In order to win, Amram Mitzna needs three miracles.
He needs a miracle in order to defeat the Likud, which is expected by all the public opinion polls to win by an astonishing 2:1.
He needs a miracle in order to defeat the functionaries of his own party, who want to compel him to join a Sharon-led “National Unity” government. The posteriors of Peres, Ben-Eliezer and their colleagues, Sharon’s collaborators in the last government, are itching to regain their soft chairs, from which they were separated with such great difficulty.
But he needs the biggest miracle in order to defeat Ahitophel & Co., the crowd of advisors, election experts and “strategists”, who feed on public opinion polls and statistics. (Ahitophel, the advisor of Absalom, has entered Hebrew folklore as the quintessential dispenser of bad advise, even though the Bible (2 Samuel 17) does not bear that out.)
This points to simple and convincing arithmetic: “The great reservoir of votes is located in the center. The more you move to the left, the further you get away from them. The more you move to the right, the greater become your chances of winning. The leftist voters are in your pocket anyhow. What other alternative do they have? Therefore, don’t talk about peace. Speak about “separation”, about a wall, about a fence.
Simple and convincing, indeed. But this is a certain recipe for defeat. If Mitzna rejects their advise, he will pass the first test of leadership. If he accepts it, his election campaign will die before it has even started in earnest.
Because Mitzna can defeat Sharon only if he lights new hope, an exciting, sweeping, electrifying hope.
As of now, Sharon enjoys immense superiority. A great majority supports him, in spite (some would say, because of) the fact that he has failed in every respect: Brought no peace, brought no security, created an economic crisis and a social time-bomb. Yet he looks like a good old grandfather, who can be trusted. The ferocious wolf, whose whole world consists of war and brutal force, has wrapped himself in the white clothing of a sheep.
At the last elections, he promised to bring “peace and security”. Now he proposes a “Palestinian state”. That does not disturb his rightist voters, because they know that this is all make-believe. At most, he will agree to a Palestinian Bantustan-like enclave, surrounded by Israeli settlers and soldiers, on 40 percent of the occupied territories (amounting to 8.8 percent of pre-1948 Palestine), and this only after the Palestinians surrender unconditionally and accept the leaders appointed by Sharon and Bush. Sharon calls this “painful concessions”. (Painful for whom?)
For centrist voters, that is enough. Sharon coming out for a Palestinian state — what could be better? Occupation of the Palestinian towns, targeted killing, demolition of houses and uprooting of fruit trees, together with the vision of a so-called Palestinian state in the remote future and under the conditions dictated by him — that is a winning recipe.
What will be Mitzna’s response? The Ahitophels advise him to abstain from any talk about peace. At most, he should speak about a “political horizon” or “arrangement”. And, most importantly, not to utter the name Yasser Arafat under any circumstances.
The “center” has despaired of peace, hates the Palestinians and is living in fear. So it is better to speak about “separation”, building a wall, erect a high fence.
But whoever speaks about separation and walls, says in practice that he, too, has despaired of peace with the Palestinians. After all, the wall is the opposite of peace — a symbol of fear, hate and distrust, an expression of the conviction that peace is not on the cards in the foreseeable future. All in all, this is a message of despair, of depression, of being reconciled to the fact that there is no solution.
But if this is the message, who the hell needs Mitzna? Why leave the known and trusted Sharon for some unknown and inexperienced newcomer?
True, the Ahitophels agree that Mitzna should add to this dark message some mild words about negotiations with the enemy, finding out whether this is possible and making sure that it is not. But the message between the lines is: Probably it’s impossible.
That would be a message of disaster.
The public is longing for a leader with a different message. One who will get them out of the embrace of despair. One who will call out, without flinching: “Yes. It is possible! We can make peace with the Palestinians and their elected leadership, under Yasser Arafat! The violence can be ended! I shall do it!”
If Mitzna succeeds in lighting a fire of hope, all the polls and expert opinions will be burned by it. A new situation will be created, one that will have immediate effect in many areas. New polls will show that there is a new center.
Mitzna’s campaign needs two arms — the arm of peace and the arm of security. He cannot and must not give up the arm of security. But the decisive arm, the only arm that can bring victory, is the arm of peace. An electrifying message of peace will bring back to the ballot box hundred of thousands of Arab voters, as well as thousands of despairing leftists. And, more importantly: He will bring back hope to millions of despairing voters.
They will bring victory.
Arab News Features 9 December 2002
