Sunday, May 27, 2007

How a Political Scientist Scares

The following excerpt I found in an interview conducted with Prof. Ian Lustick on March 4, 2002. the book I wrote, Unsettled States, I tried to solve this question of whether the point of no return had been passed. I feel that I did by looking at it not in terms of one point of no return -- either it's impossible or it's possible -- but to two thresholds. If you want to keep all the territories in Israel, you have to make the issue of what to do with them disappear, and to establish what is called the hegemony of the idea of the greater Land of Israel. That's impossible for reasons that we've already discussed. Israel can't go past that threshold. But in order to get out, you have to risk a civil war in Israel, you have to risk the fact that groups, including the settlers and the right-wing parties, feel so strongly opposed to withdrawal that they will attack the government, they will try to assassinate the leadership. They will try to engineer disobedience in the army and the public at large. They will resist violently.

Now, while an attempt was made to engineer disobedience over the disengagement protests, an act the left-wing has been much more successful at and much more active in with ads in Haaretz, poems by Aharon Shabtai, and plays amd songs, etc., Lustick, someone I know well and who knows Israel well, methinks that Lustick either was taken in by Kach people or, in a self-fulfilling prophecy, sought this agenda because it fitted his outlook on the right-wing.

Just in case you dobn't know what I am referring to, there were no assassinations nor real violence on any meaningful scale.

Was this a scare tactic?

No comments: