English follows Hebrew
מצורף בזה לינק למאמר של אריאל כהנא במקור ראשון לפני שבוע
http://www.nrg.co.il/online/1/ART2/821/795.html
ציטוטים מתוך המאמר:
נסיבות היסטוריות נדירות מגלגלות בפני הציבור הלאומי בישראל הזדמנות בלתי חוזרת לסגת מנאום בר־אילן.
על הימין להתעורר מהקיפאון ולהציע תוכנית מוסכמת שנתניהו לא יוכל להתעלם ממנה
במה מדובר? ובכן, כבר כמה חודשים שבמרחק פסיעה נפתחת הזדמנות לקדם באופן ממשי את ריבונות ישראל בשטחים שמעבר לקו הירוק, וגם לקבור קבורת חמור את רעיון העוועים של מדינה פלסטינית בארץ ישראל. לא ביום אחד יתרחש תהליך כזה אלא במסע בן אלף מילין, אך הימים האלה הם המועד להתחיל אותו.
בשורה התחתונה, לפנינו צבר בינלאומי של סיבות ונסיבות שלא היה כמותו מאז הסכמי אוסלו. תזת המדינה הפלסטינית תקועה עמוק בחול, ובמקומה נפער ואקום. השאלה הפתוחה היחידה היא מי ומה ימלא אותו. זהו האתגר העיקרי, החשוב, הדחוף והנדיר שמונח לפנינו, והוא בוער יותר מאלף ואחד ענייני יום־יום.
דור המייסדים (שלֵחו לא נס) של ההתיישבות ביש"ע עשה מעשה כביר כשמנע בגופו הקמת מדינה פלסטינית. אילולא ההתנחלויות, סיכוי גבוה שתותחי דאעש היו יורים עלינו היום מרמאללה ומקלקיליה. אבל בנסיבות הבינלאומיות שנוצרו, ההתנחלות בשטח לא מספיקה. כדי שהיא תשיג את יעדיה נתבעת השלמה באמצעות מעשה מדיני, כי הוא ורק הוא הקובע.
ממש כמו שהיישוב היהודי בארץ ישראל הפך לעובדת קבע רק כאשר התקבלה ההחלטה על הקמת המדינה, כך סכנת הנסיגה מיו"ש תוסר מן הפרק רק כאשר יושלם מעשה מדיני המעגן את נוכחותנו באזור. וכדי שמעשה כזה יתרחש, מישהו צריך לפעול למענו. בדיוק כפי שהקמת המדינה הייתה תוצאה של מאמץ מדיני כביר מצד היישוב העברי והעולם היהודי, כך ריבונות ישראלית ביו"ש תתקבע רק כתוצאה מחתירה מדינית, עקבית, נחושה ומקצועית להשגתו. בהתיישבות לבדה אין די.
בין אם זו "מדינה אחת", בין אם סיפוח שטח C פלוס אוטונומיה ובין אם "מדינה פלסטינית בירדן", חייבת להיות נכונות להתאחד סביב תוכנית אחת.
לכתבה במלואה: http://www.nrg.co.il/online/1/ART2/821/795.html
Let's pull the wagon out of the mud
Ariel Kahana
The following article appeared in Hebrew in the Makor Rishon newspaper on September 2nd 2016. Translated by Sally Zahav for Women in Green
Link to Hebrew article http://www.nrg.co.il/online/1/ART2/821/795.html
Rare historical circumstances are presenting the Israeli nationalist public with a unique opportunity to turn away from the Bar Ilan speech. The Right must wake up from its stagnation and offer an accepted and unified plan that Netanyahu will not be able to ignore
Rabbi Joseph Dov Soloveitchik's deeply penetrating words are impossible to forget. When he describes the historic mistake of religious Judaism, which had turned its back on Zionism, thus extending its neck for slaughter by the Nazis, he refers to a climactic moment in the scroll of Song of Songs. The beloved, meaning the People of Israel, hears the lover's knocking and his pleas, but despite her love for him she does not open the door. "What is the essence of the Song of Songs", writes Rav Soloveitchik in his article entitled 'The sound of my lover knocking', "if it is not missing out on a great, sublime moment of extreme urgency, which she had dreamed of and fought for, which she had sought and desired with her burning soul?… (but) apathy, borne of a strange perverseness, seized her". The right conclusion to draw is that we have a supreme obligation to listen to the fluttering of history's wings and to take advantage of opportunities that supreme Providence makes available. "Do we not pay attention to our anxieties for security and the peace of the Land of Israel in our days, the knocking of the lover begging his beloved to allow him to enter? It is incumbent upon us, the faithful Jews, to listen even more attentively to the sound of our lover rapping and to answer him immediately with great and practical efforts", said Rabbi Soloveitchik, 15 years after the establishment of the State of Israel.
Even these days the lover is rapping, begging, and placing before us a "world-changing opportunity, which we have dreamed about and fought for". And indeed, even these days, "apathy borne of a strange perverseness" seizes the People living in Zion, who, held back by an inexplicable stagnation, does not take up the glove. An inexplicable reticence closes its mouth. A one-time, historic opportunity, which perhaps will never recur, is placed before us, but instead of pouncing on it we hold back.
What is this all about? And indeed, it has already been several months that an opportunity has been opened to promote Israeli sovereignty in the territories over the Green Line in a practical way, and to bury the delusive idea of a Palestinian state within the Land of Israel in its grave of disgrace. Such a step will not happen in one day, but in a journey of a thousand miles. But now is the time to begin it.
Here are the main points on paper, and it is only necessary to connect them with lines: The Republican candidate for presidency of the United States has established a campaign headquarters in Samaria. He supports the building of communities, and his party has removed the issue of a Palestinian state from the platform. There is no need to expand on Donald Trump's stance on Islam and terror, which he makes very clear. So if he is elected, and there is still a chance for this, the Israeli Right could not ask for more. We must only seize the opportunity, in other words, to present an alternative policy to the trap in which Israel has been ensnared since the Oslo Accords. Trump, who is surrounded by Orthodox Jewish, rightist Republicans, will be ready to listen. We must only know what we want to tell him. Even if he loses, his party's shift is wonderful news by itself.
Even if Hillary is elected, there are good reasons to assume that she will not rush into beginning talks for a final settlement. After all, she has seen up close two American presidents - her husband Bill and Obama – crash on the Palestinian matter. It would be especially foolish for her to repeat their mistakes, and this message should already be pushed. It is not by chance that Clinton has distanced herself as Secretary of State from dealing with the Palestinian issue. In short, it will be possible to deal with her as well. We must only have the courage to begin the process.
The background of the new page that the new resident of the White House will open on the 20th of January will include an unprecedented international situation regarding Israel in many aspects. Firstly, the chaos in the Arab world and the spilling over of terror into Europe must bring up the question that Henry Kissinger has already mentioned, which is 'what point is there is establishing another failed stated in the Middle East?'.
This is all happening while George Mitchell's and John Kerry's two failed attempts to arrive at a settlement during Obama's time are burned into the international community's memory. Because of this as well as his advanced age, Mahmoud Abbas is considered history, someone who is no longer relevant. The reason for this is that the Palestinian matter is becoming less and less important on the international agenda, while Israel is strengthening and rising and even becoming an exemplary state. The entire world, without exaggeration, including Europe, seeks to learn from her how to fight terror.
These circumstances are what led Obama, Merkel, Netanyahu and Buji Herzog – each in his own words – to say that the time is not right "to proceed with a great step" in the Palestinian sphere, meaning, to establish a Palestinian state. And if this is not enough, there is the rapprochement between the Arab states and Israel, which, as was bemoaned this week in the New York Times, "might restrain a strengthening of connections between them and thus allow injustices against the Palestinians – a source of regional tension for decades – to continue and exacerbate the wound". That is to say, even in the Arab countries the Palestinians are no longer relevant. The countries of Africa, which were once a reliable backing for them, are becoming closer to Israel. The countries of Eastern Europe, which had lost interest in them for some time, even more so, and on the contrary, they want, just as we do, to remain nationalist states and not "states of all its citizens".
The bottom line is that we are presented with an international collection of reasons and circumstances that have not existed since the Oslo Accords. The thesis of the Palestinian state is stuck deeply in the sand, and in its place there is a vacuum. The only open question is who and what will fill it. This is the most important, urgent and tremendous challenge that confronts us and it is more urgent than a thousand and one day-to-day, routine matters.
Shimon Peres' resounding question from the nineties, "So what is the alternative (to Oslo)?" calls out to the Right from every loudspeaker. And this time it must take history by the horns and answer, because who knows if and when it may happen again.
Overall, we must remember that the Right's silence on policy has been its undoing. The failure of the London Agreement in the eighties, problematic on its own, resulted in the Oslo Accords. Sharon's awkward attempt to escape the Oslo Accords resulted in the Expulsion. Indeed, these three steps can only be blamed on short-sighted Israeli leaders, but who could guarantee that leaders such as these will not come to power tomorrow or the next day. Therefore, the nationalist camp must embrace with both hands the opportunity with which it is faced now, because who knows if and when anything better might arrive in the future.
How do we take advantage of this opportunity? By defining a clear, coherent end goal, which those who are faithful to the Land of Israel will take on themselves to work toward. I will immediately suggest a way to come to an agreed plan, but whether it is "one state" or the annexation of Area C plus autonomy or a "Palestinian state in Jordan", there must be a willingness to unite around one plan.
The ideological split among the Right has been working in favor of the left for decades. And we can break this dynamic only by raising an alternative banner that the Right, as a group, unites around. At the end of the day decisions are made on the policy level, not at the level of communities or at the political level. An entire area of communities was wiped off the face of the earth because the entire Rightist camp was not playing on the correct field. Thus, in order to have an influence on what is occurring in the field of policy, we must play according to its game, and we must do this in Israel and at least as much, abroad.
