|
The most shocking fact published after the Camp David summit was that Ehud
Barak received a daily report on public opinion polls while he was there.
His man in Jerusalem conducted a poll every morning and transmitted the
results to his secluded master every evening on the "hot line" that was
reserved solely for urgent security messages. Then, according to the
results of the poll, Barak planned the next day's negotiations with
Clinton and Arafat.
Barak likes to compare himself to
David Ben-Gurion. If this comparison were valid, history would have looked
something like this:
On May 13, 1948, Ben-Gurion ordered
his pollster to conduct an urgent poll on the question: "Do you think that
the establishment of the Jewish state should be declared tomorrow?
Yes/No".
At the time it was clear that the
declaration would be followed by the entry of the Arab armies into the
country from all sides, and that a total war for the very existence of the
Jewish community would break out. It was also clear that the United States
firmly rejected the proclamation of the state. In the United Nations, a
plan for placing the country under an international trusteeship was
discussed. Important Zionist leaders, such as Moshe Sharett and Nachum
Goldman, proposed postponing the declaration to a more opportune moment.
Therefore, the results of the poll
did not come as a surprise: 63% answered that the state should not be
declared on the morrow, 34% were in favor of the declaration, the rest
(3%) had no opinion.
Ben-Gurion concluded that the
declaration would be unpopular. As a canny politician, he decided not to
make it. And so the State of Israel did not come into being on May 14,
1948…
But Ben-Gurion was no Barak. It did
not enter his mind to conduct a poll. The very idea would have shocked
him. He was aware of his responsibility as a leader, took the decision and
implemented it. The whole Jewish community rallied behind him.
Nowadays, opinions differ on many
of Ben-Gurion's acts. (At the time, I was one of his most severe critics.)
But there is no disagreement on one point: the man was a leader. He had
the guts to take fateful decisions. He did not ask himself: "What do the
people want this morning" but, rather: "What must be done for the good of
the people?"
More than once, when he made
unpopular decisions, he told the people: This is my opinion. If you don't
like it, I shall resign. Every time the people accepted his view. For
example: When he decided to accept the partition of the country, when he
accepted German reparations and when he sold arms to Germany, only a few
years after the holocaust.
But Barak is no second Ben-Gurion.
Far from it. The method of "government by opinion-poll" is as
anti-Ben-Gurionic as you can get. It looks democratic. Indeed, it looks
like the very epitome of democracy. The leader asks the people every day
what they want and acts accordingly. What could be more democratic? But in
actual fact, it has nothing to do with democracy.
Polls are based on false basic
assumptions: that the majority of people are able to understand what is
going on; that they have the information necessary for the comprehension
of all aspects of a proposed decision; that they are glued to the media,
and that the media are giving them a real, objective and full picture;
that they are able to voice a considered opinion merely by answering the
few questions in a poll. All these assumptions are completely unfounded.
A very good example was provided
this week by a poll commissioned - of all people - by the settlers. A
representative sample of the Jewish population in Israel was asked about
the "concessions" attributed (rightly or wrongly) to Barak at Camp David.
The results were as follows: 55% oppose the evacuation of some tens of
thousands of settlers from isolated settlements, even if the bulk of the
settlers will remain where they are under Israeli sovereignty; 66% oppose
transferring the Jordan valley to Palestinian sovereignty; 69% oppose to
the return of even 100 thousand refugees; 76% oppose Palestinian rule over
East Jerusalem.
A clear picture? Not at all.
Because, in the end, the decisive question was asked: Do you agree to a
final settlement that includes all these concessions? And here came the
surprise: More than 50% said "yes". If one adds the votes of the Arab
citizens of Israel, who where not asked, there is a solid majority of 55%
for a peace agreement that includes all these concessions.
How come? Simple: Each "concession"
by itself arouses opposition. But when placed in the context of putting an
end to the historic conflict, the public is ready for all these
concessions - and more.
This poll, too, like all the polls,
does not provide reliable answers. The real decisions can only be rendered
once a written agreement is achieved and a public debate has taken place.
For this to happen, Barak must make courageous decisions concerning
Jerusalem, the Green Line, exchange of territories and refugees. There
will probably be a big majority against "concessions " on each of these
issues by itself in the daily polls. But the final outcome - the agreement
that will contain all the "concessions" as all the achievements of both
sides - will be endorsed by a big majority.
This is leadership on the
Ben-Gurion model, a leadership that does not bear any resemblance to a dog
that runs ahead while looking backwards.
áìëä éðô
Get this article in
Hebrew
|
