Dr. Ron Breiman, YNET (Written June 07)
On a summer night in 1992, news anchor Haim Yavin declared a “revolution” had taken place, cries of joy were sounded, Rabin came to power, and Israel began to descend the slippery slope: Black September of 1993, the dangerous agreement with arch-terrorist Arafat and the bringing of the Palestinian occupation army into the Land of Israel; Summer 2000, the flight from Lebanon and opening of the Oslo War, the longest of Israel’s wars; Summer 2005, the flight and expulsion from Gush Katif, followed by the Second Lebanon War and the emergence of a second Lebanon in the Gaza Strip.
How symbolic that on the week where Hamas won in Gaza, we saw both the architect of the flight from Lebanon and the person who through his caprices brought the Oslo War to the center of political life in Israel.
Josef, the son of Jacob, promised Pharaoh seven good years, and said that if he conducted himself wisely through them he would be able to survive the seven bad years that would ensue. In Israel, 14 years have passed, and the concept of land in exchange for peace, or “peace,” which unsurprisingly was revealed to be land in exchange for terror, still has not given way to a different doctrine that is more logical and Zionist.
Therefore, we need to sober up; we need a complete change. Whether it comes in 2007 or 2008, we need a substantial change of direction.
We need a revolution in the perceptions that were used to brainwash us for many years by a tendentious and enlisted media that rushed forward like an obedient herd in favor of Oslo, in favor of the flight from Lebanon, in favor of the expulsion from Gaza, in favor of the fence, which the enemy crosses above ground and below, and in favor of assisting the enemy with humanitarian crises instead of those faced by Israeli citizens.
Even at this time, the media amuse themselves in a superficial manner with the term “Hamastan” in Gaza vis-�-vis “Fatah-land” in Judea and Samaria, and do not even think of a desirable option for Israel and for the enemy: Realizing the right of return of the true master of the house, of the State of Israel’s rule in the Land of Israel, instead of all the golden calves that have failed us, as was to be expected.
The polls are indeed predicting a revolution and predict the return of Benjamin Netanyahu to the Prime Minister’s Office. In 1992, the Left expected Rabin to perform better than he did during his first tenure as prime minister. In 2007, the Right expects Netanyahu to show improvement and to enhance the Zionist characteristics in his policy during his second tenure; not just the minimization of the Oslo damages, but a true revolution.
Party of hope
During the revolution of 1992, it was the leftist Meretz with its 12 Knesset members that constituted the leftist indicator in the Rabin government and guided him to the right direction in terms of its own perception, but the wrong direction historically. The revolution needed today requires a Zionist camp, a new hope, a serious political body, both parliamentarian and non-parliamentarian, that would serve as a rightist indicator in the Netanyahu government and ensure that the right path is followed.
For many years, even when the Right was in power, the Left controlled Israel through two arms: The parliamentarian arm (Meretz) and the non-parliamentarian arm (Peace Now.) This winning recipe, which had proven itself negatively, should be adapted to positive Zionist needs: A (vital) party that would operate in the Knesset in addition to non-parliamentarian rightist movements.
We need a force that would salvage important areas such as human rights and the environment from the leftist takeover and prove that human rights should also be maintained when it comes to Jews, and that the environment and all things green should be protected beyond the “Green Line” as well.
This new party of hope should be the address for many good people, and especially those who do not want to or cannot vote for the Likud on the one hand, or the National Union on the other hand.
We are talking about a large, “orange” (pro-settlement) secular public concerned that the Likud includes those who were considering a move to Kadima or deserters that are looking for government jobs who are refugees of the waning Kadima. There are also those who worry that Likud was unable to completely rid itself of corruption.
We are talking about a secular, orange public unable to vote for a party list whose appearance and language are religious. We are talking about a public that the media and polls do not count, but its absence from the polling stations in the previous elections contributed greatly to the low turnout rate.
The upcoming elections are not about deciding between leftist-seculars from central Israel and rightist-religious from Judea and Samaria. We must not assist the media and the Left in presenting the contest that way. These elections are about changing direction: From the post-Zionist and anti-Zionist direction that ruled Israel for the 14 bad years to the Zionist direction predicted by Herzl, and whose principles were proven right, for those who needed proof, in the 14 years that have elapsed since September 1993.
The needed revolution requires the enlistment of every voter, and therefore we must not give up on the important above-mentioned public. We are not talking about yet another split in the rightist camp, but rather, the provision of a parliamentarian response to the desires of those who back Zionism and settlement activity, view the State of Israel’s Jewish character as important, and reside in the coastal plain, even if they drive on Shabbat.
For the sake of the nearing revolution, a secular orange party may emerge as the tie breaker and a winning recipe.
Dr Breiman is the former chairman of Professors for a Strong Israel
