Uri Avnery, Special to Arab News

TEL AVIV, 8 December 2003 — It is not yet a tidal wave. But it is more than a ripple. It is a wave in the process of formation.

During the last few months a realignment of Israeli public opinion has started to become noticeable. It has several causes: Public tiredness of the endless cycle of bloodshed, the perception that there is no military solution, the worsening of the economic crisis, the untiring activity of the radical peace movements.

The list of the accumulating symptoms is getting longer: The movement of the young men who refuse army service in the occupied territories, the revolt of the airforce pilots, the Ayalon-Nusseibeh initiative, the statement of the four former Secret Service chiefs, the criticism voiced by the Chief-of-Staff, and, this week, the public attack of the reserve officers on the continued existence of the Netzarim settlement in the Gaza Strip.

The Geneva initiative gave this change a great boost in Israel, as well as an impressive echo abroad. The participation of international personalities in the solemn ceremony in Switzerland lent it status and prestige. The decision of the US Secretary of State Colin Powell and UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan to receive the leaders of this initiative was a gesture of public support for the peace movement. (So was the warm personal message conveyed by German President Johannes Rau to the ceremony in which a Peace Prize was awarded to Sari Nusseibeh and me.)

When the wind changes, the weathercocks start to move. That is happening these days. The most sensitive ones, like Yoel Markus in “Haaretz”, already began attacking Sharon some months ago. Now this is becoming a fashion in the media. The very same commentators who served for three years as propagandists for the government and the army high command, have suddenly discovered that everything done during the last three years was, after all, a terrible mistake.

In the wake of the pundits come the politicians. The Labor Party functionaries, who are mounting a venomous attack on Beilin and Co., have themselves published a peace program not very different from the Geneva document (not that anybody paid much attention.) But the most interesting phenomenon is the public conversion of Ehud Olmert, the former mayor of Jerusalem.

Those who have followed Olmert’s career for a long time see him as the epitome of the political opportunist. He wants to be the Likud chairman after Sharon, whom he is loyally serving now. His main competitor, Binyamin Netanyahu, is following an extreme nationalist line.

Clearly, the sensitive nose of Olmert has picked up the change in public opinion. But the Likud candidate for prime minister is nominated by the 3000-odd members of the Likud Central Committee, a notoriously extreme right-wing body that has turned down even Sharon’s so-called moderate proposals. Olmert, so it seems, believes that even this body is going to change.

Sharon himself has not changed. To him, the adage about the leopard’s spots still applies. But he, too, finds it necessary to repeat again and again that he is for “painful concessions”, hinting that he is ready for “unilateral withdrawal” (from where? where to?) and talking about a meeting with Palestinian Prime Minister Abu-Ala (what for?). This does not prevent him from driving forward the building of the monstrous wall that is cutting the Palestinian territory into ribbons.

The Palestinians, for their part, are very much aware of the importance of the change in Israeli public opinion. Abu-Ala’s efforts to organize a truce are designed to help this process. They, too, understand that a suicide bomber who causes massive slaughter in an Israeli town may well undo the tenuous steps toward change.

The direction of Palestinian policy is very important.

Arafat understood that the changing of Israeli public opinion is an important objective, but did not accept it as the single most important one. We have talked about this many times. It now seems that he recognizes the importance of this effort more than ever, as shown by the blessing he gave to the Palestinian delegation in Geneva.

There remains the question: If the change of public opinion in Israel does indeed gather momentum and become a big wave — how will it manifest itself in political terms? In other words, how will it change the political set-up and achieve a majority in the Knesset?

Not a single person in Israel is able to answer this question now.

Yossi Beilin is trying to create a party that will unite his followers with the Meretz party. This may turn out to be a serious political mistake. If the Geneva Initiative becomes the banner of one party on the margin of the political scene, it will be condemned to political irrelevance.

The central problem is the Labor Party. Its reaction to the Geneva initiative showed it in all its shabbiness. From the pathetic Shimon Peres to the shrill Dalia Itzik, not to mention Ehud Barak with his personal psychological problems, they attacked Beilin, their former comrade, whom they had pushed out of the party on the eve of the last elections.

Yet without the Labor Party, the left will not become a dominant political force, in a position to win the next elections. The creation of a viable substitute would take many years, and Beilin’s new party will not achieve this in the foreseeable future. But in the entire Labor Party, one cannot, with the best will in the world, perceive a plausible candidate for prime minister.

That may give the Likud another chance. It is not impossible that Sharon will again deceive the public, as he did at the last two elections, when he presented himself as the man of peace and security. He will speak about “painful concessions” and show photos with Abu-Ala. It is also possible that another Likud candidate devoid of principles, such as Netanyahu or Olmert, will come up with a vague peace message.

Either way: If the Israeli left fails to create a dominant political force, the change in public opinion may remain without results, a powerful wind that does not blow into any sail, steam without a locomotive.

— Uri Avnery is an Israeli journalist and peace activist. His essays are included in The Other Israel: Voices of Refusal and Dissent.