A visit to the Knesset
November 9th, 2006Our visit to the Israeli Parliament, the Knesset, was prefaced by a tour of Yad Vashem, the beautifully and imaginatively designed Holocaust Museum. I remain an incorrigible optimist. The lively atmosphere of the Knesset, with its intrigues, deals and arguments, is living proof of the enduring nature of the human spirit, and of the determination of the Jewish people to move forward.
The Coalition Government led by Eheud Olmert has just been strengthened by the entry of a further Party, giving them 78 seats in the 120 seat parliament. The views of Mr. Lieberman, the leader of the new coalition partner, are causing much controversy in the Israeli press, with some justification, it has to be said.
We were welcomed into the Gallery, where we could see all the main players - Olmert, Peres, Netanyahu etc. After a brief hello to Mr. Netanyahu, we enjoyed a couple of hours with some younger members of the Knesset from various parties.
I was particularly impressed by two of them: Yoel Hasson of Kadima and Gideon Sa’ar of Likud. Mr. Hasson spoke well about his loyalty to Ariel Sharon and of his decision to follow him when Kadima was created. He spoke about Israel’s wish to be left alone. I challenged him with the argument that Israel was trying to be two things at once, namely an exasperated uncle, giving aid and assistance to the Palestinian people in Gaza when it suited them and at the same time behaving like a reclusive neighbour who installed a high fence on the West Bank in order to avoid the Palestinians. Unsurprisingly, we did not come to a clear answer.
Mr. Sa’ar is Deputy Speaker. He had been a key advisor to Sharon, but had not gone with him to Kadima, upon the basis that the wholesale withdrawal from the Gaza Strip was not a policy that he could accept. The thrust of the argument from this most thoughtful of men was that grand treaties and wholesale solutions are not the answer for Israel. Instead, a piecemeal “nuts and bolts” approach to each specific issue should be adopted. This struck a chord with me. The wholly artificial deadlines of Oslo and Hillsborough are not an appropriate way of settling historical disputes. Big Summits always seem to focus on the Big Deal, which is more related to good headlines than good diplomacy.
Unglamorous and un-newsworthy negotiations will be the best way forward, I think.
