|
Back
to Studies page
The book contains 390 pages with an introduction,
five sections, and sixteen chapters. At the end of every section
there is a list of footnotes. It also contains an index of Arabic
and English references, the Israeli newspapers and magazines, and a
list of the documentary sources.
The Introduction:
The author defines his book and its purpose as an analysis of a special
case which is “Israel's” case. He refers the structure of the Jewish
democracy to its formative elements. The book is a mindful critical
contribution to the understanding of Israel “Society and state” in
which the means of analytical social science were used. The
ideological dimension it encompasses doesn’t exceed that of the
Israeli academic researches.
The book is not a retortion to the specialized
Israelis, nor is is a response to Arab westerners, nor a
confirmation that we are able to analyze them as they analyze us.
The writer is concerned in research and does not mean to play the
role of a researcher or to seek “Political Correct” to protect him
from mockery or severe scientific evaluation. It is not
historioography of the Zionist thought. The writer wants to provide
a perspective of complex society through a comprehensive view based
on the required social cognitive methods in research, according to
the nature of the subject without, being fanatic to an ideological
system, and with a more strict analysis of the society and state in
“Israel”, with a more scientific picture, by means of exposing the
problems of its democracy, which the author considers an incomplete
case in the Arabic researches, because one of the calamities of Arab
scientific research is the prevention of knowledge accumulation as a
behavioral stereotype which has almost become a nor or habit where
the researcher considers himself the first to write about the topic
of the research.
We still have to mention that Dr.Bshara is
conscious of the position from which he criticizes the society and
state in “Israel”!
Section I : Chapter 1: Contradictions of the Jewish
Democracy.
Israel isn’t a dictatorship nor astate ruled by a
military or a single party. It is a state with general and
proportional Parliamentary elections available. The whole country is
a regarded as one electoral zone, and people vote to partisan lists
and not to individuals. When non sectarian parties dominate, it will
be the ideal way for the nation to build a state.
There were many endeavors to change the electoral
techniques, but all have failed in persuading the Israeli voter of
preference. Now, the elections are parliamentary and the parliament
elects the Prime Minister. The post of the president is
representative and ceremonial In Israel, where the separation of
authorities is established alongside mechanisms of internal
balancing.
The judicial authority is independent and still developing this
independence armed with basic laws considered as a constitution on
which this authority depends on in monitoring the legality of any
law issued. This caused keen confrontations inside the Israeli
society. From the problematics of the modern Jewish democracy are :
the conflict about the relation between the religion and state, the
conflict between the application of liberties or expanding it , and
the conflict between the equality of citizens and the Judaism of the
state>
As for the freedom of speech, there is a prevailing
freedom in Israel within the frame of the individual’s rights, but
it faces a case of recruitment and employment in the national and
security problems, in the case of criticism from the outside and in
dealing with foreign and Arab journalists who cover what happens in
the occupied Arab territories .
The melting crucible in the Israeli society in the
Israeli army and the Zionist ideology form a sticking social glue
despite the class sorting which developed widely in the Israeli
society and which led to the Israeli political variety different
from tribal or sectarian competition which causes civil ware.
In consolidating this opinion, the author reviews a
comprehensive statistical comparative study a bout the situations of
the democratic states in questioning, representation, stability,
extent of representation, rights of citizens, liberties, corruption
and press. The study gives low marks to Israel in questioning
(because of the army interference in decision making), also in human
rights and civil rights (because of the breach of Arab rights in
West Bank and Gaza Strip), the same in the application of the social
equality, Israel occupies a middle status in the independence degree
of “the systems of law Execution”, the econonomical and political
rights and the cultural distinction occupies a high status in the
proportion of representation in the parliament and control in the
state. The study shows that the Jewish democracy marks a continuous
decrease in the confidence of the public. It reveals that the
definition of equality to Arabs in the state of the Jews means
giving them rights at this or that degree and not complete equality
among citizens irrespective of their belongings Israel doesn’t
separate between the nation, nationality and religion, so it can’t
separate between the religion and state. Here lies another problem
like the culture of settling that hinders democracy. Also
considering the state not a Jewish state but the state of the Jews,
that is the state of many who are not citizens in it. The new
conservatives in Israel see in this state as a natural case for “the
National state”. This theorizing concludes that “Israel” is an
ordinary secular case among other states and not a theological
state, although their proof depends on the “Sacred History”. They
don’t notice the hidden contradiction between the sovereignty and
Judaism which is seen by the beholder from the outsides this
contradiction is historical and formative concerning the colonial
nature of Israel which arose as a colonial state or within the frame
of a colonial activity, and this can’t develop democracy.
