Syndication
Peace Is Livni’s Best Option
Opinion
Print this article
Email this article
Other articles by Naomi Chazan
More in Forward ForumTzipi Livni’s victory in the Kadima primary is the result of the Israeli version of the clamor for change that we are seeing across the democratic world. She prevailed despite ruthless attacks on her experience, her judgment, her appearance and her gender. Her record of probity, her straightforward style and — most significantly — her decidedly civilian aura definitely worked in her favor.
But does Livni have it in her to capitalize on these currents and take the risks necessary to cement a new kind of politics in Israel? She faces incredible opportunities and formidable challenges. Ultimately, the test of her leadership rests on her ability to move Israeli-Palestinian negotiations to an equitable and durable conclusion.
The new head of Kadima must begin to prepare herself and her party for the likelihood of new elections in the spring. Her main opponents — Ehud Barak of Labor and Benjamin Netanyahu of the Likud — justifiably perceive her as the single most serious threat to their respective political ambitions. These two former prime ministers hoping for a second chance cannot ignore the polls that consistently show Kadima under Livni’s leadership pulverizing Barak’s Labor Party and giving Netanyahu’s Likud a close contest. That is why they did everything in their power during the primaries to promote Livni’s main intra-party rival, Shaul Mofaz. Now, they can be expected to step up their attacks on her.
Livni also faces ambiguity abroad. Indeed, her key negotiating partners present their own set of challenges. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is on her way out, as may be President Mahmoud Abbas, whose own term is set to expire in January of next year.
Under these circumstances, the conventional wisdom is that Tzipi Livni has two diametrically opposed options: She can put negotiations on the back burner and call for new elections as soon as possible, in the hope of taking advantage of her current popularity to consolidate her political position. Or she can try to delay new elections as long as possible — by acceding to inevitably exorbitant demands from coalition partners — and use the limited amount of time at her disposal to reach an accord with the Palestinians.
Livni may be sorely tempted to follow the first course. Her advisers and some of her closest supporters believe that continuing the negotiating process that began last year in Annapolis would be an electoral liability, especially given the growing preoccupation of the Israeli electorate with domestic socio-economic issues.
Opting to proceed quickly to the polls while foregoing the possibility of making progress on the Palestinian front, Livni would be left with little ability to affect policy in the immediate term. Livni might then opt to fall back on a politics rooted in style and personality in the run-up to new elections.
Should she choose this route, however, she will be playing directly into Netanyahu’s hands. He knows full well that several months can be a lifetime in politics, enough to darken Livni’s halo with clouds of doubt regarding her leadership abilities and her decisiveness. Wrangling with recalcitrant party cohorts and getting muddied in Israel’s political quagmire would risk sacrificing the clean image that ushered her to where she is today.
But forming a new government without elections may be impossible given the distribution of seats in the current Knesset, especially since only Labor — which can expect to do poorly at the polls — has a strong interest in maintaining a Kadima-led government. And even if a coalition arrangement is reached, the political price would be prohibitive. Capitulating to the demands of the ultra-Orthodox Shas party would prove to be a major liability down the line in terms of public opinion, and striking a deal with the Palestinians would, in any event, probably destabilize such a tenuous coalition.
Thankfully, Livni does not have to buy into the binary vise devised by the pundits. There is a third alternative: She can call for new elections and, in the meantime, step up talks with the Palestinians with a view toward concluding a comprehensive agreement that can be presented for public approval at the polls.
Such a move may speak to her Palestinian and American partners, who share her sense of urgency. It would at least temporarily confound her domestic opposition. Above all, it could salvage the last chance for a two-state solution.
The success of such a daring strategy hinges on Livni’s capacity to muster real political courage. She must be willing to inject new substance into the faltering negotiations with the Palestinians. This requires a readiness to revisit the roots of the conflict and to recognize the fundamental asymmetry that has plagued past Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. While success is not guaranteed, conditions are ripe for progress — especially if Livni takes the additional (and long overdue) step of embracing the Arab Peace Initiative, something that would have strong regional as well as international resonance.
