THE TWO VOICES OF ISRAEL GENERAL DAYAN DIVIDES NATION’S LABOUR PARTY

Press, Volume CIX, Issue 31989, 16 May 1969, Page 10

THE TWO VOICES OF ISRAEL GENERAL DAYAN DIVIDES NATION’S LABOUR PARTY

/By

MAIER ASHER.

writing to the "Daily Telegraph”. London, from Jerusalem)

jrvtn Jerusalem/ (Reprinted from the "Daily Telegraph” by arrangement.

■ + Preoccupation with survival is paramount. It overshadows internal and foreign political issues. But the complex problems it creates have resulted m the emergence of divergent schools of thought which have driven deep wedges in the united front presented to the outside world.

Of the divisions on war and peace those most immediately likely to bnng change in the country’s fortunes are the disagreements between Moshe Dayan, Israel s popular Defence Minister, and the veteran leadership of the Labour Party, the country’s most powerful political organisation.

These differences havi i come to a head and a numbe of conciliation attempts havi failed. Dayan has made it knowi that he will announce thi month his decision either t< resign from the Governmen and stand himself in the No vember general elections a the head of an “independen list,” or to continue thi struggle from within thi Labour party. The tension about his poll tical future is increasing witl the approach of the deadline If he agrees to remain witl Labour he will certainly heli the party to win an absolute majority and for the firs time in Israel’s history en able it to govern alone, with out a coalition. If he decide Ito resign, in line with thi wishes of many of his sup porters, he is bound to brin; a change in the very natun of the regime by deprivin;

Labour of some of its best elements. Divergent Approaches Trying to maintain its advantage, the Labour leadership is careful not to push Dayan over the brink. This cautiousness is not, however, shared by Pinhas Sapir, the party’s Secretary-General and its strong man. He makes no secret of the fact that his disagreement with Dayan on a long series of political principles almost borders on personal dislike. He considers the rift with Dayan almost inevitable, and would rather have an early showdown than a protracted crisis.

General Dayan’s decision to stay or quit will be taken after weighing the chances of success or failure as he sees them. He has staked his political future on disbanding the powerful party “apparatus” headed by Mr Sapir and his henchmen and on the party’s return to the system of democratically elected institutions. He considers this necessary to end the preoccupation with “factional manipulations” and to be able to concentrate on national political issues which, for the past two years, he has accused the party of neglecting. The issues separating Dayan and his opponents are definitely not personal power struggles, as is sometimes erroneously suggested. They are born of divergent ap-j proaches to problems on which the very existence of Israel depends.

“Security” Doctrine

General Dayan is the exponent of the “security” doctrine. He fears a “fourth round” with the Arabs and the pressure of the great Powers for an Israeli withdrawal without peace. Mr Sapir, a former Finance Minister, tends to judge policies by their economic i feasibility. He also sees a danger in the indiscriminate inclusion of Arab populations within the borders of Israel. A careless demographic policy, he maintains, could drown the Jewish State in the sea of an Arab majority. These fundamental differences are the source of contradictory policies. General Dayan advocates the integration of the occupied territories into Israel’s economy without changing their political status. He wishes to detach their population from dependence on the Arab States and raise their living standards by offering them employment in Israel. He advocates the immediate drawing of a “new map” by establishing settlements at points offering Israel secure borders which would never be abandoned. Internally he insists on immediate free elections for a party convention which would elect the new Labour leadership. Mr Sapir opposes all this, and has never allowed General Dayan’s proposals to i come up for discussion in the party deliberations. They have, instead, spilled out in the streets and have been raised as slogans tacitly undermining party unity. An “Outsider” General Dayan has publicly complained that he has been made to feel an “outsider” in the party. He has said to Mrs Meir, the Prime Minister, “You should know you will have no difficulty in pushing me out of the party.” He has accused Mr Sapir of distributing leaflets intended to blacken his image and of trying to undermine his standing with the Army. Mr Sapir, in return, has pointed to General Dayan’s threats to eject him from the party leadership, and has asked why he should be debarred from defending himself: Faced by such a formidable opponent. General Dayan’s position in the party was considerably weakened. But support came from unexpected quarters in the form of a spontaneous public movement proposing General Dayan for the Prime Ministry. There is no apparent organisational link between the movement and its candidate, and it is a strange relationship, because General Dayan has not agreed to its establishment, nor does he consult it about his intentions. The movement includes

people from all walks ol life, but is mainly staffed b’ Israeli-born youths. It ha' collected about 150,000 signa tures in support of Genera Dayan. This undoubtedly enhance hih position in the party, bu has become the subject o fierce criticism by his oppo nents, and he has been servei notice to dissociate himsel from the movement. He ha threatened to quit rathe than disown his supporters. Choosing the P.M. A factor which weigh heavily with him is whethe his supporters in the part: will be allowed a say in th selection of candidates fo the Knesset (Parliament) lis in the November election and in the choosing of th, next Prime Minister. “I shal not give a blank cheque t the party and I will suppor no decision or appolntmen made without consulting me,’ he says. Mr Sapir, on th other hand, has calml: stated that Mrs Meir will b expected to continue as Prim Minister after the genera election. This apparently pre eludes the functioning o democratic processes in th party and presents Mr Sapi as a “king-maker” in con plete control. In these circumstances, i General Dayan decided to rt main in the party it would b because he had come to th conclusion that his publi support was no more than “one-time" power of attorney given to him in trouble* times, and that it lacked th solidity of an establishe party. Even with a large numbe of votes on an independen list General Dayan could no hope to obtain an absolut majority, and he would hav to attach himself to one or the parties in a coalition agreement. Ideologically bound to the Labour movement, he would naturally return to his own party, but With enhanced status. He must, above all, have asked himself whether all this proDayan movement is worth another split If, on the other hand, he decided to leave the Labour party the decision would be an expression of despair at being unable to find a “modus vivendi” with his colleagues. He has not reached this point yet. He has stressed bis hope

yuuwvai 11 for co-operation, not with Mr f Sapir, but with Mrs Meir. s Since she assumed the i- Prime Ministry after the 1 death of Mr Eshkol, Mrs Meir’s popularity has grown s by leaps and bounds, in some t ways overshadowing General f Dayan’s own. She has shown i- qualities of firmness and I statesmanship which Israelis f appreciate. She has also made s an impression on General r Dayan, and at this stage she clearly prefers a compromise within the party. For General Dayan the s issue of the Premiership is r first and foremost a matter y of national interest. Recently e observers have been surr prised by the fact that, on a t long series of defence and s foreign policy issues, General e Dayan and Mrs Meir have II found themselves in full o agreement. The Prime Minist ter’s move to admit him to it the party’s decision-making » councils looks like the formae tion of a Dayan-Meir axis and y is seen as another argument e against General Dayan’s leave ing the party. “There will be j no divorce between us," Mrs >. Meir has told a cheering and 'f laughing audience at a meete WI Mr Sapir’s Policy If Mrs Meir identifies herif self with General Dayan’s j- policies, the question arises, e will the Dayan-Meir team not e be in collision with Mr Sapir? c Mr Sapir holds the party’s a and the State’s purse-strings, y and he has made it clear that d he will not give in. "I do not e oppose Dayan on a personal d basis,” he says. “Dayan is naive if he thinks he can r annex the occupied territories it without granting the Arabs it Israeli citizenship and the e vote. Should I go along with e such naivete?

“General Dayan is not alone in the Government and the country, but neither am I. I shall oppose him, yet try to keep him in the party, but not by the sacrifice of political principles. If he remains, let him fight for his ideas as any party member. If he runs on a separate list, I shall treat him as an opponent and he knows how inconvenient this could be for him.”

General Dayan says that he will decide this month. But he has also pointed to the paradox of holding party discussions at a time when a new war is threatening.