Do it right from the center

By Avraham Tal, Ha'aretz

One can complain about "the people" who don't understand that Amram Mitzna is a man of principles, one who isn't prepared to "pull a move" so as to get a piece of the government, but does have the correct solutions to the problems faced by the state.

One can be angry at "the people" for not understanding that Ariel Sharon damaged practically every sphere he touched and that if he is reelected he will continue to do damage to the point at which it will undermine the foundations of the state.

One can be infuriated that "the people" don't draw the only logical electoral conclusion from this situation. But what can you do? These are "the people" who will go to the ballot boxes next Tuesday and, in all likelihood, send Sharon back into government at the head of a far-right-religious coalition.

But the complainers are saying, that's not so bad, because when the political and economic disaster worsens, the people will sober up from the illusion that Sharon can extricate the state from the storms and lead it to safe shores; and then, finally, they will place their trust in a sane prime minister who can do it: whether it's Mitzna, or - since there's a high probability he will be deposed after the elections - someone else who adopts his principles.

Is this really so? Perhaps. The question is whether the ship of state won't hit rock bottom first.

It's not difficult to guess the results after the election of a right wing government. Politically, it will face a major imbroglio with the U.S. - President George W. Bush "adopted" Sharon and, within certain limits, his policies; but Bush knows that sticking to that line will lead the U.S. into a dead-end in its relations with the moderate Arab countries and Europe. The elections in Israel and the expected war with Iraq have fogged the American perspective of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But sometime in 2003, perhaps already in the spring, the fog will lift and the U.S. will explicitly demand that Israel line up along the lines of the "road map."

Will an extreme-right government headed by Sharon fold? Under such circumstances and, in effect, beforehand, the conflict with the U.S. will become apparent - and there will be a need for new elections (perhaps even initiated by Sharon). Labor will call for moderation, compromise and lining up with the U.S; the Likud will run under the slogan "Only Sharon can stand the pressure." Given past experience, one has to be a complete optimist to believe that this time "the people" will depose grandpa Sharon.

The situation is no less gloomy on the economic front. To prevent the deepening of the recession, and a new danger of a financial crisis, the coming months have to include painful emergency steps, which will surely draw opposition from powerful forces in the economy. Yes, Labor showed national responsibility in the last budget crisis, but it would be nearly inhuman to ask it, while in the Opposition, to lend a hand to the government, which it regards as a disaster for the state. Will the economy sink further, even before the necessary rescue steps are taken?

It is impossible to accept the approach that says the worse things get, the better the chances it will be possible some time in the future to establish a government that will save us from disaster. That is the practical meaning of the approach that Mitzna forced on his party, instead of leaving open the possibility of a joint government in which Labor softens the hard line of the Likud as a condition for membership in the coalition.

It is difficult to argue with a politician who takes a principled stand, as Mitzna did. After all, that's what is expected from a decent statesman - an expectation only rarely fulfilled. But when the fundamental welfare of the state (let alone its fate) is at stake, principles are seen in a different light. Mitzna was not asked to speak untruthfully, or to deceive the voters, but just to leave the door open.

Why is a formula like "Labor won't join a government with guidelines contradictory to Labor's platform" bad, while the patronizing and hostile "Labor will not join a Sharon government under any conditions," is better? Because it drives away voters from the center?

By taking a purist line, Mitzna is seeking votes from the margins, in Meretz and Shinui, but not in the saner parts of the Likud and the rest of the center, which is the only place to find more strength for the left in the Knesset. He apparently forgot that Yitzhak Rabin and Ehud Barak won their elections because they knew how to move to the center - and only thanks to that, did they get the historic opportunity to do the right thing.