Samir Ghattas* finds hope in the election of Amir Peretz as leader of Israel's Labour Party Israel has had its own bout of electoral fever recently, with the contest over the Labour Party leadership. Although the elections were internal and participation confined to 100,000 party members they may have far reaching repercussions on Israel's domestic politics. The poll ousted veteran Labour Leader Shimon Peres and brought in Amir Peretz, leader of the Israeli trade union federation Histradrut. Peretz, who was born in Morocco, is the first Sephardic Jew to assume the leadership of the Labour Party. The Labour Party, an extension of the Mapai founded in 1930, held a virtual monopoly on the key positions in the executive, legislature and the Jewish Agency from the founding of Israel until its defeat by the Likud in 1977. Since then it has been able to return to power on its own only twice, once under Yitzhak Rabin in 1992 and then under Ehud Barak in 1999. Both these governments were short-lived. In 1994 the Labour candidate, Peres, was defeated by Benyamin Netanyahu; in 2001 Barak was ousted by Ariel Sharon. Labour met with another stinging defeat when it attempted to field General Amiram Mitsna against Sharon in the 2003 elections. More tellingly, Labour currently holds only 19 Knesset seats, the lowest number in the party's history. Peres's strategy since the rise of Sharon and until the recent elections was to keep his party in government as a junior coalition partner to the Likud. Many in Israel believe that in pursuing this policy of hanging on to Likud's coat-tails Peres led his party towards political bankruptcy. This was one of the primary factors paving the way for the meteoric rise of Peretz, who based his challenge against the Labour incumbent on three points: the need for Labour to pull out of the coalition with Likud and reestablish itself as an alternative to the Israeli right, the need to promote a social and economic policy more favorable to the poor and those on limited incomes and the need to work with the Palestinians towards ending the occupation and reaching a permanent peace. The Labour leadership, which has been described in the Israeli press as a serpent's lair, did not take the growing threat to it from within the party seriously. Certainly, the party elite must have felt that they could never be dislodged by a syndicate leader of Arab- Jewish origin who had no college degree, never wrote a newspaper article in his life and had no military record to speak of. Amir Peretz, for his part, never attempted to conceal his humble origins. He recalls that when he arrived in Israel with his family at the age of four customs officials sprayed them with DDT. Like many other Sephardic families his was settled in the remote immigrant development town of Sderot, near the border with Gaza. Peretz entered local politics in 1983 at the age of 31, when he was elected mayor of Sderot. He fought his way up the ranks of the Histradut until he was elected the federation's chief in 1995. Elected to parliament in 1988 as a Labour candidate he soon formed a breakaway faction -- One Nation -- which obtained three seats in the Knesset. This year he returned to the Labour fold, pitted himself against Peres and won the office once held by David Ben-Gurion, Levi Eshkol, Golda Meir and Yitzhak Rabin. Peretz's rise embodies a major shift in Israel's political mood. It suggests that the Israeli electorate has regained a portion of its lost confidence in the Labour Party. This development is substantiated by an opinion poll conducted in the wake of the Labour leadership contest. According to the survey Labour under Peretz could gain an additional five seats in the Knesset were parliamentary elections to have been held while Likud was still under Sharon's leadership. A more surprising result of the poll was that if the Likud were to take over by Netanyahu and a similar face down held the two parties would receive an equal number of parliamentary seats. But not only would a stronger Labour Party under Peretz detract from Likud, it would also draw support away from Shinui, led by Tommy Labid and Shas, which represents religious Sephardic Jews. Undaunted by the dismay with which the Labour elite greeted his victory, Peretz did not falter in his resolve to compel Labour ministers currently serving in the Likud-led government to tender their resignations, thereby preempting any move on the part of Sharon to dismiss them. With equal determination he called on Sharon to bring forward general elections to late February or early March and Sharon, for his part, signaled his willingness to do so. This coming spring, therefore, should bring a profound change in the Israeli political map. In this respect three scenarios were originally envisioned. Firstly, it was thought that the Likud could unite behind Sharon, in which case the right-wing party would have outstripped Labour in the forthcoming elections and retain around the 40 seats it currently holds in the Knesset. It was not expected that Sharon would be entirely comfortable with this scenario. On the one hand his victory would also bring into power the rivals and opponents within the Likud who have obstructed and undermined