Saving a country, not a government

Op-ed | Tzipi Livni | Yedioth Acharonoth | April 9 2010 | Scan of Hebrew original on page 3 of this file |

The difficult situation that Israel is in right now is not constrained by current circumstance. Therefore, the deterioration in our situation is
causing many good people to call upon Kadima to join the government. “We have to save the country,” they tell me. These calls are
heartfelt and touching.

The public wants Kadima in the government because it realizes that our policy must replace the government’s policy. For this purpose, two
conditions must be met. The first: a prime minister who adopts a different, saner policy. The second: the formation of a government with a
majority that favors this policy. This is a crucial decision that lies at Netanyahu’s doorstep. Political unity is important and right only when
there is a shared understanding of the reasons for the situation and the need for unity regarding its solution. Joining the policy of stalemate
and survival will only cause more damage.

We cannot afford the mistaken and dangerous conclusion of some of the leadership and the public that “the entire world is against us,”
and we can do nothing other than mourn our bitter fate. Even if measures against Israel exist, their worsening is not a natural
phenomenon. It is being nourished by erroneous policy and problematic conduct.

A little more than a year ago, Israel and its positions were accepted by the international community. We fought against terrorism, the world
united against Hamas, we conducted negotiations with the Palestinians with international support, we were partners with the world in
drafting sanctions against Iran. All of this was possible because it was obvious that the government was sincere in its intentions and
determined to reach an agreement out of regard for Israeli interests and not as a favor to the Arabs or as a result of international pressure.

Neither the world nor its fundamental positions have changed since then. The only change has been that a year later, the world does not
know what the Israeli government’s policy is in the best case, does not believe its intentions in the worst case, and wants to receive the
answers that the Israeli public, too, has the right to receive. These are answers that I asked for on the eve of the government’s formation.
But Netanyahu’s sticking with his coalition partners was the only answer that was given to me. Because of this, I took Kadima into the
opposition.

The United States is Israel’s best friend, and our relationship with it is a major strategic asset, both militarily and politically. The Americans’
willingness to move the peace process forward is an opportunity, and not a hard time, for Israel. What is required now is critical
coordination. Instead of avoiding the issue and searching for words that will be comfortable for everyone, the prime minister needs to
share with the president of the United States his goals regarding the future borders and the arrangement that will represent Israel’s interests,
his willingness to compromise and the red lines without which the agreement will not be made.

This kind of openness is required, and at our initiative, not in order to please the Americans, but as a strategic alliance. Only in that way will
we be able to receive support on essential matters. That is the only way that a meeting between the president of the US and the prime
minister of Israel should appear.
Jerusalem is a Jewish consensus, and thus it will remain. That is the shared mission of all of us. That is the historical mission that must be
determined in the final status arrangement. Refraining from reaching an agreement only erodes Israel’s status in Jerusalem, and leads to a
situation in which others will decide for us—and not in our favor.

Those who say that every Israeli government built in Jerusalem are correct, yet we did not try to avoid reaching an agreement at the same
time. On the contrary: we wanted one. There is an enormous difference between unity regarding Jerusalem and support for an erroneous
policy. It is enough to see that the more declarations there are, the more Israel’s status erodes in the city that is important to all of us.
The prime minister is dependent, of his own will, upon partners who are pushing the public away from Judaism, upon partners who exude
hostility and distance us from the free world, and upon partners who say amen to any policy. Kadima is not like that. I told the prime
minister in private and public conversations: the decision is now. Your actions will bear witness to your decisions. Vague wording, whose
only goal is to appease the US and the coalition, together with attempts to dismantle Kadima in order to stabilize the coalition rather than
change it—all of these things will attest to the fact that you have chosen to be a petty politician rather than a leader.

If you decide to be a leader, if you decide to do the right thing and make the decisions that are necessary for an agreement with the
Palestinians, Kadima under my leadership will support you. If you make the decision, but do not have enough political support to put it
into effect and your partners seek to overthrow the government in order to prevent the agreement, we will become partners, if only for that
purpose.
Until now, the prime minister’s behavior has shown that even though he has adopted the right words, he has not changed his positions in
any real way. The composition of the government that he established does not allow for real change, and his interest in dismantling Kadima
has taken precedence over the national need for a change in policy. Those who work for Kadima’s destruction are interested only in more
votes for their own political survival, which will be bad for the country.

I believe, after having conducted negotiations with the Palestinians that did not conclude and that did not lead to a deadlock, that an
agreement is possible. It will not turn the region into a new Middle East, but it will set our borders, create unshakable legitimacy for our
existence as a Jewish state, and allow us to defend ourselves.

My positions have not changed. The negotiations can and must be continued. The situation changed because of misguided policy, wrong
behavior, a bad coalition and lack of vision. As the chairperson of the opposition, I will continue to defend Israel, its essence and values as
a Jewish and democratic state, its right to use force against terrorism and the world’s obligation to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear
weapons.

I went into politics in order to lead these decisions, and I will do everything I can to see them made and acted upon, either by myself or by
others. The place where Kadima will be—in the government or in the opposition as an alternative—will be determined by this test. In the
choice that I face, between saving a bad government and supporting an erroneous policy and saving Israel by a change in policy—we will
choose to act for the sake of the country.