The generation of the founders (who are still vitally active) of the communities in Judea and Samaria achieved a great deed when it prevented, with its own body, the establishment of a Palestinian state. Were it not for these communities, there is a great probability that the guns of ISIS would have been shooting upon us today from Ramallah and Qalqilya. But within the international circumstances that have been created, those communities that already exist in the area are not enough. For the settlement enterprise to achieve its goal there must be a complementary act of policy, because that and only that, is what matters.
Just as the Jewish settlement in the Land of Israel became a determined fact only when the decision was taken to establish a state, thus the danger of a withdrawal from Judea and Samaria will be averted only when there is a policy in place that anchors our presence in the area. And in order for such a thing to happen, someone must act for us. Just as the establishment of the state was the result of a great policy effort by the Hebrew residents of the Land and the greater Jewish world, thus Israeli sovereignty in Judea and Samaria will be determined only as a result of a great, consistent, resolute and skilled effort in diplomacy to achieve it. Settlement alone is not enough.
Ideological Primaries
People tell me, "Leave something to the Almighty". And this is exactly what Rav Soloveitchik asks us not to do. "It is incumbent upon us, the faithful Jews, to listen even more attentively to the sound of our lover rapping and to answer him immediately with great and practical efforts". Changes in policy do not fall from heaven but result from the efforts of man. And one thing is sure; we all agree that we cannot count on miracles.
And it is not only miracles that we cannot depend on but also "the most Rightwing government throughout the history of Israel", as the fourth government Netanyahu is labeled. Anyone who thinks that this government, "our" government, will divert the ship into regions where the voters want to go, is wrong. Indeed, the Land of Israel Lobby began the Sovereignty project, and it is important. Lieberman's plan to strengthen alternatives to the Palestinian Authority is also a step in the right direction. But ultimately, the determining factor is the prime minister. I know that there are many who do not believe this is so, but Netanyahu is really sincerely interested in the establishment of a Palestinian state. He is not fooling the world and is not carrying out the scam of the millennium. He wants a Palestinian state. Indeed, in accordance with his conditions, but still, a Palestinian state.
So when Trump or Hillary call him on the 21st of January and ask "Mister Prime Minister, what's your plan?" Netanyahu will answer them in a similar way to the Bar Ilan speech. The only possibility that he will give some other answer is if the voting base issues such a demand. And as of today, there is no such intention. Not the Likud, not Habayit Hayehudi, not Tekuma and not even the Council of Judea, Samaria and Gaza are clamoring for this, as an ultimatum, to take advantage of the window of opportunity to retract the Bar Ilan speech. In tacit agreement, all have long since fallen in line with the idea of a Palestinian state, depending on the Arabs to torpedo it, and do not consolidate around a different alternative.
The prime minister told once of "a wise man" who told him that there are two groups among the Jewish People who can be maneuvered and manipulated like Plasteline Play dough. One is the Jewish liberals on the other side of the sea, who automatically adopt all of the blame aimed toward the Jews and are quick to beat their breasts. The other group, the man told Netanyahu, is the settlers. Netanyahu claimed (why not) that Bennett is the one who is fooling the settlers. On hearing this story, I was reminded of a joke by Uri Orbach, obm. "Why does Netanyahu always wear a black yarmulke when he does wear a yarmulke? Because the knitted one is in his pocket".
Whichever way, if this is what bothers the politicians the real question is how we present an agreed-upon alternative. It seems to me that in these days of Facebook the answer is ideological online primaries. Of course, it would not be official or binding, but since the leadership is not capable of consolidating a joint position, there is no choice but to turn to the public and ask their opinion. What we need is for the Council of Judea, Samaria and Gaza to lead such a poll, but Habayit Hayehudi could also take up the challenge. It is also possible for any person who has the means and organizational ability to carry it out.
In this unofficial referendum, three or four ideological alternatives will be presented to the general public, which will be chosen by a committee of constituents. In order to lend the poll public validity and political weight, public relations campaigns will be carried out, as usual. The voters, who will exercise their right to vote in an Internet application, will come from all levels of society.
The result will determine the public's opinion, so that the civic and political leadership will not be able to ignore it. Just as the leaders of Britain are carrying out the Brexit contrary to their own opinion because this was the will of the people, members of the "most rightwing government in Israel's history" and the non-governmental organizations that support it will have to adjust to the will of the voters. This is the only way to pull the wagon out of the mud and begin to push it toward the goal that the sane camp is working for: the elimination of a Palestinian state, maximizing Israeli sovereignty and interests in the field, and compliance with a reasonable standard of the protection of human rights.
No doubt, the process is not easy, but if we want to control our own fate, we have no choice. We see that our governments, especially those of the Likud, lack the ability to express their beliefs in any act of policy.
Therefore, just as Menahem Begin spoke of "many more (communities like) Elon Moreh" but left the settlement of the Land to Gush Emunim, so it is now, that the new settlers must drive the policy and pull the political class along after them. Because we have had enough. It is time to stop playing the Plasteline play dough game.
