Addict (drugaddict) wrote,
Addict
drugaddict

Uri Avnery on the Lebanon War--8/30/06

Uri Avnery
30.8.06

      The Bees in the Lion's Carcass

EHUD OLMERT has found a convincing proof of his great victory over
Hassan Nasrallah: "I am touring the country freely while Nasrallah is
hiding in his bunker!"

It is said that "the style is the man," and by these words Olmert shows
his quality (or lack thereof). At the moment, dozens of Israeli
airplanes and helicopter gunships are standing by, ready to kill
Nasrallah if he as much as shows himself. Nasrallah does not have a
single airplane or helicopter to kill Olmert. The vast material
superiority of the Israeli army over a guerilla organization is no
achievement of Olmert - but Hizbullah's ability to survive the massive
onslaught of our army is certainly the achievement of Nasrallah.

And, by the way, why would Nasrallah want to kill Olmert? After all, why
should he mind Israel being led by a failed politician, whose
incompetence has been proved and who most Israelis say should go?

A cynic might say: Nasrallah wants Olmert to stay, and that's why he
hurried to help him out. When everyone in Israel believed that Olmert
had failed miserably, Nasrallah said, this week, in an interview: "If I
had known that Israel would react as it did, I would not have captured
the two soldiers."

As could be expected, Olmert's men pounced on this sentence. Look:
Nasrallah is apologizing! That proves that he has been beaten! So Olmert
won after all!


BUT MOST Israelis do not buy this spin. They still believe that we did
not win the war, that the deterrent power of the Israeli army has been
hurt, that the Lebanese army and the International Force that will be
employed along the border will not do our job for us after our own army
failed to do it.

So what to do when the public believes that it is being led by a group
of  political and military failures?

That is the great question that is now occupying the entire nation. A
few dozen reserve soldiers and civilians demonstrate opposite the Prime
Minister's office, others sit at home and gripe. They know that Olmert,
Peretz and Halutz must be removed. But how can this be done?

The obvious answer is to get out into the street and demonstrate. If
hundreds of thousands filled the squares, perhaps Olmert would resign,
as Golda Meir did in her day. However, Olmert is no Golda, and even
Golda clung to office for half a year after her dismal failures of the
Yom Kippur War. And where are the hundreds of thousands?

Another possibility is to appoint a State Inquiry Commission, which
could dismiss the trio. That's good, that's even very good, but that's
difficult. According to the law, only the government can decide to set
up such a commission, and only the government can decide on the
commission's terms of reference. Only after such a decision is made,
does the matter pass into the hands of the President of the Supreme
Court, who then decides upon the composition of the commission.

Such an inquiry demands, of course, time. Before it can accuse anyone of
failure, it must warn them, allow them to be represented by lawyers, to
cross-examine witnesses and provide documents, and that's a slow
process. In the meantime, the incompetents will continue to rule and
perhaps even start another war, in order to make us forget the last one.
Even if the commission were to publish an interim report, that would
take half a year at least.

But Olmert & Co. are not prepared to risk even that. That's why they
appointed two inquiry committees this week that are not State Inquiry
Commissions, allowing them to decide their membership themselves. No
inquiry committee demands the dismissal of the people who appointed them.


WHAT OTHER way is there to get rid of this trio?

The simplest thing is to have new elections. But that is not as easy as
it sounds. Only the Knesset can decide to do that. Meaning, the Knesset
Members must decide to dismiss themselves. Fat chance.

Moreover, as things look now, if elections were to take place in the
present situation, the Right would win big. The voice of the peace camp
was completely silenced during the war, and now, too, it has no exposure
in the media. As a result, the criticism of the war that is being heard
comes almost entirely from the Right. The public is not asking: Why did
we start this war? It asks: Why did we not win? And it answers: The
corrupt politicians did not allow the army to win. A new government is
needed, a rightist and patriotic one, in order to rehabilitate the army
and start another war to finish the job.

The setting up of a new government without elections, in the present
Knesset, would lead to the same result, because the only alternative to
the current setup is a coalition that would include the Likud and at
least one of the two fascist parties. No good.

Another possibility: to leave the present coalition in office but to
replace Olmert and Peretz. How? By a revolt in Kadima that would replace
Olmert and a revolt in Labor to replace Peretz. In Labor there is indeed
such a possibility. But who would revolt in Kadima, a fictitious
grouping that has no party institutions at all?

To resume: there are in theory several options - all of them bad. This
fact splits the "protest camp". Some protesters demand a State Inquiry
Commission, whatever the cost. Others want the Gang of Three - Olmert,
Peretz and Halutz - to resign without any inquiry. What the two groups
have in common is that they are supported by the extreme Right, and
especially the settlers, who declare, according to the best tradition of
the inventors of the "stab-in-the-back" legend in Germany after World
War I: "The treasonous politicians have stabbed the victorious army in
the back!"

By the way, the total number of demonstrators is very much smaller than
the thousands that the peace camp mobilized in the middle of the war to
protest against it.


SO WHAT will happen? One can only answer with the saying: The art of
prophecy is difficult, especially with respect to the future.

It is impossible at this moment to know what is going to happen in the
near future. But it is worthwhile to think about the impact of the war
on public opinion in the longer run.

When Samson the Hero saw a swarm of bees making honey in the carcass of
a lion he ramarked: "Out of the strong came forth sweetness." (Judges
14). (That's the same Samson who was abducted by the Philistines and
became the first suicide bomber in the history of this country.) Can
this phrase become true this time too? Can something good come out of
this horrible war?

Perhaps. True, for the time being the result of this war in Israel has
only been feelings of anger, frustration, insult and humiliation: Why
couldn't we overcome a small "terror organization"? Our political
leaders have proved to be foolish, our military leaders incompetent.
Things must be put in order.

But I believe that gradually a new conviction will form in the public
mind: that this war marks the end of the days of easy victoriesr. That
from now on, in any new war our rear will be exposed. That our army is
not almighty, as we were led to believe. And mainly: that the war did
not solve anything, that perhaps the solution is not military and we
would do better talking with our neighbors.

True, it is not easy to arrive at such a conclusion, which demands an
emotional and ideological revolution. That will take time. But one need
not be a university professor to get there. Simple common sense is
enough, as well as the experience that has accumulated during the last
decades. Many people, including those usually described as "the common
people", have both, thank God.

Those who complain that the Second Lebanon War was stopped before it was
finished, should note the success of Schubert's Unfinished Symphony.
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 0 comments