“If a majority of Israelis are in favor of a majority of your policies, as opposed to those of the Likud party, why are you doing so badly in the polls?” Labor Party Chairman and candidate for prime minister Amram Mitzna told a friendly audience that he basically did not know, but if he did, he would definitely win the elections. It is hard to find a better summary of his campaign. Mitzna, who has always said that he is proud of his honesty and who continues to be portrayed as seriously lacking in charisma, left the question at that.
Mitzna was speaking in English at an event organized jointly with the left-leaning, Meimad Party, which again is running on a combined list with Labor. With less than two weeks to go until the election and judging from his performance, Mitzna remains unable to cause the political earthquake that analysts believe is necessary in order to ignite support for the Labor. Notwithstanding the Likud Party’s public embarrassment over two scandals and the media frenzy surrounding them – one tainting the Prime Minister himself — the genial former general and his minions continue to lag seriously behind in all polls. In terms of policy, his advocacy of a unilateral withdrawal from post-1967 territories under fire, a radical re-drawing of the conflict and willingness to divide Jerusalem should be enough to stimulate that earthquake. Yet, even senior members of his own party have publicly criticized him in recent days.
In what some call one of Israel’s most monumental elections, slogans of national suicide sit uncomfortably alongside talk of national rebirth and for the first time since the founding of the State, the leaders of both major political parties have publicly stated that they favor a Palestinian state. Only at question is what sort of state, what sort of borders and most importantly, what sort of implications its presence would have on Israel’s security.
Many Israelis believe that the issue of Jerusalem has been reduced to how and where the city will be divided rather than “if.” One questioner fiercely attacked Mitzna for not even mentioning Jerusalem in his remarks. His response was that, “Jerusalem will stay forever the capital of the State of Israel, but if we want to reach an agreement with our neighbors…we will have to agree to an ‘arrangement’…note that I am not using the word ‘divide’ – I stress ‘arrangement’ We do not want to be responsible for the Muslim neighborhoods…Jerusalem will stay forever the Jewish capital of the State of Israel.” Apparently, Mitzna is not loathe to a game of semantic gymnastics.
This reporter for The Media Line directed a question to former Deputy Foreign Minister Rabbi Michael Melchior, a co-host of the event, asking whether Labor intends to divide the old city of Jerusalem on the lines advocated by Ehud Barak in 2000. Melchior said that there is no desire to rule over Muslim areas but the old city could not be divided, leaving some in attendance to ponder whether Melchior’s remarks clarified Mitzna’s plans or articulated the Jerusalem dilemma.
Responding to how Labor hopes to improve its dismal standing in the polls, Mitzna is clearly placing his hopes in attracting supporters of the smaller left-wing parties. Polls now predict that Labor will earn 20 seats – a far cry from 40 and more in previous decades and down significantly from the 26 seats it held in the previous Knesset. Disaffected Likud voters have turned to Shinui or Shas – cementing the former’s virtually certain position of power-broker in the new government. Some pundits believe that although his moves are dictated by internal polls, Mitzna is making a mistake by cutting off the option of joining a unity government headed by Sharon. Israelis, they say, favor unity or the appearance of unity, and see no reason to support a dwindling party that will be the anchor of an impotent opposition. More attractive, they say, is the often-suggested Likud-Labor-Shinui government that would be strong and less beholden to the small religious parties that the left loves to hate. The refusal of such Labor stalwarts as Binyamin Ben-Eliezer, Matan Vilnai and Haim Ramon to express their total support for Mitzna makes chances of a turn-around even more remote.
The former general reiterated his policy of withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and other post-1967 territories — under fire and whether or not there is agreement with Yassir Arafat. Mitzna, who previously served as military governor of those areas, argues that Israel has to take the offensive, but not a military one. Basing his assessment on his 30-years of military service, he keeps repeating that the slogan, “let the IDF win,” has proven to be very wrong. Israel’s political right wing counters that Ehud Barak adequately demonstrated the recklessness of such a policy that rewards terror and invites more trouble.
The left wing also speaks of looming national suicide — but of a demographic rather than military one — if separation from the Palestinians is not achieved. Some statisticians believe that at most there are only a few years remaining until Palestinians form a majority in all areas that now constitute Israel and post-1967 territories. As the demographic gap widens, they argue, Palestinian terror aimed at Israeli civilians in the very heart of the nation grows along with nationalistic fervor.
Interestingly, however, the questions posed at the English language event focused more on social and economic issues than on security ones. One speaker rued what he termed Israel’s lost position of being the most equitable society in the world based on sound socialist principles, while findings today identify Israel as having one of the largest gaps between its rich and poor of any industrialized country.
“I am against privatization as a solution to the problems of any economy, especially here in Israel where there are so many newcomers and society is so unequal,” Mitzna replied. “Government must keep control to generate job opportunities and help them to serve the people and the economy….I am worried about the gap between those who have and have not.”
Beyond that, Mitzna offered no tangible solutions for Israel’s economic tribulations. The nation has the largest GDP-to-debt ratio in the world and Prime Minister Sharon is apparently pinning his hopes of staving off total disaster on quick approval of a massive $12 billion package of American cash and loan guarantees. It is believed that the defense budget is inexorably tied to that request. The recently-passed 2003 budget it is already being reopened in order to cut millions of additional shekels. And the nation’s Chief Statistician received a formal reprimand from the Prime Minister for saying that, “2002 was Israel’s worst economic year since 1953.”
Mitzna leapfrogged from the military to being Mayor of Haifa — Israel’s third largest city — to being head of the Labor party. While it is increasingly unlikely that he will become prime minister this time around, he has nevertheless grown in political stature in a relatively short period of time — notwithstanding blatant attempts by those he passed over to hold him back. He articulated a clear policy on defense issues, but like the leaders of other parties, appeared to have little to offer on economic issues. Israel’s economic relationship with the United States remains a defining issue between the two countries, yet Israeli political leadership on the issue remains up for grabs.
Mitzna is trying to convince voters that he offers a clear alternative to a continuation of Sharon’s policies, and that he can really make a difference to the country. That entails solving Israel’s defense problems and economic despair – both of which require broad cooperation. Even this friendly campaign crowd seemed unconvinced that these are in the offing.