After innumerable deals, the new Israeli parliament finally found a way out of its stalemate, through the formula of a government of national unity. But that is still a very long way from solving the crisis of leadership of the Zionist state. Despite the unprecedented majority enjoyed by the new government, it very quickly teps to solve the two main problems that preoccupy the Israeli popu lation and the ruling class of the country - that is, the economic crisis and the bogging down of Israeli forces in Lebanon.
again, the Zionist state distinguished itself by its inventiveness in the area of the institutions of government.
The key word in the agreement signed by the representatives of the Avoda
Party] and the Likoud (1) is
"parity." Everything is on a parity basis in this government.
This is the rule for apportioning the cabinet ministries, for determining the composition of the inner cabinet, the makeup of the main committees in the Knesset [parliament], and so on. The government's program is reduced to the largest common denominator in the programs of the two parties, and every minister is provided with a "counor a secretary of state belonging to the opposing formation.
As was foreseen by the Labor leader
Shimon Peres before the elections, when he rejected Yitshak Shamir's proposal for a national unity government, this government is inherently a government of national paralysis, incapable of taking any
During the election campaign, the two big parties promised to strain every effort to put an end to the evils eating at the vitals of the Jewish state - to withdraw the Israeli army from Lebanon and to produce an overall plan for straightening out the economy. More than three months after the elections, how far have they gotten?
As regards the economy, while the government has taken a series of steps directly attacking the workers' buying power, it has been unable to produce any overall plan. And everyone agrees that, grave as they are for the workers, these measures will have no effect on the evils corroding the Israeli economy.
As regards withdrawing
Israeli forces from Lebanon, the new government has indeed made statement after statement suggesting this. But it has never failed to add that any retreat to the 1982 lines is conditional on a political accord guaranteeing that the situation will not be any worse than the one that existed prior to the invasion! This means, in the best of cases, that any withdrawal is ten months away. And the occupation is costing two proved incapable of taking any seriou soldiers killed per week on the average and two million dollars a day.
With respect to a hypothetical political initiative, behind the contradictory statements of the premier, who says that he does not reject the Reagan initiative, and the deputy premier, who continues to verbally reject it, the real differences are
"Words are cheap," Shimon Peres is saying in effect, "and so we can call on King Hussein to negotiate and show world public opinion that it is the Arab camp that is refusing to sit down to the negotiating table." Israel is not ready to make any concession that could break the impasse.
On the situation in the occupied territories, moreover, the government has indeed promised to impose a "freeze" building new settlements. cision has no practical effect, since 70 percent of the land has already been expropriated and simply "enlarging" the existing settlements would make it possible to pursue the process of Jewish colonizaThe Palestinians
As regards repressive policy, the new minister of defense, Yitshak Rabin, certainly going to try to avoid certain stupid provocations that his predecessor, Sharon, featured in his policy toward the
Rabin even might make some concessions to Palestinian currents close to the Jordanian regime. Nonetheless, under the pressure of the West Bank settlers, whose representatives are in the government, Rabin's margin for maneuver
In fact, in recent months, we have seen an escalation of provocations by the settlers designed to arouse violent reactions from the local population, which would then be used to justify increased repres sion. The first two measures taken by the occupation forces following the installation of the new government are symptomatic in this regard.
On the one hand, there was the rejection of the security services' demand for will hold up for five long years. mediate danger that threatens the government is, of course, not the parliamentary opposition, which is completely marginal, nor even any imminent perspective of a working-class counteroffensive vival of the antiwar movement, since the great majority of those who were involved in it are ready to give Rabin a
It is in the government itself, in particular in the component of Likud represented by Herut [freedom] that unrest is rising.
The two figures who bear the greatest responsibility for the political and economic failures of the previous government (respectively Sharon and Aridor) have allied themselves with the No. 2 figure in Herut, minister of construction David Levy, in a systematic assault on what passes for the economic policy of the new government, to which they belong.
Not hesitating to use populist demagogy, denouncing the economic measures as antilabor and the new ruling team as a government of the well off, the Herut leaders would not be unhappy if a governmental crisis led to new elections. think they could win, thanks to the unpopularity of the economic measures, and present leader, Yitshak Shamir.
But in this game also the outcome is against the minister of finance, who is
Liberal wing of Likud [see footnote 1] could force the latter to provoke a split in Likud, which would then enable Labor to form a government without Herut. And in that case, Peres could remain premier for five years.
As is clear, far from undertaking a restoration of everything that was destroyed by seven years of the Likud regime, the new government has devoted itself to maneuvering between the attempts of the various factions that make it up to increase their part of the pie. Couid there more tangible expression of the structural crisis of the Zionist state?
The Union, the main rival of Labor. Like the latter, it is also a coalition, consisting mainly of Herut (Freedom), which get the votes of poor oriental Jews and the Liberal Party. historically the party of independent middle-class (occidental) Jews devoted to free enterprise. Herut's origins go back to the Revisionthe right-wing Zionists led by Jabotinsky. The Liberals go back to the General Zionists, that is. those elements that did not identify with the religious wing, the labor wing, or the ultranationalists. The main contradiction in the Likud thus runs between Herut, whose base the poor oriental Jews, and the Liberals, with a conservative middle-class base. - IV.
International Viewpoint 14 January 1985
Thus, there its own military industry.
will be no reduction in the amounts of
The money will keep military loans.
flowing into Israeli coffers.
But the same is not true for the nonmilitary budget.