Move to the Right. Move to the Left.
Yossi Beilin has always understood that the pursuit of peace involves compromise. Unlike many on the left, his pursuit of an agreement with the Palestinians is not predicated on a flowery notion of peace, but rather is imperative for the survival of Israel. What's remarkable about his latest editorial in Haaretz - insisting that Hamas reject terrorism, accept a two state solution and act upon agreements signed with Israel - is that his long-held position now represents the Israeli concensus. In this sense, the 'shift to the right' by the Israeli public following Arafat's embrace of terrorism, has been accompanied by a 'shift to the left' in long-term objectives.
- sheikh X at 9:33 AM
8 Comments:
hi victor!
Yes yes, you knew I would answer about my darling Beilin. The man is nuts - what else is new? I have to say that I chuckled a little while reading his fantasies about cooperation with the Palestinians. Beilin, the poor man's intelligen polly, the dude who says yesteryear's plattitudes with the air of having made great discoveries - while puffing existentialistly, a la Sartre of Brecht, on a cigarette. Like them, Beilin is a poseur not a thinker, the kind who has his picture taken with a hand at his temple, so we know he's thinking (the philosopher's porn - just as centerfold beauties offer their vulva for contemplation to the masses). Take his cigarette and let him write - he shows how weak he is.
As Adam once cogently explained, previous cooperation with the Pals at security level (implemented during the times of Peres, Netanyahu and Barak - the right may be no less idiotic) resulted in the destruction of the networks of informers in the territories. Instead of arresting the terrorists, the PA "peace partner" has sought and executed the informers while shielding the terrorists or worse. Worse, because more than half of the attacks during the past five years have been done by members of the various "security forces", salaried employees of the PA. These are the people Beilin wants as partners.
I'm not angry at Beilin because thankfully he is so nutty that he does not stand a chance to be elected.
I was angry at him only while he was or stood a chance to be a government member.
But I'll let you think of one of his declarations a few years ago, according to which he was unprepared to think that Israel's enemies might want not just some of Israel's lands, but all; not just the death of some Jews, but of all. He then said that structurally he is incapable of believing in such irrationality and hopelessness. I understand that and I even have a bit of sympathy for him. Nevertheless, political leadership should not be a place for wishful thinking or for coddling cuddly fantasies. I would be unhappy to have him or his likes as an elected leader, because where I come from, I have no problem of believing in the existence of such evil - my dear childhood homeland has provided enough evidence for the existence of such evil. Moreover, as I mentioned to you recently, Communist Romania was a beacon of enlightenment compared to any Arab country - and certainly to Palestinians.
I am angry at Beilin because as the chief architect of Oslo he bears personally a large portion of the blame for the thousands of Jewish deaths that have followed as a consequence. To say nothing of the dispossession and police brutality that we have recently been forced to witness.
Beilin has always been ahead of the curve in subverting and undermining the legitimacy and survival of the Jewish state. Your characterization of his proposals as "not predicated on a flowery notion of peace, but rather is imperative for the survival of Israel" seems at best disingenuous and at worst downright deceitful. Since I know you not to be deceitful I have to assume that you are forgetful.
Beilin has never been pragmatic but often, as in the present circumstances, opportunistic. Don't forget that there is an election in the offing, one in which the true left is dangerously (for them) poised on the edge of irrelevance. Your whitewashing and praise for Beilin only serve to validate him and his reprehensible policies. Beilin has always and again been driven by ill-founded and misguided ideals. His marriage to Shimon Peres in the 1990s almost destroyed the State, and may yet contribute to the forces that ultimately do so. (God forbid).
I suggest that you review the historical record and publicly recant, on the front page of your blog, this apalling post in praise of the traitor and enemy of Israel Beilin. Otherwise, I might be forced to initiate a boycott of your publication. If Victor joins me it is bound to become very lonely in this little corner of the blogsphere.
No Adam, no boycotts. Harrys is partial to Yossi Beiin for some strange reason (strange because Beilin is the caricature of an intelligent man - all pose and no substance).
Moreover, we should not amalgamate Beilin with Peres. I don't like Peres now or in the past ten years, but Peres has done some truly magnificent things for Israel - which Beilin never has. It's one thing to be Peres and quite another to be Peres's poodle.
But there are two reasons not to boycott. Ths first is tha Harry's position is in good faith. The second is that Beilin himself is no danger to anyone. His fatal mistake (and Labor's gain) was to defect to Meretz. Since Beilin has the anti-Midas touch, Meretz too is now a capsized ship (maybe we should actually thank Beilin, no one could have destroyed Meretz as effectively as he has). It's only a mater of time until Beilin will reach his final political destination, where he truly belongs: Hadash. There he'll roar with his brothers and soulmates Ahmed Tibi, Azmi Bishara.
It's like here, in the US. US has Lyndon LaRouche and Louis Farrakhan and Noam Chomsky and Pat Robertson. Like Beilin, these fellows are pretty disgusting, but they are nowhere close to power.
No need to worry.
Right now, I'd be more worried about Olmert, who transfers money to the PA, instead of taking care that the Hamas guys receive a rocket on their plate for lunch.
I love this choosing an identity. it is so glamorous!
I think it is wrong not to draw attention to the connection between Peres and Beilin who together cooked up the Oslo debacle and served it to Israel cold.
For all that Peres has undeniably done good for Israel I think it is clear from where we stand today that he did it for an Israel which is not one that we would recognize and did not mean to aid any parochial Jewish state. If you doubt that then you should take a quick skim through The New Middle East.
