israel´s first Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion cultivated and
sanctified, elevating it to the status of a national value, has
weakened over the years and cannot be relied upon exclusively as a
means of existential protection. Building up a stronger army is an
important objective, and it is an absolutely necessary condition for
the achievement of long-term goals.
The goal I have presented here is not just part of the Left-Right
debate. Aside from the extreme fringe, Israeli public opinion,
including that of the more responsible Likud leadership, is
influenced by Israel´s main objective - peace. We mustn´t avoid the
truth regarding our dire situation. Our main objective is to change
our situation. Anyone who thinks that achieving short-term goals will
change the target in the long run is delusional, and this delusion
will very soon explode in our faces.
Return to Top
MATERIAL REPRODUCED FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY