In an earlier AT article, The Arab Constituency in Israel, we took favorable note of the surge in the number of Arabs in the Labor Party of Israel.

This development represents a sea change in Israeli politics, since there are parties that are recognized as being the natural "homes" for Arabs, and the Labor Party has not been among them. The Labor Party has often been associated with leaders who have been aggressive in meeting the threat of Palestinian terrorism, and this was thought to be a factor that would dissuade Arab political participation in that Party.

This Haartez article analyzes this conundrum and comes to the conclusion that the age—old practice of patronage politics explains these recent maneuvers. The writer has a very harsh attitude towards the Likud Party, but also registers extreme anger that many Arabs have betrayed their brethren by joining the Labor Party.

Needless to say Haaretz is extremely liberal and models itself on the New York Times. As with that paper, readers can often find themselves wondering how it can show such bias and contempt on such a regular basis. While others can optimistically see this Arab participation as a beneficial development for democracy in the Muslim world, this Haaretz writer seems to be calling for a rejection of participation in Israeli politics and a renunciation of Israel itself. As I said, a very New York Times—like sour approach to the world.

Ed Lasky   6 20 05