As noted in the NY Times article, the results of the 2006 Knesset election marginalized the two extremes on the Israeli political spectrum, paving the way of success for the centrist party: Kadima. Likud, the victors of the previous election, suffered a historic rebuke and dropped to 12 seats. Likud?s diminished support in part represents the failure of ?Eretz Israel? (an Israeli state stretching from Jordan to the Mediterranean Sea) to take hold in Israel?s majority and that majority?s willingness to reign in the settlers. The dovish party Meretz also fared poorly, winning only five seats. Their minimal representation in the Knesset highlights the Israeli public?s frustration toward the Palestinians as peace partners and the seemingly futile peace process. Kadima?s single issue platform of a unilateral withdrawal from the West Bank seized on prevailing sentiments in Israeli society, and they are now in position to form and lead a governing coalition in the Knesset.
As TRC analyses previously suggested , Kadima?s plan for implementing unilateral measures to define the borders of both the Israeli and Palestinian states was predicated on several factors that continue to resonate in the Israeli population. First, if Israel intends to maintain the Jewish character of the state, it has to address the Palestinians? demographic advantage. Ceding the Gaza Strip?where Palestinian Arab Muslims and Christians far outnumbered Jewish Israelis?was a logical step toward that end. Likewise, there are 240,000 Israeli settlers living among 2.4 million Palestinians in the West Bank. Kadima?s disengagement plan would remove approximately 80,000 settlers; retain most of East Jerusalem and large settlements surrounding Jerusalem for Israel; and roughly draw the border along the lines of the current security barrier. Contending with a booming Palestinian birth rate, the combined ceded territory in the Gaza Strip and West Bank would maintain a predominately Jewish population in Israel for the foreseeable future. Second, in the wake of two intifidas and a stalled, if not failed, peace process, a majority of Israelis do not view the Palestinian leadership as a viable peace partner. This perception bolstered support for the unilateral withdrawal from Gaza and has, subsequently, become more entrenched with Hamas? victory in the Palestinian parliamentary elections . Designated a terrorist organization by the United States , European Union, and Israel, Hamas has refused to renounce the use of violence and/or recognize Israel and the legitimacy of past peace agreements signed by the Palestinian Authority.
While Kadima was successful in the election?securing 29 seats and leading all other parties?their representation in the Knesset will be far less than they had predicted. The failure to obtain an overwhelming mandate is the result of multiple issues, including social and economic ones that helped Labor and the Pensioners Party. However, the Israeli public was seemingly more comfortable with unilateral measures when the daunting political figure of Ariel Sharon was leading the government. Their level of trust in Sharon?the war hero and settlement leader turned political iconoclast?has not yet been extended to acting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert . Additionally, as the Shalem Center?s Yossi Klein Halevi noted, ?Even those who support unilateral withdrawal are depressed by it. It?s kind of an admission of failure.? Indeed, describing Eretz Israel as untenable and a negotiated peace settlement with Palestinians as currently unfeasible is not an inspiring political platform. But it is a practical platform. In an election marked by low voter turnout, the Israeli public provided Kadima with enough support to lead a coalition in the Knesset that surpasses the 61 seat majority to begin implementing Israel?s unilateral disengagement from the West Bank.
