6
JOURNAL OF PALESTINE STUDIES
right-wing government in Israel's history. Following Likud's crushing defeatat the polls on 23 June 1992, the Labor party under the leadership of YitzhakRabin formed another narrow government. This one is probably the mostdovish government in the country's history. Most Arabs believe that there isno significant difference between the two parties. It might be instructive,therefore, to examine the record of the Likud-led and the Labor-led govern-ments in the peace talks with the Palestinians in order to determine whetherthis is indeed the case.When the Labor party emerged as the victor in the Israeli general electionin June 1992, a BBC correspondent asked an Arab janitor in Jerusalem forhis reaction. "Do you see my left shoe?" asked the Arab indifferently by wayof response."That is Yitzhak Rabin. Do you see my right shoe? That isYitzhak Shamir. Two Yitzhaks, two shoes, so what's the difference?"Thisfeeling that there is not much to choose between the leaders of Israel's twomain parties is not confined to Arabs. When Rabin served as defense minis-ter in the national unity government headed by Shamir from 1986 to 1990,there was a joke in Israel, which went as follows: "What is the differencebetween a left-wing Likudnik and a right-wing Likudnik? Answer: aleft-wing Likudnik is a follower of Yitzhak Shamir, and a right-wing Likudnik isa follower of Yitzhak Rabin."The traditional foreign policies of the rival parties led by the two Yitzhaksalso display some striking similarities. The critic William Hazlitt comparedthe Whig and the Tory parties in the early nineteenth century to two rivalcoach companies that splash mud on one another but go by the same route tothe same destination. It is tempting to apply the same analogy to the Laborand the Likud parties which have dominated the Israeli political scene since1948. But to do so would be to take a simplistic view of Israeli politics.No one would deny that Likud and Labor splash mud on one another. Itis true that both parties used to share a blind spot regarding the Palestinians,preferring to treat the Arab-Israeli conflict as an interstate conflict. It is truethat both parties are deeply opposed to Palestinian nationalism and deny thatthe Palestinians have a right to national self-determination. The notoriousstatement that there is no such thing as a Palestinian people came not fromthe Likud but from that old Labor party battle-ax, Golda Meir. It is also truethat, until very recently, both parties refused to negotiate with the PLO andthat both remain unconditionally opposed to the establishment of an in-dependent Palestinian state.Yet the differences between the Likud and Labor are quite significant, bothin the realm of ideology and in the realm of practical policy. The final desti-nation of the two parties was different and they sought to get to their respec-tive destinations by different routes. This is why the rise to power of theLikud in 1977, in addition to ending three decades of uninterrupted Laborrule at home, constituted such a sharp break in Israeli foreign policy. Andthis is why the Labor victory of June 1992, which ended a decade and a half
Leave a Comment