his current term and who would continue to make life impossible for him in a forthcoming term. On the other hand he would find it virtually impossible to form a coalition government. With Labour unwilling to take part he would have to appeal to both Shinui and Shas: their long-standing mutual animosity would obviate their taking part in a government together. Alternatively, if he turned to ultra-right religious parties such as the National Union, Mifdal and United Torah Judaism, his hands would be almost entirely bound on major policy decisions. Perhaps the only hope he would have under this scenario is for Labour to fail to win more than 20 Knesset seats, in which case Peretz would be ousted as Labour chief as was the fate of Mitsna following the 2003 elections. The second scenario was for Likud to take the initiative to oust Sharon, elect a new leader such as Netanyahu or Silvan Shalom, and form a coalition with other right-wing parties. This scenario presumes that Sharon will fail to form a new party of his own and that the number of parliamentary seats controlled by the other right-wing parties will rise from 18 to 23. The third, and more plausible, scenario would be for Sharon to leave Likud and form a new political party, taking some Likud figures with him and bringing on board leaders of other parties. That Sharon's office leaked information to the effect that the legal procedures for the establishment of such a party were already in progress on 19 October suggests that this is the likeliest prospect. Certainly, as a centrist party it would probably sweep the elections, especially considering the disarray in which Likud will find itself following his departure. Indeed, in a later, and utterly unexpected development, Sharon seems to have favoured this scenario and replied to Amir Peretz' coup with an earth-shaking one of his own. On Monday 21 November, Sharon pulled out of the Likud, which he had helped to found in 1973, and declared his intention to contest the coming election, expected in March 2006, at the head of a new political party that would be to the left of Likud and the right of Labour. In one week, Israel has witnessed two major political coups, and the country is holding its breath for the upcoming showdown between Sharon and Peretz. Although it is too early to speak of a concrete, itemised manifesto the new Labour leader is clearly determined to rally his party behind two policies: a socio-economic programme that focuses on the concerns of the poor and underprivileged and a revival of the peace process. He revealed his thinking on the latter issue in no uncertain terms in a speech before a crowd of 200,000 during a memorial rally marking the 10th anniversary of Rabin's assassination. He said: "If we had left the [occupied] territories and stopped the violence coming from there we would have conquered the violence among us. The ongoing occupation in the territories is a recipe for drowning in the mire of Israel's lost values. We need a roadmap of morals. Ending the occupation and a final status agreement are synonymous with protecting human values." He went on to express his belief that "the path of Oslo is very much alive" and that in this process "Israel's future and hope" resides. "I have a dream," he continued, "that one day in that no-man's land between Sderot in Israel and Beit Haroun in Gaza there will be an industrial zone, resorts and playgrounds where our children and Palestinian children can play together and can build a common future. On that day, I will be able to tell [Rabin], 'Your soul may rest in peace. You were killed, but you won.'" Although critics derided the Quixotic tenor of his speech, Peretz rose to the challenge. When asked how he planned to put his ideas across to Bush in plain English that the US president can understand, he answered that he would spare himself the price of a ticket to Washington since he didn't have to meet with Bush to talk about peace but with Abu Mazen. Peretz further surprised his audience by announcing that, if elected as prime minister he would include in his government an Arab party representative of the Palestinians of 1948. No other Israeli leader has ever risked taking such a position. The Israeli right is already amassing its ammunition against Peretz. On the one hand they are painting him as a latter-day Bolshevik bent on reverting to antiquated socialist ideas. On the other they charge that he will put Israel's security at risk by offering territorial concessions while chasing after the illusion of being able to reach a peace agreement with the Palestinians. Although this campaign is certain to mount in vehemence it is difficult to predict how the Israeli public will react. Perhaps Peretz's election as Labour chief may be a sign that Israelis are beginning to awake from Sharon's heavy-handedness and to fathom the disasters wrought by his insistence that there is no Palestinian partner with whom the Israelis can talk. Peretz's prospects will also be determined by how the Palestinians behave. A suicide attack now is guaranteed to play into the hands of Sharon and turn Peretz's dream into a nightmare. * The writer is director of the Maqdis Centre for Political Studies in Gaza.
