Subscribe to Print Edition | Fri., January 11, 2008 Shvat 4, 5768 | | Israel Time: 00:17 (EST+7)
Haaretz israel news English
web haaretz.com
  Back to Homepage
Rosner's Domain
Diplomacy
Defense Jewish World Opinion National
Print Edition
Advertising
Books Arts & Leisure Business Real Estate Easy Start Travel Week's End Anglo File
In the role of party pooper
By Meron Benvenisti

Poor Ehud Barak. All he did was repeat recently the "there's no partner" formula he bequeathed to the Israeli discourse after his failure at Camp David and during the intifada - the formula that has become a consensus uniting right and left. And now he is discovering that the very same formula being explained as his attempt to "pass Benjamin Netanyahu on the right" is being described as a blow to the first signs of a diplomatic process. It is being condemned as interfering with the consolidation of new diplomatic programs. He is also accused of defying the leadership of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, who is suddenly being described as a responsible leader hoping for a two-state solution.

Barak has not changed his views; after all, the diplomatic-security situation has not changed. Some people even think it has worsened because severing the West Bank from the Gaza Strip makes the chances for an agreement less likely. In addition, the power and authority of Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas and the PA in the West Bank have been undermined, Israel continues to control the West Bank, there is nothing new in the diplomatic plans and the ability to implement them, and the United States has lost the strength to use pressure to realize the plans. Barak will do everything he can to prove that "there is no partner."

In that case, why did his words provoke such a hostile reaction? Because commentators, experts and columnists adapted their response to their new mood. Until now they needed the "there is no partner" formula. Now, when they are becoming devoted to the illusion of the peace process, they have turned the formula and its inventor into party poopers.
Advertisement
It's not Barak who has changed, and it's not the situation that has changed. Only the pundits have changed.

With the Camp David failure and the outbreak of the second intifada, the Israeli public needed a narrative that would unite its parts, justify its deeds and allow it to deal with a difficult situation while describing the situation as a war for survival. The narrative presented by Barak, in which he offered the late PA chairman Yasser Arafat the moon and Arafat chose violence instead, has become resistant to any contradicting argument, fact or evidence. Barak and his disciples have succeeded in convincing the Israelis that the Palestinian rejection of the generous and unprecedented offers led to the wave of violence, and that the Palestinians are not ready to end the conflict, which is not territorial but stems from their refusal to accept Israel's very existence.

The "there is no partner" formula is what led to the peace camp's destruction. Anyone who dared present a more complex picture was accused of supporting the enemy. This narrative, which still dominates in describing the past, does not suit the new mood Olmert is nurturing for his own reasons. This mood is being eagerly adopted by people who until recently proclaimed the "there is no partner" formula and are now marketing its opposite.

It's amazing to see how Olmert, who was humiliated and ridiculed, has suddenly become "the person responsible for the policy of peace and security." He is obliged to "restrain" the defense minister, who dares to challenge his leadership. Olmert, who wants to appropriate the Palestinian issue, is keeping Barak away from any contact traditionally under the defense minister's aegis, and is trying to give him orders. But the pundits' decree is unequivocal: Barak's motives are personal; he is undermining the process out of fear that someone will succeed where he failed. And none of this prevents them from continuing to demand that the Labor Party leave the government and Olmert be replaced.

It's not a good idea for those who are suddenly discovering the missing "partner" to attack Barak with such fury and make light of his assessments, because there is a good chance the old slogan will come back and be useful. After the buds of the new diplomatic process have wilted under the care of gardeners Olmert and U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and Barak proves that he is not only a commentator, they will once again unashamedly raise the tattered flag of "there is no partner."
Bookmark to del.icio.us  
 