Chapter2 : A Jewish and democratic state:
Ben Gorion wrote “ We don’t have to separate the
religion from the state since there is a unity of fate between the
state of “Israel” and the Jewish people “means that there is a
complete conformity between the religion and nationality as defined
by Zionism. For this the term” the Jewish people which is a synonym
to the Jewish religion is used in “Israel”.
Despite the differences among Israeli researchers
concerning their democracy and state, the language used is always
one taken from the Jewish law and thought, in other meaning, they
use the same source in different styles to reach results which are
apparently secular, religious, national and Zionist etc… but as in
the essence it is one (the land of Israel is a Godly promise, and
the establishment of this state is fulfillment for this promise, so
it is a legal existence).
Before the rise of the Jewish state, the secularists,
Represented by the secularist Osichkeen say “the historical request
of the Jewish nation is to be returned to her boundaries in the land
that the Israeli people promised by the divine care before four
thousand years”. For this, these adopted the terms and ideas of the
Jewish religion and its religions store for salvation to historical
of looks and expressions (national – political) used by Zionism.
The orthodox religious movements considered the Zionist
movement at first as dishonest “Dishonest – Christ”, Who later
reinforced the connection of religion and religious movement with
Zionist since the same salvation was the bond.
Lawfully, Israel hasn’t a constitution, but “the basic
laws”, and practically, they are separated sections in the
constitution when necessary .
The Supreme Court has the right to look into any law when asked for
that.
When this law is a constitution with a religions essence, its revision
in the Supreme Coast becomes every important process not only to
confirm or strike it from the side of language and depending which
from the answer whatever the mental belonging of the judge is, the
language used and depending is the and after all the aim is the
same: Protection of “Israel” : the land of the Jews, a Zionist
State, the State of the Jews, a democratic and Jewish state….etc
Barak, the Liberal says “ We are a young state with an old people
returned to his homeland… the beginning of salvation is to fulfill
the Zionist sight….”As for Manahem Iloan, he concentrates on the
necessity of the court to the Hebrew law and Jewish Legality in case
there is a lawful gap. Then, the Supreme Court is Israeli in its
Liberal and conservative sparts and settles an ideological situation
for the advantage of the Zionism, it is a Zionist Court.
The academics essure that “Israel” is the state of the
Jews and it is democratic. The secularists say that the idea of the
secular identity is in disperse Roan Jafezone and the secular
Hirtser believe that the Jewish identity is for sure religious :
Bosh, the American President said “We are committed strongly by the
security of Israel as vital Jewish state”. In his Road Map he
demands a Palestinian cession of every claim to have the right for
the returning of the Palestinian refugees to the inside of Israel
and ask the Palestinians to declare that “Israel” is a Jewish state
Charoun expresses that the Arab citizens have right in the country,
but not on the country. He believes that the concept of equality is
impossible because the concept of rights is originally damaged.
If the Hebrew state wants to keep its Judaism, it will
find itself in a contradictory state with democracy and its values.
Chapter3 : the Eddy of the Religion in the State
Historically.
Europe gave the modern Age a classical sample for the secularization
process. What concerns us is the separation of the religion from the
nation. This separation resulted in tension and conflict.
In the religions world, which is a social world, a
yearning rose to return unity between religion and state, then the
political religion will becomes ancestral movements in the world
pure of religion rose secular “sacred places” Like the nation. The
home land, the ruling party….etc.
