Politicians learn hard way that
campaigning was the easy part
There is an axiom in democratic politics: Getting elected is the easy part; it is governing that is tough. When you are not in power, when you are in the opposition, or even when you write a judicial dissent, you have far greater leeway to proclaim outrageous ideas and statements. Held accountable for what they say and do, their every move subjected to public scrutiny, even the most hardened of politicians acknowledge that they prefer campaigning to governing. Nowhere is this becoming more and more apparent than after the surprise election results in the Palestinian territories last week. It is evident as well in Washington and in Trenton.
In the case of the Palestinians, the venom and hatred that Hamas had spewed out over the years against Israel and its right to exist requires immediate, radical change if they seek any validity to govern. The willingness of the Hamas leadership to justify and praise suicide bombings against Israel is categorically unacceptable. While rogue movements might say things that justify the use of terror against another nation-state, Hamas will never be able to gain worldwide acceptance if it continues to articulate or espouse a policy justifying the use of terror.
Pressure to do so will come not only from Israel, America, and the world, but also from the Palestinian people. The Palestinian Authority was already on tenuous financial ground. The United States was beginning to hold back some of the $400 million that had been pledged to the Palestinian Authority in this fiscal year’s budget. Even before the vote, the European Union had frozen almost $50 million of its $500 million pledge to the Palestinians. The World Bank had announced its intention to freeze its assistance. These funds had been withheld because of charges of corruption and mismanagement by a Palestinian Authority led by Fatah. It is assumed that now these funds will be frozen until Hamas dramatically demonstrates in deeds its willingness to repudiate its platform. Given the likelihood that, at best, this will take time, the Israelis now may also withhold $40 million to $50 million in tax revenues which it collects for the Palestinians.
Unless the world cites the needs of the Palestinian people and decides to appease the Hamas leaders — a tragically plausible scenario — the PA faces a crippling financial crisis. Presumably, it can be addressed by the Arab world, but the Saudis, Egyptians, and others have been less than forthcoming when it comes to underwriting the PA’s needs. The pressure will build on Hamas to stand and deliver.
Israel’s acting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is facing a similar challenge. While he engages in on-the-job training in governing over the next few weeks, he is also trying to engineer a March 28 election victory for the fledgling Kadima Party.
Olmert must demonstrate continuity of policy in a time of internal political turmoil caused by Ariel Sharon’s sudden incapacity, while at the same time exhibiting the ability to react creatively and coherently before an Israeli public that is seriously looking for leadership in light of the Hamas victory.
Politically, Olmert must reveal to Israeli voters that he has a program of how to respond to the Hamas victory. He must demonstrate command to an anxious public, in deeds as well as words. Olmert faces an Israeli public that usually moves to the right when it is facing a crisis or is unsure of its future. He must assure Israelis that he will have zero tolerance for any suicide attacks should they occur over the next eight weeks. At the same time, in order to come out of the elections with at least 40-plus seats in the next Knesset, he must demonstrate that the he is continuing the unilateral construction of the fence dividing the Palestinian territory and the Israel. If he shows weakness and responds to a possible U.S. or EU demand to give Hamas “a chance,” he will be setting himself up for a possible political disaster.
In the United States, President George W. Bush must address the question of what to do about the results of a democratic election in the Palestinian territories whose results he did not expect and does not favor.
Bush must consider his “democracy first” policy not only now in the Palestinian territory but also in Egypt, Kuwait, and especially in Iraq. He also must evaluate the results of his domestic surveillance policy and the extent to which the public — once it understands it better — will regard it as a serious threat to democratic values.
In New Jersey, the newly elected Gov. Jon Corzine also faces the challenge of demonstrating his ability to govern. Making New Jerseyans face the state’s fiscal challenges is much more complicated than managing Goldman Sachs. Justifying budget cuts to a public who feels government services already are not meeting their needs, is much harder to explain from Trenton than it is from the heights of Capitol Hill. The new governor’s honeymoon may be sharply curtailed unless his planned brand of austerity quickly produces positive results.
In all these instances, the power to govern brings with it the enormous challenge to produce results acceptable to the populace.
All rights reserved