It is not clear how much newly elected Labor leader Amir Peretz will battle against the tide, and how much he will drift leeward.
Some of what he has been doing has obviously fit into the category of going against the tide. A prime example is his rehabilitation of partisan values and agendas, at a time when "election parties" has become the norm. This could be seen with Prime Minister Sharon splitting from his Likud to form another party (Kadima), and Shimon Peres departing from Labor to support Sharon after being defeated within his own party.
Add to this the fact that the new leader of Labor is a social democrat representative of the lower and middle strata of the working class, and is a civilian in an establishment jammed by generals.
The fact that he is a Sephardic Jew is less a matter of going against the tide, since the Sephardim have been working their way up in Israel for years. In the Likud Netanyahu is competing today with Tunisian-born Silvan Shalom and, until recently, Iranian-born Shaul Mofaz. Even the Labor party, the bastion of the Westerners (Ashkenazim), was briefly led by the Iraqi-born Binyamin Ben-Eliezer.
The most salient sign of sailing against the tide is Peretz's collision with the current political situation, locally and internationally. Peretz is drifting to the left when Sharon and his new party are becoming the new center. Add to this Bush's radical effects, settlement expansion, construction of the barrier and what Hamas and Jihad are perpetrating. All of this pushes politics drastically to the right, especially following the recent bombing in Netanya.
Consequently, sailing against the tide entails dangers that could end Peretz's career in a more tragic manner than Amram Mitzna's experience three years ago, or might leave him to be remembered as just another populist unionist.
Perhaps one of the main dangers is Eastern Jews withholding support because of his Western party, while Western Jews withhold support because of his Eastern origins. Furthermore, some speculate that the Russian immigrants do not trust a Moroccan-born Jew and the religious camp might fear his membership in "Peace Now".
Finally, Peretz's political rise indicates something, though 'old fashioned', is superior to the current political consciousness in Israel. He developed a theoretical link between the economic aspect of his politics and its national dimension.
As a leader of Histadrut, he opposed what he believed to be the anti-peace governments' allocation of development and employment budgets to the settlements. For him, raising the level of hostility against Palestinians, as Yossi Alpher put it, is the 'opium' that the rightwing is spraying on the public opinion to mesmerize them.
This rhetoric from Peretz clearly clashes with the rationale of the Labor Party barons themselves, who started to sharpen their blades threatening the new leader. Moreover, it poses the important question of how to contain ethnic and religious loyalties in a modern class consciousness.
Although Peretz is certainly moving against the tide, this does not rule out the possibility that the political climate had already been on a slow course of change, as well. There was a large stake placed on the reconciliation between the Sephardim and the Labor party.
The monetary policies adopted by Binyamin Netanyahu as finance minister have deepened the social rift in an unprecedented manner. The jobless, low-income citizens, retirees and divorced mothers, many of whom had voted for the Likud, today feel that their representatives betrayed their interests, spreading corruption to an extent never before witnessed in political life.
Furthermore, demographic changes and political difficulties have killed the concept of "Greater Israel". Here lies the deeper meaning of Likud's recent major political losses.
In fact, since its founding in 1973, the party's history reflects an inclination to crumble upon each such clash between dogma and reality. Some of its ideologues, among them zealous nationalists, broke away in 1979, when Begin signed a peace treaty with Egypt. Others dissented in 1997, when Netanyahu handed over most of Hebron to the Palestinian Authority. Then came the Gaza pullout and its well-known repercussions.
Another reason for the rise of Peretz must be the undeniable, though still persisting, decrease in Palestinian violence, which diminished the influence of the Labor right-wingers who became Sharon's apologists and allies.
Finally, Peretz might have been betting that the international situation will not remain as it is for long, and that positions on the peace process might become more forthcoming. Indeed, even the current US administration showed its impatience with the persisting stagnation by exerting pressure, resulting in the opening of the Rafah crossing point.
Another reason for hope is that election opposition parties do not live long - the latest example being the Shinui party that won 15 seats in the 2003 elections.
In conclusion, it is unclear how much Peretz will take positive action that will end somewhere, and how much he will just use negative reaction to prevent others from walking their walk. Whichever is more true, it is clear that Peretz has already revealed much about himself as a politician who respects politics, his people and peace. We will see what outcomes his noble overtures will yield.
Hazem Saghiyeh is a Lebanese veteran writer, commentator and columnist for the Arabic newspaper Al Hayat in London, and the author of many books. Acknowledgement to Common Ground News Service
Viewpoint: Amir Peretz: Going against the tide or drifting leeward?
TOOLBAR
To add a comment,
Please log in:
Don't have an account?
Register now to comment on stories and stay up to date on important events and issues in the Middle East with our newsletter.