All these movements are the result of the secular process, but they use
contradictory terms and concepts. This means that the religious
ancestral movements differ from the religious institution because it
need the process of secularization. There is a clash between
ancestry and nationality as the case between the Arabic nationality
and the Islamic ancestry with respect to Israel, it is the only
example for the meeting of the religious ancestral trend with the
national extreme direction because secularization wasn’t found in
the concepts of the Zionist movement, and the clash didn’t lead to
the separation between the nation and the religion.
The clash which is still being discussed in “Israel” was
not only between the nationalists and the secularists, but between
the religious themselves also.
In this religious and doctrinal clash, they want to define who is the
Jews. This was reflected in the Immigration law to specify the Jew.
In Israel, unlike the “Nation States” the nation doesn’t coincide
with the nativity. Every Israeli citizen is not part of the Israeli
nation.
In Israel the secularists adopted the idea of militarism
as a melting means in the Israeli society, and this is another clash
between the secularists and the religious. When the Zionism idea was
put forth, it was at a clash with the religious despite using
religious ideas to the extent that it described the Zionists as
wicked according to the saying of the rabbi Ghore, because it aims
at changing the Jews to nation as other nations. These movements
believe that the salvation of the Jews is celestial and not earthly.
Most of the traditional current moves gradually to coexist with
Zionism and alliance with it after the rising of the state
considering Israel as historical reality. The secular Zionist leader
Hayeem lviseman say “God has promise is our most important document.
And we don’t gain our right on the land of Israel from the British
Mandate but from the Torah”
Section II : the Security Tendency
The Israeli security obsession is not a more anesthesia to the
crowds, or “Opium of people”, or a mere tool in the Israeli military
elite hands to drive the crowds, despite the charge of this tendency
to a prevailing culture in need of reasons, excuses, myths and lies
we are interested in the deep mental roots of this tendency.
1-
Deep understanding to the size of the crime committed against the
Palestinian people.
2-
Assimilation of the size of the Arabic hatred and the non-expecting
to the approval of any Arabic in the existence of “Israel”.
3-
State building cannot be completed except on the basis of strength.
armament, and permanent caution.
These three point I have their clear support which cannot be confuted
in the speech of Mochi Dayyan on the day of escorting an Israeli
youth killed at the hands of sneakers from Gaza on 19 April 1956,
when he said in an extreme uneasy frankness: the Palestinians have
been living here since eight years in refugee camps, and we in he
rit their lands and villages in which they lived and in which their
father lived. Lands and villages in which they lived and in which
their father lived. We won’t ask the Arabs for the blood of Roic,
but we ask ourselves how we paid no attention to look clearly into
our destiny and see the message of our generation with all its
harshness. The Arabs (in Gaza) are praying to destroy us. We have to
be armed and ready morning and evening so as not to be annihilated
from here, began the security tendency that dominated the political,
cultural, social and economical sides of life in Israel. Israel
which discerns that it rose on the debris of another people who and
other Arabian people do not admit its existence, finds that there is
need to convince them by using force or by wars.
This understanding determines the Israeli policies and
justifies the revenge borderline operations, the war of 1956, and
waging the anticipated deterrence strength will bring peace in the
end this means briefly that there is no choice before Israel except
to be in a state of complete readiness to war and to wage the war to
abort any Arabic plan to wage war. Ben Gorion said, “If I were an
Arabian leader, I wouldn’t accept the existence of Israel”. This is
natural because use captured their land which God promised to give
it to use. This security tendency was exposed to comprehensive moral
criticism, but without giving the substitute Ideas from the
qualities of this tendency is being not the time of war trying to
justify it during battle.
There is another situation represented by Dayyan in dealing
with the revenge borderline operations not as a means of defense,
but as a means to escalation towards war. This includes all sides of
life because the Arabs didn’t recognize Israel, then it is in a
state of security danger. With the completion of the Cheke bargain
of weapons with Egypt, there was estimation for another war waged by
the Arabs after 1956. After this bargain, the Israeli confessed that
the security situations were tumbling down intentionally. Egypt and
Syria were attacked after borderline operations. This sample was
repeated when Israel found it was time for war and they began to
spread intelligent reports that the Arabs were directed to war.