Could Livni pull this off? The answer is unclear. What is evident is that if she fails to take an audacious step of this sort, her political career will be short-lived and prospects for a negotiated settlement will dim, and perhaps disappear entirely. It is up to Livni to demonstrate that her victory in the Kadima primaries augurs a new type of leadership. Otherwise she — like her once promising predecessors — will become a footnote in the history of an Israel still desperately looking for ways to open up a new political horizon.
Naomi Chazan is president of the New Israel Fund. She is a former deputy speaker of Israel’s Knesset, where she represented the Meretz Party from1992 to 2003.
Comments
It still remains to be seen if Mr Olmert will resign. If he resigns soon, then Tzipi Livni will get her chance to form her coalition government from within the existing Knesset. It could be, however, that the Knesset will call for early elections, in which case Tzipi Livni will only become the new prime minister if Kadima wins the coming elections - which is not certain at all.
The headline of this article is in bad taste. Why is peace Livni's best option? Any political leader of Israel from any party would like to achieve peace. The end of conflict is the most central interest of the Jewish people. From this poorly-worded headline one could understand that there are those for whom peace is not the best option. Moreover, it could be understood that the achievement of peace is merely an issue of Israeli politics and policies. There is a Palestinian side as well (not to mention other hostile parties such as Hizbullah and Iran). To belittle the other side - its motivation and its aspirations - is a very serious misunderstanding of the Middle East reality. Should a final peace agreement be reached (including borders, Jerusalem, refugees, settlements, Palestinian statehood, etc) - there is still no guarantee that the Palestinian Authority has the strength or the determination to force its entire public to accept this end to conflict. Hamas has the ability to renew the war with Israel, turning the yet theoretical peace arrangement into a very bad joke. Not all the cards are in our hands. We do not live in a situation in which peace "hinges on Livni’s capacity to muster real political courage..." The Palestinian side might be weaker militarily, but it has tremendous determination, making it an equal in the Middle East equation.
Here are the nonnegotiable Palestinian demands 1) Right of return for ALL Palestinian people 2) return to 1967 borders 3) Division of Jerusalem, with explicit control of the Western Wall by the Palestinian government How does Ms Chazan propose Israel give in to these demands without committing suicide? have you ever noticed that right wing critics of Israel are usually engaged in other professions or lines of work, while left wing critics of Israel criticize Israel for a living? What has Ms Chazan accomplished in her career? Is Israel any closer to peace? Has she helped a family out of poverty? Has she cured a disease? She needs to ask herself these questions
As the saying goes, from your lips to God's Ears, Mr. Chazan. But in truth, Israel has burned its bridges with the street level Palestinians it once considered a potential reserve of support. These same Palestinians looked up to Israel as a liberating force that might well help them escape both European colonialism and Arab culture trapping them in past centuries of squallor and despair. Yet, there is a certain reverence to spiritualism among Israelis that, whatever its cause, makes Arab Muslims come to see themselves in fellowship with these Jewish people who died in the millions for their faith/ehtnicity but never capitulated to Western norms. These street population level Muslim Arabs never forgot that and, to this day, say to eachother when despised immigrants in the West: we should stand by our faith and its observance much as the Jews similarly in the Diaspora did. I have heard that from Arabs in the Middle East and abroad thousands of times over several decades. It used to be my marker indicating that I was finally accepted by them. Since my life was often at stake, my survival makes my own case. But when Jews choose land and subsidized homes over humanitarianism, it becomes a Semitic sectraian fight. Arabs now see Jews as going out of their way to humiliate them, oppress them and chase them out. To an objective observer this view is not without merit.
