Who Is A Fascist?

What made him deserving of a place in history? Not his talents. On thecontrary, during his short term as Reichskanzler (chancellor), he was as much afailure as his predecessors. Neither was he a very interesting person - just anordinary politician from the minor nobility ("von"), a member of the"Zentrum", a German party like our own "National-ReligiousParty", before it lost its mind.

No, the name of von Papen is remembered only because he paved the way for theNazis to take over Germany. It was he who advised the President of the Reich, analmost senile Field Marshal, to appoint Hitler as Reichskanzler. Von Papen toldhim that Hitler was just another demagogue with a big mouth, who, once in power,was sure to moderate his views. And anyhow, for safety's sake, all the importantpositions - War Minister, Foreign Minister etc. - would be given to non-Nazis.Hitler would be Kanzler in name only, unable to move.

Well, everybody knows what happened next. After getting his foot in the doorwith the help of von Papen, Hitler stormed into the building, instituted a reignof terror, threw his opponents (including the assistants of von Papen himself)into concentration camps, changed the law and established the dictatorship thatled Germany to disaster.

Now there is a danger of Ehud Olmert becoming the Israeli von Papen.

I have always been careful to avoid the example of the famous shepherd whoused to cry "Wolf! Wolf!" just to tease the others.

Many times, this or that Israeli politician has been accused of being afascist. But to be a fascist, it is not enough to espouse extreme nationalistviews or to carry out racist policies.

There is no scientific definition of fascism. But from experience one can saythat it is a combination of world view and personality type, radicalnationalism, racism, a cult of violence, dictatorship and more. When asked whois a fascist, I answer: When you see one, you will know.

Or, as the Americans say: If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, itis a duck.

More than once, Menachem Begin was called a fascist, but he was far from it.He was indeed an extreme nationalist, but also a confirmed democrat, withdecidedly liberal views (like his guide and master, Vladimir Ze'ev Jabotinsky).Rehavam Ze'evi, who advocated "voluntary transfer" of the Arabpopulation, came close to the definition, but he lacked the special characterthat makes the fascist.

The only leader in the history of Israel who can accurately be defined as afascist was Meir Kahane. He did not grow up in this country but was an importfrom the US. He was and remained alien in appearance and style, and failed toimpress the general public.

Now Israeli democracy is threatened by a much more dangerous individual.

Avigdor Liberman is a clever person. It is not easy to nail down his views.They are always formulated in a slick and elusive way. But the rule applies tohim: When you see him, you will know.

When he came to Israel from the Soviet Union, he already brought with him aracist outlook. He wants a purely Jewish state, with no Arabs. For this, he isprepared, so he says, even to give up Israeli territory in which a dense Arabpopulation is living. He proposes to get these citizens out of Israel, togetherwith the land they are living on. Not a second Naqba, God forbid: the Arabs willnot be driven from their lands, as then, but will be expelled together withtheir land. In return, Israel will annex the territories on which the settlers,one of whom is Liberman himself, are living.

What's wrong with that? The basic idea is wrong: the turning of Israel into astate "cleansed" of Arabs. In German that would be called "Araber-rein".(Actually, it's an inversion of the Nazi phrase: not Juden-rein, but Rein-für-Juden.That is clearly a racist slogan, which appeals to the most primitive instinctsof the masses.

The chances of this actually happening are, of course, nil. But the veryvoicing of this idea prepares the way for something even worse: the simpleexpulsion of the masses of Arabs from Israel proper and the occupiedterritories. Without euphemisms, without exchanges of territory, without anykind of spin. Once the fascist genie gets out of the bottle, no power can stopit before it leads to disaster.

The annexation of the settlements will, of course, put an end to any chanceof peace.

