President Shimon Peres said Sunday that "without peace we cannot exist." This statement, which was said at a dinner breaking the daily Ramadan fast, harbors a dangerous sentiment: If Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas flees the negotiation table yet again -- as he did when dealing with Ehud Olmert in 2009 and as PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat did to Ehud Barak in 2002 -- does that mean that Israel will no longer be viable-
That is an [inadvertent] invitation to the Arabs to radicalize their demands.
Peres' statement is also wrong. Israel prefers peace, as should the Arabs, but in answer to the age-old question "shall we always live by the sword-" -- which dates back to the days of King David and was often used by former Defense Minister Moshe Dayan -- one must admit that this too is a viable option.
Dayan stressed his own point during his eulogy for Roi Rutenberg, [who was abducted and murdered by Sudanese soldiers serving in the Egyptian army in April 1956 near Kibbutz Nahal Oz in southern Israel], which to date remains one of the most powerful eulogies by a military commander, saying, "This is our life's choice -- to be prepared and armed, strong and determined, lest the sword be stricken from our fist and our lives cut down."
Philosopher Yeshayahu Leibowitz held a similar opinion, saying that Israel may retreat to maintain its strength and morality but that will not diminish the Arabs' desire to throw us into the ocean.
Any peace is better than war. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Justice Minister Tzipi Livni face a double challenge: They must pursue peace with the Palestinians, be it temporary or permanent, in good faith and pay a hefty price for it; while also trying to convince Israel's friends worldwide that it is the Palestinians that are fanning the flames of hostility in the Middle East.
Barak was able to do that in Camp David and garnered the full backing of U.S. President Bill Clinton, to the discontent of the Israeli Left. Olmert was able to do the same, but in his haste to blame Netanyahu's government for the absence of a peace deal, he forfeited whatever advantage he had and started defending Abbas.
Netanyahu and Livni will have to participate in a game of high-stakes diplomatic poker. Netanyahu's attempt to garner his ministers' consent to give him a free hand in these negotiations will make it easier for the government. It will allow Netanyahu and Livni to maneuver their responsibilities freely, to hint, cajole and entrap as they see fit -- and to release murderous terrorist as a test of Abbas' true intentions.
This will free the rest of the Likud-Beytenu and Habayit Hayehudi ministers from any liability to anything promised during the negotiations.
This way, everyone could play the ostrich. Only when this round of talks in over, in a few months' time, will Israel's friends worldwide be able to determine who is to blame for the negotiations' failure; and in the event that things go well, the public will be required to approve the peace deal -- not the government nor the various parties' caucuses.
This is not an easy situation and it is not akin to a normal democratic process, where the government is liable for any move made in its name, let alone by its leader. But this is not a normal situation and under these circumstances, the proposed flexibility is in order.
טעינו? נתקן! אם מצאתם טעות בכתבה, נשמח שתשתפו אותנו