Chapter 1: The Formation of the Security Creed
The security creed was formed with its military strategic extreme
from four constituents.
1-
There is no choice before Israel except and preparation for it.
2-
The superiority of the Arabs in number, economy, and geography
obliges Israel to develop its abilities qualitatively to have
temporary superiority during the stages of war and prepare for
emergency. From here, rose the concept of “people under Arms” or
(the Nation in the Military Uniform). Israel kept a permanent
regular professional army, compulsory army, and reserve army. The
importance of this is that the Israeli man is either a real soldier
or a soldier by force and he always live the obsession of the
security considerations continuously.
3-
Achieving one victory after another till the Arabs are convinced
gradually that the choice of force will never achieve a political
Arabic implementation.
4-
Israel worked to reach an alliance with one superpower at least and
this was achieved with the United states completely after the war of
1967 It worked on having alliance with non-Arabic countries
surrounding the Arabian countries and had contact, dialogue and
cooperation with minorities in the area such as Iran the Shah,
Turkey, Kurds and Ethiopia>
Chapter2: The Internal Considerations:
Their Role in the Nation Building.
The internal considerations don’t mean the
need of Israel for war, but the intended is the domination of the
security ideology on the political and economical life as part of
Nation Building the army doesn’t from danger on the Jewish
Democracy, but part of it and one of the basic constituents of
“tribe”. The Israeli security depends on every vital thing such as
economical, agricultural, scientific, settling..etc. Zionism aimed a
building a man opposite to the picture of the week Jew. Men to
plough the land and carry arms to make a fighting people According
to Ben Gorion’s concept, all the armed Zionist organizations were
merged in the army which doesn’t confess any identity over that of
the state.
Section III: Chapter1 : Economy,
Secularization and Politics.
Israel has witnessed basic economical
charge since its foundation. It rose on ascetic and agricultural
settlement, distribution of shares and on public sector. Then
changed to liberal economy depending on private sector on public
sector. Then changed to liberal economy depending on private sector
and industry. The dynamic force of direct economical advantage and
concerned in the political reconciliation with the Arabs have
increased.
The contribution of the U.S.A in the Israeli economy was very
important useful in the seventies where the security consumption
reached 17% from the whole production.
Without the American donations, it could reach 33.5 % which means
downfall of economy or security. After seventies till now, the
direct Americans existence in the area, the interlocking of the
Israeli economy with that of the world, the technological
development, the downfall of the Soviet Union, and the
neutralization and weakening of great military forces led to
decrease in security expenditure where it was an obstacle before
evolution and led to pumping lots of money civil industries and
change in the Israeli economy. There was a gradual decrease in the
domination of the state on the economy. This led to the rising of
general forces carrying ideologies and values different from those
during the stage of the state foundation.
As for the Israeli military industry, it a great economical
reserve because it exports what is worth 2.2 milliard dollars and
employs 35 thousands laborers. It seems losing in whole, and need
continuous governmental assistance. Economy in this case left a deep
social effects. Israeli became the second state after the U.S.A for
the non-existence of equality and the widening of the gap in incomes
and the increase in the number of poor families. Israeli changed
from a state of luxury to a state of help. The uprising, the
security situation and external factors after Sep.11,2001 were
reflected negatively on the Israeli economy, where the world economy
was afflicted by stagnation due to the American war against
terrorism, which increased the pressure on the Israeli society and
its internal contradiction.
Chapter 2: Some Argumentative Sides of Secularization in Israeli.
In Israeli secularism didn't have an effect in this basic formation
of the relation between the state and the nation, but stabilized the
nature of the Judaism of the state and the society and began to look
for a Jewish identity which surpasses commitment with the riots of
the Jewish religion. Israeli is discovered again universally as an
axis for this Jewish and secularized identity. The previous stage of
the history of Zionism was characterized by secularizing Judaism,
but in the present stage it is characterized by taking up Zionism.
Capter IV: Chapter 1: The Victories and the Defeated in the Israeli
Elections. Brief Historical Backgrounds of the Two Stages of Barak
and Charoun.
