By Michael Freund
December 13, 2002
Originally published in the Jerusalem Post.
For the average right-wing voter, these ought to be heady days. With the Labor party all but certain to get walloped when Israelis go to the ballot box next month, and the Likud set to double in size, it would seem the right can at last breathe a sigh of relief.
Finally, Israel will have a solid and stable right-wing government, one that will erase the catastrophe of Oslo and reinforce our hold over the Land of Israel.
Or will it?
The implicit assumption behind this view is that a Likud government is necessarily equal to a right-wing government. But that, unfortunately, is no longer something that can be taken for granted.
The right, after all, has consistently spoken out against the notion of a Palestinian state, and it has long opposed yielding parts of the Land of Israel to foreign control. Yet even a cursory look at some of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's recent rhetoric makes one wonder whether the Likud can still be called a right-wing party.
At a press conference last Thursday commemorating the 1947 UN Partition Plan, Sharon reaffirmed his intention to carry out his own partition plan by agreeing to the establishment of a Palestinian state. He vowed to grant the Palestinians 'territorial continuity' - a code word for territorial concessions by Israel - and pointedly refused to rule out the dismantling of Jewish settlements in Judea, Samaria and Gaza.
In effect, Sharon is saying yes to a Palestinian state, yes to Israeli withdrawal, and yes to the uprooting of Jews from their homes. How, then, is he any different from Labor and the left?
Back in July 1998, Labor dove Yossi Beilin wryly noted in an opinion piece published in this newspaper that, "if the Likud hadn't come to power, there would be people in Israel who would still believe that the Likud has some other solution to the problems of our region."
Furthermore, Beilin wrote at the time, "when even Ariel Sharon is speaking of a Palestinian state, the Likud has buried any imaginary solution that may have lingered in people's minds had we [i.e. Labor] remained in power."
Now, some four years later, with Sharon heading the Likud, Beilin's words take on new meaning. For, by sanctioning the creation of a Palestinian state in his capacity as the Prime Minister, Sharon has ironically set the stage for the realization of Oslo's ultimate goal - the establishment of "Palestine."
He has given it the imprimatur of a Likud premier and, inexplicably, he has done so precisely when it is obvious to nearly everyone that Oslo has collapsed in failure.
If Sharon's words are not enough to persuade you, then consider his actions. As Prime Minister, he has refrained from arresting or exiling Yasser Arafat, he has refused to dismantle the Palestinian Authority, and he has continued to transfer funds to it even as he accuses it of engaging in terror.
Under Sharon, no new Jewish settlements have been established, and several months ago, he even allowed the army to forcibly remove several outposts built by Jews in the territories.
Again, one cannot help but ask: how is this any different from what Labor and the left would do?
To be fair, Sharon has taken a tougher line against Palestinian violence than his predecessor, and he has succeeded in building a strong relationship with the Bush Administration in Washington. But that does not take away from the fact that he has presided over the sharpest increase in anti-Israel terrorism since the establishment of the State, a wave so lethal and terrifying that had it happened under a Labor government, Sharon would undoubtedly have been unsparing in his criticism.
Even on the economic front, it is difficult to see how the Likud can claim to be the bearer of a conservative, right-wing agenda. Under Sharon and Likud Finance Minister Silvan Shalom, Israel's public sector remains one of the largest and most bloated in the Western world, with government spending equivalent to a mammoth 54.9 percent of GDP. In the United States, by contrast, the percentage is 30.4 percent.
In the past two years of Likud rule, little has been done to advance important initiatives such as privatizing government-owned firms, slashing bureaucratic red tape and deregulating the economy. Taxes such as VAT were actually increased, from 17% to 18%, new taxes were imposed on passive income earned abroad, and the cabinet grew to a record size of 28 ministers and 14 deputy ministers.
Though Sharon and Shalom did seek certain limited reductions in the state budget, their record speaks for itself: they have transformed the Likud from a party of fiscal onservatives into one of "tax and spend liberals."
For all intents and purposes, then, the choice facing Israel's voters come January 28 is hardly as stark as it might seem, with Sharon seemingly intent on finishing the job that Labor began.
Hence, anyone interested in seeing a strong right-wing emerge from the upcoming elections would do well to ponder the following question long and hard: is the Likud still a right-wing party?
The answer, by now, should be clear: if it walks like a dove, talks like a dove, and spends like a liberal, the conclusion, unavoidably, is no.
Views expressed by the author do not
necessarily reflect those of israelinsider.
 
|
|
|
|
Click on the blue headline to read a Talkback comment and respond to it. Click on the  icon to send a private email to the talkback writer. The icon appears only if the writer has decided to be contacted. If no popup window appears, please make sure your popup blocker allows israelinsider.com.
|
|
| |
|
