by Ruthie Blum
This week’s prize for
political chutzpah goes to two prominent Israelis — President Shimon
Peres and Ambassador to the U.N. Ron Prosor — whose salaries are paid
for by our tax shekels.
On Sunday, Peres
reiterated his position that Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud
Abbas “is a true partner for peace,” while criticizing the current
government for failing to grasp that the public is firmly in favor of a
two-state solution.
As if that weren’t bad
enough, Peres went even further on Monday, when he told a group of
Christian leaders that there is “nothing wrong” with talking to Hamas.
The irony here is that
part of the reason that Peres was appointed to his cushy post in the
first place was so that he would finally be forced to keep his utopian
ideas about a “new Middle East” to himself, and to stop going around the
globe undermining the policies of his country.
But being a figure-head
does not come naturally to the elder statesman, who has always had a
soft spot for all things European, particularly wine, women, song, and
socialism. This is not to say that he hasn’t enjoyed what the peace camp
in the United States has to offer him by way of honor, mind you. And he
was certainly more than delighted to be awarded the Medal of Freedom
from U.S. President Barack Obama. But nothing could really match the
1994 Nobel Peace Prize that was bestowed upon him — together with his
nemesis, the late Yitzhak Rabin, and his buddy, the late Palestinian
Liberation Organization head Yasser Arafat, in Oslo.
So it was quite foolish
for anyone to expect that he would cease to be who he is as soon as he
took up residence in the President's Residence in Jerusalem — a move
that cost him his marriage.
Still, one might have
harbored a glimmer of hope that the blatantly anti-peace-process
behavior on the part of the Palestinian leadership, both in Gaza and in
the West Bank, would have served to modify his stance somewhat. Alas, it
was not to be. And the Right needn’t get all up in arms over it. As
president, Peres is not supposed to voice partisanship, but that is not
the real reason for our anger. After all, had he expressed the opposite
view, nobody in conservative circles would have uttered a word, other
than to use it as an opportunity to say, “You see? Even Peres is now on
our side.”
No, what we should all be appalled by relates to the gall of the second winner of the “big-mouth” sweepstakes.
While Peres was on his
podium promoting the Palestinian Authority, Prosor was in the audience
at a different conference — one that was hosted by the Foreign Ministry
for 160 ambassadors and heads of Israeli missions abroad.
After National Security
Council chief Yaakov Amidror gave a lecture/briefing on key issues,
such as Iran and the Palestinians, Prosor — who, unlike Peres, has not
been a vociferous leftist — got up during the Q&A portion and posed a
challenging question. What he asked had to do with the timing of the
government’s announcement that it would build housing in the E1 corridor
between Jerusalem and the Palestinian Authority.
Prosor’s question
elicited a round of applause from the crowd of Israeli diplomats. This
irritated Amidror to no end. "Gentlemen, do not be confused,” he
responded. “You are the government's representatives. If that doesn't
suit you: either go into politics or resign.”
It should come as
little surprise that Amidror, not Prosor, has been the one under attack
for the incident. Previous Foreign Ministry bigwigs have been hauled
into TV studios to express their indignation. Ambassadors are thinking
people, not mere underlings, is the long and short of their argument.
Indeed. But ambassadors
also commonly suffer from a form of diplomatic “Stockholm Syndrome,”
which causes them to begin to identify with their host countries.
This is as
understandable from a human perspective as is Peres’ glee at being
treated like royalty beyond Israel’s shores. It is as difficult to
resist praise as it is to withstand criticism. Prosor deserves sympathy
for being stuck in the snake pit of the U.N. and surviving.
But he should not be
let off the hook for worrying more about what the world will say about
Israeli policy than doing his job of promoting and defending it. The
fact is that the “international community” is not hostile to Israel for
its construction of this or that house. Indeed, Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu didn’t actually send any bulldozers to E1, and doubts at home
that he will ever do so have been strengthening the Habayit Hayehudi
party on the Right.
It is about time that
Israeli diplomats stop imagining that their task would be easier if the
Netanyahu government would only be more appeasing. They ought to know
better, since their situation under more left-wing governments was no
different.
Whether or not Peres
and Prosor are within their rights to be outspoken is irrelevant. There
are many battles taking place against Israel, both military and
civilian. Shame on any of our representatives for providing the
multi-tentacled enemy with the slightest additional fodder.
Ruthie Blum is the author of “To Hell in a Handbasket: Carter, Obama, and the ‘Arab Spring.’”
Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=3169
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
No comments:
Post a Comment