ISRAEL AND GAZA: DEMOCRATIC DYSFUNCTION VS. TYRANNIC DYSFUNCTION


The degree of consensus in Israel regarding the Palestinian Question is for that fractious nation remarkable. With the fantasies of Greater Israel and Olso both exposed, there is solid support for a policy of unilateral separation. This consensus extends beyond mere principles to support of concrete proposals, such as the building of the West Bank fence and the evacuation of the Gaza settlements. And yet, despite this consensus, the progress of the Sharon Government towards these goals has been agonizingly slow. The reason for this is that with the exception of the Shinui party, no political force is wholeheartedly behind this agenda. Yossi Beilin and Meretz snipe at the project from the unreconstructed left, while the settlers and their allies who recently departed the government snipe at it from the unreconstructed right. The Haredim as they always do simply want to milk the budget for every last drop to preserve their radical project of subsidizing a mass movement of schnorr-pilgrims. And the two formerly major parties of Labor and Likud, who if they were at responsive to the electorate would have formed a unity government months ago are still fractured by their splits between their pragmatic and ideological wings. This is very much the dysfunction of a thriving democracy - with interest groups and factions putting their parochial interests in the way of national interests for as long as they are able. In the end however, the odd couple of Sharon and Peres, with their unique combination of pragmatism and idealism will most likely prevail and Israel can finally begin implementing a policy that will significantly ameliorate the conflict.

Unfortunately for the Palestinians, their is no similar hope for an end to their political dysfunction. The chaos in Gaza, while blamed internationally on a diabolical scheme by Sharon, is the direct result of Arafat's misrule. Far more concerned with preventing the rise of a rival to his power than providing basic security for his people, Arafat's divide-and-conquer approach has left competing gangs masquerading as security forces. The chaos keeps international attention on the conflict, and keeps would-be rivals such as Mohammed Dahlan from emerging with a sufficient power base to oust Arafat, but makes the possibility of basic law and order emerging in the Strip after the Israeli withdrawal a herculean task. This is result of tyrannical dysfunction, which is why a decade after Oslo the possibility of a functional Palestinian State is even less likely then before "Peave" arrived.

THEY LIKE MY MONEY, THEY REALLY REALLY LIKE MY MONEY


I received earlier this week a very special invitation from our president to join him (and a squadron of GOP heavy-hitters) for dinner (all for a generous contribution to the campaign ). It was forced to share my mailbox with not one, but two appeals from the Kerry campaign. How exactly this happened is still a bit of a mystery. (Not the Kerry part, as clearly I am currently on at least two Dem mailing lists after giving to Lieberman and Edwards during the primaries), Still, it does make me feel wanted to be one of those precious swing voters. Now, to be fair, I am voting in New York and therefore don't really have to conisder the possiblity that my vote may enable a second Bush term, Still, it is a testament to how alienated I feel from the Democratic Party's national security and foreign policy to consider myself torn at this late point in the game to register a protest vote.


The member of the Bush Administration that makes pulling the lever for Kerry the most attractive has got to be John Ashcroft. Thankfully, the worst excesses of his assault upon the Constitution have gone checked by the Supreme Court. He has failed just about every test posed by the War on Terror - whether it be a sensible, targeting tightening of our immigration regime, or the need for a full-scale housecleaning at the FBI, necessary restraint in the curtailment of civil liberties for terror suspects, or resisting the temptations to expand the compromises of civil liberties necessary to fight the war on terror into regular law enforcement. Without a doubt, a Kerry Justice department will a dramatic improvement no matter who Kerry selects for the top post. As much as find Kerry's overreliance on the rule of law in the international realm troubling, his firm commitment to the rule of law domestically will be reassurring in what no doubt will continue to be a trying time in our nation's history.

COMING SOON TO A REPUBLICAN CONVENTION NEAR YOU....ANYTHING BUT REPUBLICANISM


So the featured speakers at the upcoming GOP convention are going to Ahnold, Pataki and McCain. It seems that the GOP enjoyed its faux integrated convention so much in Philly last time around that it is going for a Rockefeller Republican convention in NYC this time around. With that lineup, the GOP is rightly running away from their entire domestic platform - gay-bashing, handouts to the rich and corporate lobbies, environmental deregulation. The only thing they aren't running from is their hard-line stance on the War on Terror. None of this is surprising. Karl Rove didn't become the Mayberry Machiavelli without a keen sense of when to put on the show for the swing voters..

THAT'S THE TICKET....


I wish could get excited about the selection of John Edwards as Kerry's VP choice. After all, I am big fan of Edwards and this decision has effectively preserved his national political career for at least one more election cycle. I am looking forward to the Edwards-Cheney debate, which will put the starkest contrast between the GOP's domestic policy of cronyism versus the Democratic alternative that is superior both in terms of prudence and justice. Still, at the end of the day, the top of the ticket is the top of the ticket, and Edwards' passion and vision do not erase Kerry's failings anymore than Al Gore's moral probity erased Clinton's. Moreover, the one area where it is pretty clear Edwards is going to have little say about is foreign policy. If Kerry wins it will be as much his show as it was for Bush the Elder. And that means a large, heaping dose of liberal realism.


A large part of me prefers the Jacksonian-neocon mess that stumbled into Iraq to four years of putting democracy-promotion on the back burner in the name of international consensus. I won't however, pull a lever for Bush, not even in New York as a protest vote. Not after Abu Ghraib. I'm not sure I could have ever swallowed a domestic platform based on gay-bashing, tax cuts for the rich and an ostrich-like approach to global climate change. However, up until Abu Ghraib, for the all the bumbling, Bush at least "got it" about the war against Islamist terror. But, the Jacksonian urge to "send a message" won out over the neocon dreams of a "democratic Middle East" and the whole point of the Iraq war was discarded for a short-term bump in intelligence on the insurgency. So, as upset as I am about the the Democratic abdication of America's mission, there is no point in doing anything that rewards the Cheyney-Rumsfeld-Ashcroft approach to the world either.


So maybe what I really do need, given the dark color to my thoughts on the American political landscape is to listen to few more John Edwards speeches. At least somewhere, besides the blankness of Bush and the bleakness of Kerry there's a ray of hope coming out of the 2004 election. While that might not be excitement, at least its something.