An Arab member of the Knesset expected that Israeli Prime Minister-Elect Sharon would contact President Arafat in an attempt to reach a peaceful agreement, when he realizes that peace is the only option he has.
Talab Al Sane, Knesset member representing the Arab Democratic Party, stressed in an interview with Albawaba.com that the Israelis are not ready to sacrifice peace for the sake of Sharon. Peace would therefore remain the only choice for the new prime minister. This view is also supported by the objection of the Israeli military establishment to engage itself in Sharon’s adventures.
The following are excerpts from this interview:
Q. How do you perceive Sharon’s future relation with the 1948 Arabs on one hand, and the peace process with the PA on the other hand?
A. There are different tracks for the Israeli government to deal with these two issues. Relationships with the Arabs in Israel will be under the heading “Equality for All” regardless of the citizens’ ethnic or religious belonging.
There are likely to be differences between the Labor and Likud parties, but we believe that the Likud is capable of adopting a more positive policy towards the Arabs and their rights.
Each of the two parties has its own political tactics of dealing with the PA and the peace process. I can say that Sharon does not basically reflect the Israeli political attitude in as much as it reflects the public horror. Those who voted for Sharon did not vote for him as a person, but rather out of their despair at the failures of Barak and his policies. The electorate were also scared and lacked a feeling of security. The election results therefore reflect Barak’s defeat rather than Sharon’s victory. The new prime minister’s winning 63 percent of the votes gives observers a preliminary impression that the Israeli society has a move towards the extreme right. I think, however, that had [former premier Shimon] Peres run the elections, Sharon would have witnessed a severe defeat. Sharon himself went for the elections under the umbrella of peace and not war.
Q. But Sharon’s election agenda does not mention that. He called instead for the transfer of the Palestinians, and making Jordan the alternative Palestinian homeland and declared that Jerusalem is the undivided capital of Israel.
A. I do not want to defend Sharon, but I would like to put things straight and discuss them in an objective manner. Sharon and his blood-stained history are well known, but during the elections, he tried to appear as an innocent peace seeker.
I do not believe in exhibitory things and I am convinced that Sharon’s nature will dominate. Look at his partners such as Zief and Liberman who call for war. I believe that he has covered himself with a transparent cover showing his actual orientation. This is reflected by the Arab countries’ fear of him winning the election. Do we have now a new Sharon or will he continue to be the same Sharon? Do the domestic, Arab and international circumstances give Sharon the opportunity to go back to the reason of force? Will he use atomic bombs to excel Barak who has used gunships and tanks?
I believe Sharon reflects what I call a crisis of force. There are limits to the use of force and killing and therefore this orientation will be defeated because the public, which voted for Sharon, needs security. This cannot be achieved by force and there will be no security without responding to the Palestinians’ legitimate rights. The problem now is that there is no other political choice, and Sharon should expect a reaction to any imprudent action he may take. The issue is related to a whole population and not to mere individuals. Israel’s security has become strongly linked to Palestinian security. No Palestinian security leader can prevent an action against Israel if Sharon does not provide a political environment suitable for peace. These military operations will lead to the failure of Sharon and all his options and will convince the Israeli society with the unfeasibility of occupation after it pays the price. From this angle, I would say that Sharon would fail.
Q. How would you describe Sharon’s position in the Knesset?
A. This issue is connected with the first one. Sharon will go to a divided Knesset without a parliamentary majority. The existing coalition consists of various contradictory parties such as Shas, and the deputies representing the new immigrants and other parties. In addition, [former premier Benjamin] Natanyaho has a very strong influence within the Likud party and he will try to make Sharon step down.
Q. Can we say that Sharon’s rosort to the Labor party is a sign of the force option failure and an attempt by Sharon to market himself abroad with an acceptable foreign policy?
A. By so doing, Sharon can have a wider area for political maneuvering. If he limits himself to the extreme right wing, he will not have that margin, but if he was serious in his search for peace, he will guarantee the support of the labor party and the left factions. Sharon has the potential of passing any agreement with a vast majority but if he reverts to war, he will fail because the Labor party and the left factions will withdraw from his cabinet. I would like to say that there is no reciprocal confidence between the military establishment and Sharon since there are fears of Sharon’s adventures and a common belief that he will throw Israel into labyrinth and battles which will lead to serious consequences. The Israeli people cannot afford to pay for Sharon’s bills.
Q. Therefore, any military move would be faced with deterrence from inside Israel?
A. I believe that Sharon is politically contained from committing any reckless action. Any future crisis between him and the military will be the first of its type for the military establishment in Israel. It would be the first time the military rejects the orders of the political leadership.
Q. The Palestinians in Israel boycotted the last elections, which Barak lost. Do you feel sorry for that after you see Sharon is now the Prime Minister of Israel?
A. On the contrary, the boycott decision proved to be wise as it led to unity among the Palestinians in Israel. This position has proven the free political will of the Arab community in Israel. It has given a warning that those seeking the support of the Arabs in Israel should obtain it through equal partnership and those who seek the Arab votes should respect them before and after the elections.
The boycott has enhanced our political influence. I believe that it will change the principles of the game in future. Sharon, upon winning the elections, contacted the leaders of the Arab community and asked to meet with them to discuss the possibility of forming a coalition government.
Q. There are reports about appointing an Arab minister within Sharon’s cabinet, what do you have to say about this?
A. We are against this step and see it as an attempt to evade our community’s demands for equality, full citizenship and recognition of our full partnership in running the state of Israel. The issue is not merely the appointment of an Arab as a minister which I see as futile because it will cover for the Israeli racial actions. An Arab minister in the Israeli government will neither solve the problems of land confiscation nor will achieve equality between Arabs and Jews in the country. Therefore we do not want these secondary matters to mask the major issues. In addition to this, an Arab cannot assume the post of a minister in a government that adopts settlements and war, and he cannot sit beside Zeif who calls for the transfer. We have the experience with Nawwaf Masalha who was not more than a symbol.
Q. As Arab Knesset members and as parties; do you have plans to overturn Sharon?
A. Certainly, we will spearhead the opposition and uncover the ugly face of this government and try to address the Israeli public opinion, telling them it is a dangerous choice not only to the Palestinians, but also to the future of the State of Israel, which should seek agreements that would grant it the legitimacy of existence in the Middle East. We have to have a political Intifada to go hand in hand with the Palestinian people’s Intifada and teach everybody a lesson that the Palestinian blood is not so cheap.
Q. Some sort of confusion seems to have erupted between the Palestinian Authority leadership, and the Arab parties leaders in Israel after the PA called on Israeli Arabs to vote for Barak. What is this relationship like now?
A. Coordination is perfect, and the ties are very strong. I believe Sharon will take the initiative and ask for a meeting with Arafat and the resumption of negotiations because these are Israeli demands, particularly from the military establishment.
Q. Some observers believe that the PA has no control anymore over the Intifada attributing this to the individual operations carried out by some Palestinians.
A. This type of operations is normal because the Palestinian issue is the issue of all Palestinians. The Israeli actions lead to reactions such as these acts. I believe the Palestinian people have confidence in their leadership and have enough political awareness. If these people feel any progress on the political track, they will be committed to any agreement. The Palestinian people do not carry out operations for the sake of operations; they do so to achieve greater political progress.