Livi will have to re-cross this river and cross it again, trying to bring back the times of Arab admiration for the Jewish survival. I recall, living all my life deep in the anti-Semitic world of East Europe that every Jew-hater had his favorite Jews that he felt deep setimental attchment to. And I will never forget the many Jews, survivors of the Holocaust, who adopted me as their "lansman" and educated me to hope over our long common post-WWII refuge.
All this points to a back-up-so-as-to-start-anew that Livni aquired as lucky baggage on her genetic feminity double-X chromosomes. Yes, there is a power of the woman in a Semitic home that is unique and trumps even physics. I can feel it watching her, though I rarely like her comportment and words-- but then there's that "she-magic" I can always feel no matter what. Perhaps finally free from their desperate challenge to prove themselves "mensch," Israeli men can exploit the wisdom that comes from a woman at the helm. History has precedent, but never as youthful and today-ish as Livni.
If she finds her mystical center of magic, she may well appeal to Arabs before she even conquers her fellow Israelis. Then, her accomplishments will speak for themselves next to worn out old hard hat-hard heads like Barak and Netanyahu, both who never succeeded at much and both of whom bear Prime Ministerial corruption charges from the past like cans tied to a running dog's tail. I had thought the US needs a "mom" to stand by it and nurse it back to health from the Rove-disease from which it has suffered these eight long years. But this was not to be, for, alas, she "stood by her man," all the way from sure victory down to defeat. Israel is giving Livni a "girl's head start" before the next election. If she can move fast and prove that girls don't run fast but walk straight, perhaps she can save Israel by making it a real country instead of an bottomless welfare pit on the back of American taxpayers, making Israel recognized as the sci-tech liberating leader of the Arabs from their one-product (oil) Banana Republic status. Jews and Muslims always felt deep comfort in the presence of their mothers that brought them into the world and cared for them, in contrast to how they feel about the women in their own lives. But Livni can make a liberating coup for all the latter women, all by showing that peace requires a woman's touch. It's a long shot, but God always sent a hero and a hero there to save each people of the Middle East. She may prove to be the one, or she may be a disaster, just like the two guys vying for yet another shot at the Premiership where both abismally failed. If a miracle happens for peace and progress, why not again in the Holy Land and why not Mother Tzipi?
I wonder what is Naomi Chazan's dictionary definition of "ruthless attacks on her experience, her judgment, her appearance and her gender". Indeed, the experience of any candidate for PM is an issue of public concern, and it's a topic of debate in any political campaign. It's quite normal. Tzipi Livni's experience was likewise a legitimate topic of discussion. There was nothing "ruthless" about it, and it was quite fair and balanced. A "ruthless attack" against her gender is, without question, a figment of Naomi Chazan's imagination. It's total nonsense. It was mentioned occasionally that the leading candidate for PM is a woman, but beyond an occasional reminder of the Golda's years - gender wasn't a issue at all.
Naomi Chazan raises other issues that remain undefined. What does it mean "to recognize the fundamental asymmetry that has plagued past Israeli-Palestinian negotiations"? Is she claiming that there is some fault on the part of Israel that we are stronger than the Palestinian side? Well, I don't really know. I just don't think that there would be any peace negotiations if Israel were not the obviously stronger side in this conflict. It's very clear that if there were symmetry, all Palestinians factions would agree on a military solution to the conflict (in Arabic - "al-kifah al-musallah", the armed struggle).
I would be curious to hear what are the "roots of the conflict" in Naomi Chazan's dictionary. I have noticed that a typical article in the Forward is very short, and yet a line or two would have been appropiate to give us at least a hint as to what is the cause of conflict in her eyes. Embracing the Arab Peace Initiative would not mean that the conflict would come to an end. Surely it is obvious that the Hamas and many others intend to continue "the struggle against Zionism" even if there is an agreement between Israel and the Arab League. Such an agreement would deal with the results of the 1948 war (refugees, the birth of Israel) and the result of the 1967 war (the status of Jerusalem), but it would not deal with the very roots of a conflict that came into existence long before 1948.