Why is Bibi Netanyahu so popular?
... according to Mohamed Sid-Ahmed.

via IMRA: "Why is Netanyahu so popular", by Mohamed Sid-Ahmed,Al-Ahram Weekly 23-29.1998

EXCERPTS: A nagging question that refuses to go away is whether Arab political forces can continue to maintain a total boycott of their Israeli counterparts at a time official Arab parties are engaged in a peace process with Israel.

The question has become even more urgent since Netanyahu came to power, not least because the main argument he uses to justify not pulling out of the Occupied Territories is that the Arab states are not democratic, that they do not have solid institutions, that they have no scruples about resorting to military coups d'état and that if Israel were to implement the 'land for peace' trade-off it could well end up with neither land nor peace.

The indiscriminate boycott of all Israeli political forces consolidates Netanyahu's argument. An effective way of countering it would be to develop relations with forces inside Israel which accept the restoration of occupied Arab territories and the establishment of a Palestinian state.

Surprisingly, however, all attempts made so far to establish contacts with the 'peace camp' in Israel have had only a limited impact. Moreover, it is a fact that Netanyahu enjoys wide popularity in Israel despite his blunders, mistakes and scandals.

In his article entitled Netanyahu's Safety Belt published in this month's issue of Foreign Affairs, Ehud Sprinzak, professor of political science at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, calls the Israeli prime minister's continued popularity "the great paradox of Israeli politics today". . . .

The most salient development in Israel in the recent period has been the shift in the political balance of power in favour of the Jewish religious forces at the expense of the traditional Zionist forces.

Today, the newly powerful ultra-Orthodox forces are more concerned with their Jewish identity than with the Zionist solution of the Jewish problem. Sprinzak is sceptical about the possibility of any solution of the conflict under Netanyahu. He does not believe, however, that Netanyahu will always enjoy the support he now gets.

He writes that "unlike the Israeli right's hard core, which is ready to fight for the land of Israel and to accept the concomitant sacrifices, most Israelis are opposed to spilling blood to keep the West Bank or maintain Gush Emunim's settlements".

Still, Sprinzak believes that the alternative to Netanyahu need not be a Labour-led government, but could be a government led by "a less tainted Likud figure like Olmert, Jerusalem's ambitious mayor," who could pre-empt upcoming disasters by accepting a territorial compromise. In such a context, the soft right could become a bridge between the moderate wing of the Likud and supporters of peace on the left.

This, of course, is a rather optimistic scenario, presupposing a dialogue between religious forces on either side of the confrontation line taking precedence over the traditional confrontation between pan-Arabism and Zionism.

For a long time, hopes of a breakthrough towards peace were pinned on leftist forces on both sides of the barricades. Then came talk of the secular forces being the best equipped to achieve that objective.

Now the task has been assigned to the conservative religious forces, who are totally out of touch with the requirements of the present so-called 'globalistic' world.

Actually, it is important for the Arabs to prove themselves capable of becoming part of that world: the question is whether they can reach that objective better through communication with Israel or by remaining totally aloof from it. It will probably prove necessary to explore both courses concomitantly.

How this can be achieved will need much creative thinking.