HERZLIYA, Israel, Jan. 21 (UPI) -- 06IsrJan21
Israel, a country that has learned the hard way never to rely on anyone's decisions but its own, now finds itself in the uncomfortable position of dependence on the choices of others. Having always, in diplomatic as in military affairs, preferred to seize the initiative, it must now wait on the actions of others to shape the new security environment in which Israel must operate.
The first new direction comes next week, with the Palestinian elections that now seem likely to give Hamas up to a third of the vote, and very probably a role in the Palestinian Authority government. The latest Bir Zeit poll gives Hamas 30 percent and Fatah 35 percent, and Hamas itself must soon decide whether to renew the terror campaign against Israel, or to take the path of politics and diplomacy and leave the terror to the Islamic Jihad.
The Bush administration, committed to its belief in Arab democracy, leans to the view that the responsibility of participating in government is likely to change Hamas for the better. As a result, the United States has put pressure on both Mahmoud Abbas, Arafat's successor, and on the Israelis, for the Palestinian elections to go ahead as planned and to allow the vote and political campaigning in East Jerusalem.
The Israelis know that this did not work for Fatah and the Palestinian Authority, as misruled by Yasser Arafat, so they are skeptical. But they will have to wait and see.
The Israelis also know that their own elections in March, in the wholly unprecedented circumstance of the new third party, Kadima (Forward), that Ariel Sharon launched just before the stroke that felled him, will be profoundly affected by the results of the Palestinian vote. The current polls suggest that Kadima is likely to emerge as the largest block of votes in the next Knesset, but a new terror campaign could change that, and Kadima's choice of coalition partners in government is also at this stage unknown.
Israel's most serious security threat is the prospect of the current regime in Iran gaining nuclear weapons, but this too is for the moment out of Israel's power to control. Diplomacy, led by the three European powers of Britain, France and Germany, with American backing, continues in the slim hope that a referral to the United Nations Security Council and the threat of sanctions could yet head off a crisis with Iran.
This too will be unknown until March 8, the next scheduled meeting of the board of governors of the International Atomic Energy Authority, the body that must decide such a referral. And further delays are possible as the Russians try some diplomacy of their own and as the Chinese juggle their need for Iranian oil with the international responsibility that comes with becoming a great power.
Any temptation the Israelis may feel to seize the initiative once again and launch a military strike of their own to defang the Iranian menace is muted by the knowledge that Iran's nuclear assets are widely dispersed and deeply buried. Success cannot be guaranteed, and the diplomatic and military price Israel might pay for such an attack is likely to outweigh the benefit of the relatively brief delay - perhaps two or three years - in Iran's nuclear development that is probably the best that could be expected.
There is a further important unknown that is also out of Israel's hands. The Assad regime in Syria is in deep trouble, destabilized by the United Nations probe into its responsibility for the killings and bombings in Lebanon and by internal defections. Syria is the only Arab neighbor that has yet to conclude a peace agreement with Israel and one possible option for the regime to try and escape its current impasse might be to revive the stalled peace talks with Israel, and thus seek to recover the Golan Heights by diplomatic means. That would leave Israel with another difficult decision over trading highly strategic land for peace.
This unusual combination of uncertainties and dependence is focusing attention on the first major policy statement of the acting prime Minister, Ehud Olmert, that will be delivered to the annual Herzliya Conference on Israeli security on Tuesday.
Olmert, a cigar-smoking former Mayor of Jerusalem whose wife is a known supporter of the Peace Now movement, is something of an unknown quantity. Although he has yet fully to cement his position as Sharon's heir, he has the backing of Sharon's own political clan. He seems to be consolidating his own position and that of the new Kadima party as the nucleus of a new national consensus. He has the backing of Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz, the new Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and other senior figures who left the Likud party with Sharon, and of the former Labour Prime Minister Shimon Peres. Significantly, his election campaign is being helped by the political adviser Tal Zilberstein, who formerly ran the campaigns of Sharon's predecessor as Prime Minister, Ehud Barak.
Olmert's speech Tuesday has been drafted by another Sharon loyalist, Eyal Arad, and is said to focus on the Palestinian elections and the role of Hamas. Olmert faces a tricky choice. If he says too much, he could not only impact the Palestinian election but also damage his own chances of an election victory in March. If he says too little, he could look indecisive at a time when Israelis are looking for reassurance of strong leadership after the eclipse of Ariel Sharon.
In policy terms, Olmert is best known as the father of the plan for Israel's unilateral withdrawal, first from Gaza and then from most of the West Bank. Sharon finally followed Olmert's advice and took the decision to pull back from Gaza, but the state of chaos that has resulted has hardly reinforced Israel's sense of security. And proposing to withdraw from a West Bank where Hamas is challenging Fatah for political dominance could give the rump of Likud led by Binjamin Netanyahu just the election issue they need.
Olmert will be tempted to play safe and simply repeat his offer to the PA leader Mahmoud Abbas to return to negotiations after the disarming of the terror organizations. But after the elections as today, that if probably a demand that Abbas will be unable to fulfill. Like the Israelis, Abbas too is dependent on the great unknown of next week's Palestinian vote.
Ends