Till the year 1977 when "allikoud" reached the power, Israeli was
practically the state of one party, Labor Party, so the ruling party
with its elite interlocked among the security, economical and
political systems of the state, at the beginning, it was difficult
to talk about a civil Israeli society. Thus, the faith in the
socialistic thought imported from Europe with the Laborious
immigrations was a means to establish a Jewish economical
regulation. So, there was the general Laborers syndicate, the
Histidrout and the Kibrits. The 1967 war came after radical
expression in the formal policies of Israeli from mere demand to
recognize it within the borders of 1949 to an alliance with the West
colonial forces to fulfill basic achievements.
1. Striking the movement of the Arabic union in its form supported
by a big Arab country and defeating it militarily.
2. Occupying Arabic, lands which reach triple of Israel area. This
changed the forces of the security tendency that reached the
occupation power from a "political negotiative document" to a
political Strategic situation.
3. Deepening the connection of Israel with the American supports.
4. The flowing of the investment money in a way that the Israeli
economy didn't witness before.
5. This war played the role of confirming the success of the bet on
the Zionism before the Jews of the world, so Zionism spread among
them and the Jewish capital participated in consolidating the status
and size of the middle Jewish class.
The interlocking between the Labor party and the state formed a
meeting point between the Eastern Jews and the new middle class. So,
two political and social blocs rose in Israel at the same time:
Allikoud Bloc and Labor Party Bloc which brought the Likoud to power
(1984-1977). This bloc changed the way in which the Labor Party
death with Palestinian Settlement, and Later Aloan`s program fell
off by giving regional disposes with Jordon in the West Bank in the
sea of negotiations with Egypt after Camp David to have peace with
it.
Instead of "Territorial Compromise" rule began the "Functional
Comp".
This choice was consolidated after the defeat of P.L.O during the
War of Lebanon in 1982 and the Likoud drowned in the Lebanese mud,
untie of Jordan connection with West Bank, and the acceptance of the
Palestinian National council to the rule of division, besides other
changes.
After 1977, the new Israeli political map divided them into two
camps: Right and Left and within their orbit small and middle
parties more ideological pulled by Right or Left. Sometimes Likoud
and Labor parties found themselves obliged to have alliance with
small parties to remain in power the Likoud allied with poor groups
to become an accepted and popular party. While a big social mass was
formed around the Labor Party and both parties believe in "The
Israeli National unanimity".
The political alliances bring a party to power and the opposite
alliances can't take it out of power, and this what happened with
the government of Chameer when the aspects of corruption emerged in
the Likoud and before a universal changed situation especially with
the downfall of the social block and the emerge of settling
horizons. The Labor won under the leadership of Rabeen as it got a
great number of seats in the synagogue. The stage of Rabeen was
characterized by.
1-
Recognizing the P.L.O and ratifying peace with Jordon.
2-
Economical accelerating development and entrance of Israel in the
age of "High Tech"
3-
The development of relation with Arabs in "Israel" so that Rabeen
depended on their votes.
4-
The change of the Histidrout into a general syndicate with voluntary
membership.
The political stage of Rabeen reflected social change, but the
society didn't change to non-Zionist, it became more Israeli and not
of less Judaism. Nitinyaho tried to lead Likoud to more Rightism
situations socially and politically but he didn’t succeed internally
and externally when U.S.A and Europe couldn’t bear this direction.
Anyhow the two parties behave the same when they are in power and
only the change in the political circumstances and the political
temper in the Israeli street can make one of the parties reach
power.
Chapter 2: The Victory of the Middle and End of the Attraction
Period.
The victory of Barak in the electrons of 1999 wasn’t a victory to
the Left nor to the forces of peace against forces of War. The new
traditional Right kept the majority in the synagogue and the Israeli
Society was divided between supporters and opposers to Oslo
Agreements. Even Charoun accepted Oslo Agreements when reached
power. Barak tried to assign a wide harmony government depending on
a Jewish majority. This was a practical step to return the "tribe"
product and refute to the split caused by the Killing of Rabeen at
the hands of an extreme rightist, and moving gradually the complete
stability of making decision inside one camp to the national
agreement supported by the minimum common level, that is the not`s
Barak declared in the speech of "Victory".
