Strong Right Wing Leader Needed to Enforce Security Barrier
Supplement to Archive Update 170A
August 16, 2005
The article accompanying thi s
Supplement to Archive Prophecy 170A, “Netanyahu’s Lightning Flash,” outlines a distinct possibility to look for in future changes in Israel’s Likud Party. In Archive Prophecy 170A, issued some 16 months ago, I anticipated the possibility of Netanyahu eventually replacing Sharon as Prime Minister.
It now appears possible for what I expected to come to fruition. The following article by Uri Dan in the Jerusalem Post, gives an excellent assessment of the possible future scenario regarding the office of Prime Minister in Israel.
I hope he is right concerning Netanyahu. There is no better leader in Israel than Netanyahu to administer barrier security once the withdrawal is complete from the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.
Netanyahu’s Lightning Flash
By Uri Dan, THE JERUSALEM POST
August 14, 2005
Finance Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s resignation from Ariel Sharon’s government came with the same surprise as Sharon’s resignation from Yitzhak Shamir’s government at the beginning of 1990, when he was minister of Industry and Commerce.
At that time, at Sharon’s direction, I secretly prepared his letter of resignation, which he read aloud to the astonishment of Shamir and his m inisters
during a meeting of the Likud Center.
Sharon explained that he was resigning because of the government’s passivity in the face of Palestinian terror, which had even penetrated Jerusalem.
Respect is due to ministers who base their resignation on matters of principle. Very few ministers in Israeli governments have done so.
“It’s very nice to be a minister,”
Sharon has said mockingly for several years, since he is very familiar with the features of the average Israeli ministerial position. Ministers derive great satisfaction from the perks of their office: cars, luxurious offices, frequent trips abroad at the public’s expense, and never consider the idea of resignation.
When Sharon raised the idea of resignation from Ministry of Industry and Commerce for the first time in May 1989, during a meeting held in his office in the Tel Aviv Kirya, I was the only one who supported the idea.
All others present were opposed.
“You would be abandoning a position of strength,” they told him.
Sharon hammered on the glass-topped table in anger, and shouted: “This isn’t a position of strength but of weakness!” He explained once again the impotence of
the national unity government led by Shamir, Peres, and Rabin in its surrender to the PLO and Palestinian terror.
The day after Sharon’s resignation in 1990 he was given a political funeral by the media, and by Likud and Labor politicians.
No one took notice of his warning regarding the government’s failure to address the security situation.
The media laughed at him when he cried, “Who is in favor of fighting against terror?”
SIMILARLY, very few commentators and politicians paid notice to the reasons for the resignation of Netanyahu, who warns against the danger of the Gaza Strip becoming a new, dangerous springboard for Palestinian terrorist attacks against Israel.
Most of the commentators mocking Netanyahu were angry that he dared to resign just before the closing of the Stock Exchange, thus causing the plummeting of share prices and the loss of billions. They seemed more worried about stock profits than the danger to life about which Netanyahu gave warning.
We now have two great people who have at some time resigned from the Likud: Sharon and Netanyahu.
Sharon’s resignation, as I predicted to him in 1990, became a station on his inevitable path toward the position of prime minister. Will Netanyahu’s resignation also advance him toward his declared aim of becoming prime minister again?
A great deal depends on security developments. It may be assumed that Sharon, like Netanyahu, is well aware of the grave dangers from Palestinian terror that will exist even after the withdrawal from the Gaza Strip.
However, Sharon believes that he will be better able to wage the military and diplomatic campaign after he retreats from Gaza, under the new conditions that will be created. In contrast, Netanyahu declared that Israel’s situation will further deteriorate after Sharon withdraws under such terrible conditions.
These conflicting viewpoints were illuminated by the lighting flash of Netanyahu’s resignation, when he got up and pulled the carpet out from under the feet of his enemies and persecutors, just as Sharon did to Shamir & Co. in 1990.