Israeli politics and the peace process have been experiencing major turbulence as of late.
This was clearly evident on Thursday, when Justice Minister Tzipi Livni sat for an interview with Channel 2. News anchor Yonit Levi was unrelenting, and rightly so. She confronted Livni with an inherent contradiction: Now that the cabinet has suspended the talks with the Palestinians, how is it that she is still in the government? Hasn't she pledged not to take part in a coalition that does not hold talks with the Palestinians? When does she plan on bolting?
This is a big question. But it is the wrong question. If Livni had valid grounds to leave the government over Netanyahu's decision this week, why didn't she resign in protest against Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' efforts to sabotage the peace efforts? If this standard was upheld in full, Livni's Hatnuah would have had to be on board with every political whim the Palestinians exhibited.
Livni promised that she would leave the government if its members crippled her ability to engage Ramallah. But what if Abbas is the rejectionist? Why should Israel be destabilized because of his conduct?
It is worth noting that Abbas' walk to Canossa (or Gaza in this case) took place some 48 hours after he had received a new Israeli offer. Even the Israeli defense establishment was on board. But he just ignored that offer. You can always count on Abbas to be Abbas.
Abbas has never been good at theatrics around the negotiating table. You never see him storm out of the room or pound his fists on the table. But when he bolts from talks he does it just when the peace process enters crunch time, when the parties need to make crucial decisions. Another rule of thumb is that his departure will always come after he receives an Israeli offer with fresh ideas.
In 2000, he convinced then-Palestinian Authority leader Yasser Arafat to run away from Prime Minister Ehud Barak's generous offer at Camp David, despite the latter's willingness to discuss Jerusalem. He ran back to Ramallah when former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert presented a more generous offer. And now, just when Israel was willing to make concessions, he has done the same. This is the classic Abbas. Netanyahu and Livni are his latest victims.
The cabinet made the right call by punishing the Palestinian Authority. But it should have watered down the language of the resolution to make sure it does not explicitly say Israel had suspended the talks. The cabinet should have presented the facts: It was Abbas who suspended the talks by striking a unity deal with the Hamas regime in Gaza. Israel's announcement is merely a response and a retaliation for political breach of trust on the part of Abbas (or something very close to it).
It is still not too late to roll back the Palestinian unity deal. Israel and the Palestinians both share blame for the talks' collapse. But Abbas and his cohorts are the main culprits; their conduct was worse then Israel's. A prolonged period of bloodshed may ensue, which would end only after both sides tire of burying their dead. But even then, nothing will have changed. The peace process would still be where it is right now. Only the Americans can avert this bloodletting.
טעינו? נתקן! אם מצאתם טעות בכתבה, נשמח שתשתפו אותנו
