Sharon Centers on What’s Left

By Yisrael Medad

Published November 25, 2005, issue of November 25, 2005.
  • Print
  • Share Share

Since independence 58 years ago, Israel’s political system has lacked a true center. This week, Ariel Sharon decided to try to find it, and in the process, rewrite the history of the Jewish state.

The prime minister’s jettisoning of his Likud connections is more than just politics become personal on a scale not seen since David Ben-Gurion left Mapai in the mid-1960s to form Rafi. Sharon’s formation of a new party is nothing less than a courageous, or foolhardy, gamble to find Israel’s elusive political center — or perhaps create one, if need be.

Sharon seems to think he knows who these closet centrists are. Indeed, he is staking his political legacy on them: weary but financially comfortable Israelis who after five years of intifada just want to make peace with the world. Whether such a swath of the electorate truly exists, and whether the prime minister is vindicated, will be known only when the polls close March 29.

What the prime minister most certainly has done is send shockwaves through the national religious movement. Sharon’s bolting from Likud, which he prided himself on founding back in 1970 — a claim, incidentally, that Menachem Begin considered not to be entirely correct — has the right scrambling to find its place on Israel’s redrawn political map.

It is the second time the national religious movement has had to do so in the last two weeks. Shimon Peres’s defeat to Histadrut firebrand Amir Peretz pulled the Labor Party several degrees to the left of the Israeli mainstream, putting in stark relief the party’s disconnect with the rest of the nation.

More importantly for the national religious camp, this development seemingly ensured that Sharon’s threat to split the Likud would not come to pass. Without Peres playing Sancho Panza to Sharon’s Don Quixote, it seemed that the prime minister would be unable to desert his own party. Peretz made clear he had no intention of forming a grand coalition, leaving Sharon no choice but to duke it out with Benjamin Netanyahu and Uzi Landau. Finally, it was believed, Sharon would be handed his just deserts and be removed from power in the upcoming Likud primaries.

However, Sharon was not to be stopped. Even while maintaining that he could have defeated all comers had he stayed in the party, he left Likud, bringing with him, for starters, 14 renegade Knesset members.

Among the biggest losers in all this political maneuvering, according to some polls, is the national religious camp. The movement, say the pundits, should expect a major drop in parliamentary support in the March 2006 elections.

Yet even before Sharon dropped his bombshell and his party, the National Religious Party, Moledet and Tekumah were talking about establishing one nationalist electoral bloc. The like-minded Yisrael Beiteinu has been wavering on joining this bloc, focusing instead on its Russian-speaking base now that Likud stalwart Natan Sharansky has left politics, but it, too, may come around to some kind of cooperation with its fellow nationalist parties.

The right-wing parties need no reminder that Yitzhak Rabin’s victory in 1992, which brought on the now discredited Oslo peace process, was in part their fault. By failing to unite, they ended up splitting the anti-Labor popular sentiment. Some 90,000 votes were cast for the parties that did not make the parliamentary threshold, which ultimately cost the right the election.

The question, however, is whether such a reminder is relevant for the upcoming elections. This is not just about the prime minister’s arch-nemesis, Benjamin Netanyahu, labeling Sharon’s new party “Labor B” in an attempt to keep Likud voters in the fold. Sharon himself seems to be operating under the assumption that the right-wing vote is no longer of consequence.

The ideology that brought Sharon to power has been destroyed, first by Oslo and then by his own hands, with this summer’s disengagement from Gaza. The prime minister now appears to have a new agenda. The Land of Israel, he seems to believe, is not a value but a commodity that can be traded. The Jewish communities living beyond the Green Line, he seems to believe, have little of the pioneering quality that has long defined the Zionist ethos.

In place of his discarded ideology, Sharon is now putting his faith in what he believes to be the center of the Israeli electorate. Whereas previously the center was a marginally small segment of the population, comprising dissatisfied and floating voters, Sharon believes that his policies over the last couple of years have created a firm, durable center — one that can be his, in a most personal sense.

If he is correct, then the right-wing parties, and the national religious movement in general, have a serious problem indeed.

Yisrael Medad, a spokesman for the Yesha Council of Jewish Communities in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza District, is director of resource information at the Menachem Begin Heritage Center in Jerusalem.

Find us on Facebook!
  • Undeterred by the conflict, 24 Jews participated in the first ever Jewish National Fund— JDate singles trip to Israel. Translation: Jews age 30 to 45 travelled to Israel to get it on in the sun, with a side of hummus.
  • "It pains and shocks me to say this, but here goes: My father was right all along. He always told me, as I spouted liberal talking points at the Shabbos table and challenged his hawkish views on Israel and the Palestinians to his unending chagrin, that I would one day change my tune." Have you had a similar experience?
  • "'What’s this, mommy?' she asked, while pulling at the purple sleeve to unwrap this mysterious little gift mom keeps hidden in the inside pocket of her bag. Oh boy, how do I answer?"
  • "I fear that we are witnessing the end of politics in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I see no possibility for resolution right now. I look into the future and see only a void." What do you think?
  • Not a gazillionaire? Take the "poor door."
  • "We will do what we must to protect our people. We have that right. We are not less deserving of life and quiet than anyone else. No more apologies."
  • "Woody Allen should have quit while he was ahead." Ezra Glinter's review of "Magic in the Moonlight":
  • Jon Stewart responds to his critics: “Look, obviously there are many strong opinions on this. But just merely mentioning Israel or questioning in any way the effectiveness or humanity of Israel’s policies is not the same thing as being pro-Hamas.”
  • "My bat mitzvah party took place in our living room. There were only a few Jewish kids there, and only one from my Sunday school class. She sat in the corner, wearing the right clothes, asking her mom when they could go." The latest in our Promised Lands series — what state should we visit next?
  • Former Israeli National Security Advisor Yaakov Amidror: “A cease-fire will mean that anytime Hamas wants to fight it can. Occupation of Gaza will bring longer-term quiet, but the price will be very high.” What do you think?
  • Should couples sign a pre-pregnancy contract, outlining how caring for the infant will be equally divided between the two parties involved? Just think of it as a ketubah for expectant parents:
  • Many #Israelis can't make it to bomb shelters in time. One of them is Amos Oz.
  • According to Israeli professor Mordechai Kedar, “the only thing that can deter terrorists, like those who kidnapped the children and killed them, is the knowledge that their sister or their mother will be raped."
  • Why does ultra-Orthodox group Agudath Israel of America receive its largest donation from the majority owners of Walmart? Find out here:
  • Woody Allen on the situation in #Gaza: It's “a terrible, tragic thing. Innocent lives are lost left and right, and it’s a horrible situation that eventually has to right itself.”
  • from-cache

Would you like to receive updates about new stories?

We will not share your e-mail address or other personal information.

Already subscribed? Manage your subscription.