'Body of 2008'
A U.K. men's magazine pays homage to Israeli supermodel Bar Refaeli.
Echoes of Thessaloniki
A book on Sarkozy's Greek-Jewish roots goes on sale in Greece.
  1.   The excuse of the moment 10:41  |  Natallie Durson 17/08/07
  2.   There is no future for so-called Israel in the Middle East 11:56  |  Hannah 17/08/07
  3.   I`m afraid a `Pal` State is out of the question for the near term 12:05  |  Pavel 17/08/07
  4.   Barak is an irrelevant HasBeen who offered Yerushalyim to PLO 12:44  |  Objective Guy 17/08/07
  5.   #1 natallie finally sees the light there are no partners 13:05  |  victor hardman 17/08/07
  6.   what kind of partner....? 13:08  |  ravi 17/08/07
  7.   Haaretz gone off the rail 13:13  |  S 17/08/07
  8.   Barak Will Go Forward If Progress Is Made 13:28  |  Jane 17/08/07
  9.   The arabs proved that already 13:57  |  Dr David I. Gross 17/08/07
  10.   objective guy in the galut 14:03  |  Objective Margie 17/08/07
  11.   Prime Minister Barak 14:14  |  indrajaya 17/08/07
  12.   National Interest Is Not Based On Justice. 14:18  |  Terry 17/08/07
  13.   Benvenisti ,your pal "partners"` aim is the same: "Right of 14:24  |  Absolute Sweden 17/08/07
  14.   Long centre fingers. 14:32  |  Giles Martin 17/08/07
  15.   PALESTINIANS PEOPLE WHO HAS NO PARTNER, NOT ISRAEL 14:56  |  indrajaya 17/08/07
  16.   #9 David 15:28  |  Leo 17/08/07
  17.   BARAK LEARNT THE HARD WAY 15:37  |  Ian 17/08/07
  18.   #10 15:57  |  guido 17/08/07
  19.   indrajaya is right 16:01  |  pancasila 17/08/07
  20.   The buds of the "new, improved" diplomatic blahblahblah! 16:25  |  sandra chitayat 17/08/07
  21.   Ms. Hannah`s response #2. 16:27  |  sandra chitayat 17/08/07
  22.   #14 (addendum) 16:35  |  guido 17/08/07
  23.   Under the table 16:37  |  Baz Mann 17/08/07
  24.   Cant believe what i read and hear 17:29  |  Avi 17/08/07
  25.   #12 national interest? 17:32  |  jake 17/08/07
  26.   Barak was misunderstood 17:37  |  Tosefta 17/08/07
  27.   General natalie # 1 17:39  |  I agree nat 17/08/07
  28.   Meron - Just a Pooper 17:40  |  Tod Zuckerman 17/08/07
  29.   Indrajaya # 11 17:40  |  Seduction 17/08/07
  30.   Barak is right-NO peace partner 17:42  |  Brod 17/08/07
  31.   Leo - Defend itself to the fullest 17:42  |  Dr David I. Gross 17/08/07
  32.   Indrajaya # 15 17:42  |  partners for peace.. 17/08/07
  33.   Barak Can,t Be Trusted Either 17:47  |  Montgommery 17/08/07
  34.   All those who want peace answer this... 18:02  |  Avi 17/08/07
  35.   jake # 25....who are you fooling 18:06  |  kameel 17/08/07
  36.   jake # 25....who are you fooling 18:06  |  kameel 17/08/07
  37.   #25 Jake - ....And everyone lived happily ever after. 18:17  |  Terry 17/08/07
  38.   Barak was misunderstood 18:17  |  Tosefta 17/08/07
  39.   Momentum Jane? 18:21  |  Mark Lincoln 17/08/07
  40.   Is this a party ? 18:45  |  ka 17/08/07
  41.   Avi # 29...read the Iron Wall by Prof Shalaim 18:49  |  kameel 17/08/07
  42.   Mark Lincoln-I Don`t Accept Nefarious Motives 18:56  |  Jane 17/08/07
  43.   #24 Avi the "Die Hard Fan" 19:07  |  Labhras 17/08/07
  44.   I would like to see an honest effort too Jane 19:13  |  Mark Lincoln 17/08/07
  45.   To prove that there is NO partner , 19:25  |  Joseph E . 17/08/07
  46.   Tosefta - the net effect 19:27  |  Mark Lincoln 17/08/07
  47.   Avi, the answer is very simple. 19:49  |  Ibrahim 17/08/07
  48.   And all of Israel and Jews for peace 19:50  |  El-Birawi 17/08/07
  49.   Armchaired quarterbacking P1 20:32  |  TonyL 17/08/07
  50.   Anti-rocket systems (Mark Lincoln #46) 20:43  |  Tosefta 17/08/07
  51.   Armchaired quarterbacking P2 20:45  |  TonyL 17/08/07
  52.   Isn`t Barak right......? 20:52  |  Dagma 17/08/07
  53.   # 2 Hannah 21:31  |  Dolly 17/08/07
  54.   No Tosefta, I am thinking of the problem 21:40  |  Mark Lincoln 17/08/07
  55.   And Barak is not talking about missiles from Iran. 21:42  |  Mark Lincoln 17/08/07
  56.   `Palestinian Land`..... 21:50  |  Dagma 17/08/07
  57.   El Birawi - Now`s Not the Time to be Discouraged 22:05  |  Jane 17/08/07
  58.   To Hannah # 2 22:16  |  Missknowall 17/08/07
  59.   To Indrajaya #11 22:35  |  Otto Rand 17/08/07
  60.   To Dagma #56 22:51  |  Otto Rand 17/08/07
  61.   hannah #2 22:59  |  Sonja 17/08/07
  62.   IF 23:07  |  Harrison 17/08/07
  63.   The cost (Mark Lincoln #54) 23:10  |  Tosefta 17/08/07
  64.   land theft,and peace? 23:18  |  Billy Jack 17/08/07
  65.   Party Pooper? 23:32  |  P. J. Casey 17/08/07
  66.   Tosefta - an engineer 00:04  |  Mark Lincoln 18/08/07
  67.   Poor Benvinisti 00:13  |  Danite 18/08/07
  68.   PJ Casey #65 00:18  |  Brod 18/08/07
  69.   to Dagma #52 - what partner for peace? 00:45  |  zeev 18/08/07
  70.   Re jane #42 00:52  |  Billy Jack 18/08/07
  71.   Mark Lincoln,quite right about the cost,somebody recently 01:03  |  lakshmi 18/08/07
  72.   Does Benvenisti think there is a partner for peace? Who? 02:09  |  Briton 18/08/07
  73.   puppets make nice partners