But the menace of Liberman lies not only in his acknowledged orunacknowledged views. It is imprinted in his character. Witness: he is the soleleader of his party, which is almost entirely composed of new immigrants fromthe former Soviet Union. Like previous waves of immigration, this is a group ofpeople who did not grow up in a democratic society, and tend to have anoversimplified view of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Many of them live in Israel as if on an island, read only the localRussian-language press (almost entirely far to the right), and are isolated fromthe liberal and democratic tendencies in the country. They have pushed outNathan Sharansky, who looks too weak, and vote for a tough, authoritarian leaderwhose main election slogan, even in Hebrew-language broadcasts, was "Da,Liberman!" (Yes, Liberman!) What does that remind one of?

Liberman does not hide his intention of totally changing the structure of theIsraeli political system and establishing an authoritarian regime, headed by astrong leader (himself). As a first step, he has submitted a bill for theestablishment of a "presidential" regime, in which the president wouldhave almost dictatorial powers. He would not be dependent on the Parliament,which would become unimportant, and would control all the instruments of powerhimself. The immediate model is Vladimir Putin, the gravedigger of Russiandemocracy, but it seems that Liberman is far more extreme.

Why does Ehud Olmert court this man? Why does he insist on including him inhis government and agreeing to vote for his proposals? Why is Libermania fastbecoming the hottest topic in Israeli politics?

Simply: Olmert, completely bankrupt, is clutching at straws.

Only seven months after becoming Prime Minister by a stroke of luck - ArielSharon's stroke - he is left with nothing, and right with nothing, too, itseems:. The public already understands that the Lebanon War, in all its facets,was a total fiasco. His refusal to appoint a Judicial Commission of Inquiry hasdeepened the feeling of defeat. The central slogan of his election campaign -"Convergence" - has become a bad joke. From the famous "SocialAgenda" nothing has remained. Olmert & Co. have been left withoutany plan, any mission, except one: to hold on to power at any price.

One of the hallmarks of a person like Liberman is a talent for sensing andexploiting the weaknesses of others. He is making Olmert a seductive offer: hewould join the government and bring with him his 11 votes in Parliament -without anything in return. Literally for nothing.

In the past he has demanded the post of Minister of Defense, or at leastMinister of Police (officially "Minister of Interior Defense"). Now hetalks about a nebulous title: "Minister in Charge of Long-RangeStrategy" (translation: the bombing of Iran). But he does not insist evenon that. He is prepared to be a minister without portfolio, not even demandingthat two or three of his colleagues also become ministers, as the size of hisparty would justify.

An offer that cannot be refused. Liberman knows that the title isunimportant. What is important is to get his foot in the door and gainlegitimacy as a minister. The rest will come in due course.

For the despairing Olmert, out to hold on to power, this looks like a giftfrom heaven. He has opponents in the government, especially in the Labor Party.His parliamentary majority is not safe. And here comes Liberman and provides himwith complete security in office. People have sold their souls to the devil forless.

The official justification is: "One cannot reject any Zionistparty" (a wording that automatically counts out all Israeli Arab parties).Adapting the famous words of Dr Samuel Johnson, it could be said: "Zionismis the last refuge of a scoundrel."

Olmert wants to gain some more years - or months, or weeks - in power. Powerfor its own sake. Power for no cause or purpose, for no idea, for no action. Inreturn, he is ready to open the door to the forces of darkness. What does hecare? After him the deluge.

I have said more than once that I believe in Israeli democracy. Theimmigrants from the Soviet Union are not the only ones who grew up in adictatorial system - almost all Israelis, or their parents, grew up undertyrannical regimes. But Israeli democracy, the miracle that has no logicalexplanation, is holding up even in these difficult circumstances.

However, we cannot ignore the dangers that threaten our democracy now. Yearsof a brutal occupation have corrupted the state and the army, racism isflourishing in our daily life - not only against the inhabitants of the occupiedterritories, not only against the Arab citizens of Israel proper, not onlyagainst foreign workers. There exist in our society deep schisms that can beexploited by fascism in its search for power.

When Rome was in danger from the approaching Carthaginian army, the cry wentup: "Hannibal ante portas!" We should now raise the cry: "Libermanat the gate!"

Ehud Olmert will be a passing episode in the annals of Israel. In a fewyears, nobody will remember him. Unless he acquires the status of the Israelivon Papen.