In any event I was appalled and disgusted to see what seemed to be praise for Beilin on these pages, especially when the upshot was (and I have to quote again) "is not predicated on a flowery notion of peace, but rather is imperative for the survival of Israel." I kept looking for the punch line. I read the posting twice just to see where it had been quoted from. Whether or not Victor joins, I'm afraid that people of good conscience and historical perspective will be turning to other blogs by the thousand. Not everybody is as hardy as Victor and me when it comes to such gut wrenching, sickening drivel.
I am worried about Olmert, but I am counting on seeing him voted out of office and into humiliating repudiation next month. I can't wait to see what figure will be elected on a right wing platform only to pursue left wing policies to ameliorate the Americans and his own pocketbook next. Olmert probably already has a team of accountants standing over a fleet of bill counting machines waiting to count the dollars.
Still, it is heartening to note that Hubert Humphrey was defeated in a landslide (by Richard Nixon, no less) after Chicago police cracked a few thousand hippie skulls in 1968. But then the Israelis seem to have a thing for despots...
Fine, it was quite cosy in this corner of the blogosphere before you two came and started causing a ruckus. And it'll revert to a comfortable Hobbitville long after you vanish in search of blogs with insight less penetrating.
Comparing Yossi Beilin to a porn star's vagina is flamoyant but absurd. For a long time Beilin remained well out of the limelight, doing the actual work of establishing an agreement framework for which Peres (and Rabin) took credit.
Comparing Yossi Beilin to famous anti-semites is mean-spirited and bizarre. He argues pretty cogently that his aim is to ensure a strong Jewish state which can remain demographically viable in the long term.
And blaming him for the violence that followed Oslo is wrong. He was hardly alone in thinking it was worth putting Palestinian leadership to the test - a good proportion of the Israeli public thought likewise. In hindsight we saw Arafat and Abbas fail the challenge.
Fine - Oslo failed and a we can try a new strategy. But you'll recall that the Israeli position in the shtachim was hardly tenable pre-Oslo. While Captain Marvel and the religious right may have been happy to linger in occupation happily waiting for moshiach to sort things out, people living in the real world realize that occupation is a war of attrition killing and corrupting Israeli society. This is nowhere better illustrated than in the behaviour of the settlers who scream anti-semitic slurs upon their fellow jews.
The Shalem Center's talking point that Oslo compromised the intel network is odd. We certainly don't seem to have any trouble pinpointing terrorist leaders now, despite disengagement. And my heart doesn't bleed for the ones the PA executed either.
one does not have to be a messianist or a religious fanatic to figure out that you don't give strategic depth and weapons to your enemy.
other than idealist utopians was surprised to see arafat and abbas "fail the test." Only a fool would attempt to make peace with an enemy who has no interest or desire in peace. Beilin was and is such a fool. That the consequences of his foolishness have been paid and are being paid in blood is pretty atrocious in my humble opinion.
people living in the real world then as now recognize that when you are at war with an enemy who has declared his intention to annihilate you you'd better make provisions to defend yourself. Do you really think that the supposed "war of attrition" was worse than what Peres and Beilin et al wrought? And it is only in hindsight, politically distorted, that the occupation appears "untenable."
If pragmatists had been able to remain in power, such as the Rabin that Israelis believed they had elected, then Israel would have had no problem winning the waiting game as new leaders emerged who could coexist with Israel. Instead a couple of deluded zealots empowered Arafat to massacre those emerging leaders and poison the education of another generation.
Way to go.
My heart does bleed for the Pals the PA executed – they were the ones informing Israel about terrorists. I certainly appreciate allies, whatever their own reason for collaborating with Israel.
As for not having problems pinpointing terrorists, that is now. Israel did have lots of trouble after the variously idiotic prime-ministers destroyed the network of informers. The successes of recent days have not always been the rule - they are successes because the networks have been rebuilt.
Of course you're giving me the best reason to not vote and to ever despise Beilin - you're taking the same line as him, and that is the trait that I most despise in a human being: the inability to admit mistakes.
Beilin doesn't admit he did a single wrong thing. For this alone, he deserves what the Israeli voters have given him: the boot.
I'm not up for keeping the occupation because I prefer a smaller Jewish Israel to one with four million Palestinians inside. But I strongly disagree with Beilin's notion that Israel should be cooperating with Palestinians. I want a separation precisely because I think Pals are enemies and will still be enemies, not because we should open the door to cooperation with them. The notion you should cooperate with your deadly enemies is idiotic and cliche - India has no need to cooperate with screwed-up Pakistan, why should Israel want to cooperate with its deadly enemies?
As for the argument that the PA needed a test, it is laughable. Wasn't it clear at Camp David 2000? Wasn't it clear in January 2006 when they elected genocidal lunatics? Oh, wait Beilin wants to negotiate with them, as long he doesn't have to deal with a Hamas guy. If they put some straw man, some nominally non-Hamas man, Beilin would give the shop away.
He is not a bad man, he is just a really stupid person whose only way of appearing intelligent is striking those idiotic poses. Thank God I lived in France, I've seen and now fully appreciate and see through such "profound" phonies.
It's quite symptomatic that he hasn't run on his own - when he has run for office on his own (Meretz), we can see how well he has done. Meretz has shrunk by half and there is a good chance it will disappear althogether.
If I were you Harry, I'd worry this Beilin guy is really a mole planted by the right. Only a mole with a destructive plan could be as bad for the Israeli left (or at least for the party he is a member of) as Beilin.
Post a Comment
<< Home