Two years after having registered one of the most remarkable victories in Israeli electoral history, Ariel Sharon has disposed of all his original coalition partners and recruited an entirely new set of political bedfellows.
That massive change of horses is not only drastic and unprecedented, but also dangerous. Governments are meant to last four years, and do so while retaining at least most of their core partners. Sadly, Sharon’s precedent exacerbates an already severe instability whereby ministers and their senior appointees cannot be assumed to last in their offices much more than a year or two.
Then again, the reality within which Sharon has been operating is indeed unique, demanding equally unique political realignments. Sharon’s determination to dismantle settlements could not possibly be realized with the National Religious Party, nor with the National Union. Similarly, one can appreciate Sharon’s apparent desire to bring on board religious parties with which to execute the disengagement plan, even if that comes at the cost of shedding a loyal partner like Shinui.
The new government’s most daunting goal will, of course, be to pull Israel out of the Gaza Strip and northern Samaria, as has already been decided by the outgoing government and approved by the Knesset. That goal, however, could have been accomplished by a secular coalition. The reason such a configuration was not chosen was the great desire to avert civil strife, a goal that stands a better chance of being accomplished with at least some religious politicians on Sharon’s bandwagon.
It follows that a major goal for this coalition in general, and its religious members in particular, is to avert a civil war as Israelis are detached from communities they built with the government’s encouragement.
To be nationally responsible, United Torah Judaism’s rabbis must now take to the synagogues and preach the kind of prudence that their spiritual leader — Rabbi Shalom Elyashiv — has demonstrated in deciding to join this government. At a time when right-wing rabbis habitually condemn Sharon as a criminal and his plan as a profanity, it is urgent that those rabbis who see in such rhetoric a religious abomination speak out — loudly, clearly and publicly.
While chances are low that United Torah Judaism will actively assist Sharon’s main effort, the Labor Party can be counted on to make matters worse, by returning to the Oslo-era’s peace-in-our-time rhetoric. Labor leader Shimon Peres may disagree, but the fact is that the public long ago lost faith in his New Middle East vision.
The public does not believe in the imminent prospects for a durable peace with the Palestinian Authority; that is why the mainstream electorate voted the way it did two years ago. That is also why Sharon designed the disengagement plan as a unilateral mechanism, one that separates rather than integrates the Israeli and Palestinian peoples, and why there is such widespread support for the separation fence, despite Peres’ opposition to its construction.
It follows that just as United Torah Judaism would do well to resist the temptation to pander to those who stand to Sharon’s right, Labor must avoid winking at those to his left. If it fails in this, it might find itself unwittingly causing the coalition’s disintegration, disengagement’s derailment and its own demise.
For his part, Sharon should remember that his partners not only stand to ruin his disengagement designs, but also his domestic agenda. Both Labor and United Torah Judaism can be counted on to hammer at Benjamin Netanyahu’s economic reforms.
Sharon and Netanyahu should follow the notion that the best defense is a good offense, and should therefore press harder for additional structural and tax reforms that a still-too-weak economy desperately needs, as Stanley Fischer, the Bank of Israel governor-designate, would surely agree.
This government will have to work hard, both to avoid a tumultuous mess and to realize the diplomatic and economic potential of this moment in history. We have gotten used to the main goal of our governments being self-perpetuation. As challenging as the year ahead will be, this government should aspire to more than mere survival.