Not for the withdrawal to the borders of 4th June,
not for any participation in the sovereignty over Jerusalem, not for
a foreign army-Arabian, Palestinian-to the West of the river, and as
for the return of the refugees, it doesn’t need no because its
refused is an unquestionable matter.
With respect to the situation of the voters from the religious
parties, the Israeli were divided between peaceful to religious
parties and opposers to their power and domination among
secularists: There was a feeling that Nitinyaho reached power an
illegal way which caused the rise of the Middle Party to fall
Nitinyaho down as a prime minister. Barak failed same as Nitinyaho
when he wanted to impose a final solution on the Palestinians in
Camp David. So Sharoun at the head of National unity government
with Biriz as minister of the exterior.
Chapter 3: Division of the Group Identity.
The trial of the direct elections to the Prime Minister by
people led to the division of the group identity of the Israeli
voters for two considerations: The first is expressing a political
situation and the second is expressing the group identity to which
the individual Israeli belongs. The aim was weakening the small
parties, but the result was the opposite. This way increased the
strength of the authority of the Prime Minister, but complicated the
formation of the government and exposed it to the extortion of the
small parties. So, joining of the two great parties and determining
the group and auto identity became complicated and threatening the
gains that may be gotten to achieve political, social and economical
aims. The wish to belong to one of the two parties is because the
state is that of the Jews. When the Israeli negates the Arabian is
assurance on his Jewish identity. The orthodox elite was able to
change the identity product, folklore, belonging feelings, the group
memory and historical recognition from rising and formation of the
Zionist movement to a symbolic capital invested politically in the
clash over the positions of domination and strength in the state. An
example of this is "Shas" movement which seems moderate in the
problem of peace. It is wrong to consider the political expression
of social sectors known by originality and culture a proof about the
possibility of Israel downfall when it reaches peace agreements with
the Arabs. This is the speech of wish of some Arab groups who are in
lack of a strategy to deal with Israel.
Chapter4 : The Form of Secularism and Religiousness in the Elections
of the Last Decade.
Since the rise of the two camp system in 1977, the religious
parties have become stronger and able to impose, also the secular
crowd became more sensitive towards religious imposing and the
political speech of the religious Orthodox became more Zionistic. So
new religious political-Rightist party rose to behave as a Jewish
Clerical System of a new kind, practicing the strength of effect on
the feature of life in the state and society. Barak perceived that
so his direction was to attract the secular right to the Labor Party
to Face Nitinyaho. There was a clash between the religious and the
secular resorted to the Supreme Court. This clash took the form of a
clash between judicial power and legislation power. The secular
forces, the Left Zionism and the woman movements adopted the
"Reformist" and the "Politically Correct" from U.S.A. this internal
clash led to Zionizing religious parties and Judaization of Zionist
forces in the aim that each keeps its identity and strength inside
Israel.
Chapter 5: The Right and the Left after the Election of Barak
The Left lost its social, laborite and popular base and began to
depend on new middle classes expanding continuously. And the new
Right changed into addressing new wide popular group which have
living advantage in the interference of the state in economy. Then
the measures were adjusted so that the readiness for a regional
settlement became a middle situation. And negotiations with P.L.O a
situation whish doesn’t distinguish the Right from the Left after
Oslo. After that Ntinyaho in a delivered speech before the students
of a religions school in 1999/05/17. a week after his loss declared
frankly and directly that it is impossible to separate between the
religion and the state in Israel, and impossible to separate between
the religion and the Jewish nationality. After the election of Barak,
he was supposed to look for the Left values of the Right, but he
didn’t. As for the Arabian minority through its position in the
Zionist entity, it can`t play the role of the Left in facing the
Israeli Right. They defend partial advantages and they are
politically margined.
