Other People's Futures

Olmert, Livni, Barak and Yishai have no objection to getting headlines now and paying for them with other people's futures.

I won’t comment extensively now about prisoner exchanges in general and the particular exchanges being negotiated with Hizbullah and Hamas. Six months ago I expressed my opinion here and I haven’t changed my mind.

I will only add that Israeli politicians’ stewardship of their country’s security is epitomized by the prisoner exchanges now being negotiated, in which Israel has given up the maximum in return for the minimum. The greatest incentive possible is being given to further terrorism.

All the experts warn that the deals further portray Israel as a hapless victim to be brutalized. For the politicians, the only thing that matters is the temporary orgy of emotionalism that will fleetingly sweep the popular press, in which they will play a part and have their pictures taken. They will have brought the boys—in some cases, their remains—home. Olmert, Barak and Yishai need an achievement, after their fatuous political performances last week, as something that can be spun as an achievement whether it is one or not. It does not matter how bitterly other families and other political leaders will have cause to rue it in the future. That, after all, will happen to other people and at other times.

This attitude is the exact opposite of stewardship: The use of public interests and resources for private advantage, with disregard for the consequences because they will likely be borne by other people.

Knesset Kremlinology

I don’t like to engage in straight political commentary, but sometimes something needs pointing out. Originally I was trained as a Sovietologist. I learned the arcane art of analyzing official statements in Pravda to discern when policy was being changed, and who in the Kremlin was doublecrossing whom. While I don’t consider myself an expert in the field of modern “media,” a lot of my old skills come in useful when applied to the Israeli press—especially Ha’aretz.

Ha’aretz is a lot like Pravda. All its writers are ideologically committed to Peace Messianism, with a few token exceptions like Nadav Shragai and Yisrael Harel. Many of them are connected to various portions of the left-wing establishment, and reflect the interests, passions and aversions of their chosen factions. As in the former Soviet press, why a news item appears and how it is presented often matters more than the facts it contains.

Thus on Friday a report appeared under the byline of Haaretz’ political reporter, Yossi Verter, telling us that “people close to Olmert” were referring to Ehud Barak as a “whipped cur,” a coward who again made a threat and backed off when challenged by Olmert. The whole tone of the “news item” smells like Verter got it ready written from one of Olmert’s spin doctors. The news, supposedly, is that this is Olmert’s opinion of Barak. The point however is not to impart information but to influence attitudes.

Barak’s conduct last week does not justify such crowing. Barak achieved what he set out to do—he got Kadima to agree to hold primaries, and he did it without Labor having to leave its cushy ministerial chairs. He’s won on points. But he made one serious mistake: He gave Olmert a breathing space of three months.

The Verter article in Haaretz is meant to start destroying Barak’s reputation among the members of Israel’s leftist elite who get their opinions from Haaretz. Olmert notes that most of Labor’s MKs and ministers really, really don’t want to go to elections. Only the necessity of not creating a public breach with Barak made them go along with his threat to leave Olmert’s government. Olmert is gambling that in three months, when he runs in Kadima’s primaries and wins, or better yet welches on his promise to Barak and cancels primaries altogether, he will have so weakened Barak’s image that his Labor colleagues will no longer follow his lead.

It is equally significant that Barak has sustained two more attacks since the weekend. His former campaign manager, who worked for Tal Silberstein, once Barak’s adviser, now Olmert’s, has threatened to go to the police with evidence that Barak, too, takes cash-filled envelopes. And Amir Peretz, whom Barak replace as head of Labor, has announced he will challenge Barak for the leadership position again before the next elections—which could be quite soon. Peretz may have made his announcement independently of Olmert, but it is also quite possible that Olmert told Peretz that the Prime Minister’s spin doctors would be gunning for Barak and that now would be a good time for Peretz to make his challenge public.

To me this all feels just like the time when I perused Pravda to follow up on Suslov versus Brezhnev, Andropov versus Chernenko, and Gorbachev versus the rest. I used to thank heaven that I lived in a country which wasn’t run by hints and innuendo in Pravda. Little did I suspect then what the future would hold . . .