SectionV: Chapter1 : Barak
Barak raised in the military institution which is respected
politically. His culture was middle. He is not a genius, or superman
and not a man of peace. He occupied several positions and led
qualitative operations and among them two assassination operations
in Tunisia and Lebanon and advanced to become Chief of staff. He was
brave and expressed his political satisfaction against the security
gaps in Oslo agreement. As a prime minister, he surrounded himself
by previous militants and estranged politicians by frightening many
of them. This made the leadership of the Labor Party to revolt
against him. The Israeli and Western information honored him which
reinforced his status internally and universally. He was expected to
carry out his commitments and withdraw from Lebanon in one year and
finish negotiations with Syria in October 2000, but because of his
not(s) negotiations of the final solution because academic. He
retreated from his promises to withdraw to the borders of 4th
June due to the insistence of the Syrians on that. He cheated the
Americans and the Syrians and his party got angry with him after
leading it to the adventure of Camp David which caused the break of
the uprising, then to his downfall.
Chapter 2:The Downfall of Barak.
Barak lost because he began his period in fighting his party. He
lost when Mirits movement made its battle with Chas movement and not
with the Right. He lost when he tried to impose relinquishments on
the secularists for the advantage of religious parties. He lost his
great loss when he tried to impose his conception for permanent
peace on the Palestinians and when they refused this concept he
declared that there is no Palestinian partner for negotiation. The
sense of his downfall is summarized by the gradual continuous change
towards the Right in the Israeli society to become nervous reactions
against the uprising, so the "peace manner" collapsed and fell off
with his party. He was elected to bring peace but he was taking the
area toward the edge of war.
Chapter3: Sharon
Most people who are fanatic to Charoun say that he is a war
criminal who committed crimes against humanity. His history is full
of killing, destruction and terrorism. He believes in security
deterrence so as not to appear as a coward. The state, authority and
army colluded to hide his crimes. Even Kahan`s committee (Official
Investigation Committee) after the massacres of Sabra and Chateela
recommended him to be the security minister in the future, then he
became the Prime Minister of Israel after 20 years exactly.
Chapter4: The Picture of the Politician
As a politician Charoun is an opportunist adventurer same as he
was a military opportunist. He doesn’t abide by instructions and
laws. He carries out missions required directly as a "Caterpillar".
His mentality is that of pure settlement and he is ready to get rid
of any obstacle like the Arabs. He believes in "Painful
Relinquishments" that is to return small parts of land to its owners
after plundering it by force of arms. He always believes in using
strength. He understood that it is impossible to dismiss the
Palestinians or joining them to Israel and the result was a regional
middle solution with the Palestinians. He is elastic when he takes
part in decision making and strong refuser when he doesn’t. He
believes that Jordan is Palestine. He didn’t like to have two
Palestinian states. Peace, in his opinion, is possible if the Arabs
recognize the historical rights of the Jews to establish their state
in these countries, on the land of Palestine, so the state of non
war is preferred to him because it gives the Palestinians s chained
state limited and demilitarized in which Israel keeps its borders
for long years as long as that doesn’t afflict its security, this
means that Palestinians handle the internal security affairs, to
have features of sovereignty and political relation with the eastern
side of Jordon.
The End
The return of Charoun to rule is confirmation to the activity of
security in the Israeli political life the colonial nature of
"Israel" which practiced the policy of segregation with the
assurance of the Judaism of the state without need to alliance with
religious parties. Charoun represents adaptation of the fanatic
elite to the Judaism of the state with the new circumstances to
abort the new broach carried by the civil society and middle class
in the way for a settlement with the Arabs.
With a complete support from U.S.A, the Road Map with its Israeli
fourteen conditions excluded the Arabic initiative from the
diplomatic deliberation and Charoun`s plan excluded the Road Map
from deliberation. The assassinations and the Isolating Wall formed
a kind of pressure in imposing the conditions of separations on the
Palestinians in Charoun`s stage. That is by force and assassinations
new leaderships rise and accept Charoun`s sight and conditions, so
the Arabian and Palestinian favoring is not useful to Arabs, but
legislates "Israel" and its discrimination, which is not an emergent
state, but a structural matter.
|
