Ehud Olmert enjoyed a long upward climb despite slighting the rules. His two years as prime minister have included several police investigations for alleged corruption, and a still tentative decision by the Attorney General to issue an indictment. His tenure also featured two wars, with the second more successful than the first. For those who thought that he might be refurbishing himself with Gaza, the last 48 hours have seen him stumble over a political cliff, perhaps while he thought that he was reaching a political mountain top. We can only hope that he has not struck a painful blow to his country along to himself.
He has been in the Knesset since 1973, when he was only 28. He came on the scene even earlier, and in a way that might have been seen as foretelling his brashness. When he was only 21 years old, he challenged the mythic Menachem Begin to step down as party leader.
He climbed through several sessions of the Knesset with memberships on important committees, then appointment as minister without portfolio. His first opportunity to make policy was as minister of health, and was called to order by the State Comptroller. He had ordered the purchase of hospital equipment from a company run by a party activist, without competitive bids.
Olmert outpolled the tottering Teddy Kollek in 1993 to become mayor of Jerusalem. After two terms he returned to the Knesset and leadership posts in the Likud party. Then appointments as minister of trade and industry, with his hands on a good deal of government money; minister of finance, with his hands on more government money; and deputy prime minister. From the latter position he became acting prime minister and then prime minister with the illness of Ariel Sharon and the election of 2006.
Olmert knows how to speak. Sometimes he speaks too well, as when he gets carried away with an idea that best be kept under wraps. In 2006 he proclaimed his intention to follow up the withdrawal of Jewish settlements in Gaza with similar actions in the West Bank. He would make peace without having to negotiate.
Rocket attacks from judenrein Gaza had already begun.
At the onset of the 2006 Lebanon war he proclaimed his intention to fight until the freeing of soldiers captured by Hizbollah, and the destruction of Hizbollah's capacity to endanger Israel. After the fighting stopped it took two years for Israel to negotiate with Hizbollah for the return of the soldiers' bodies. By that time Hizbollah had replaced its munitions several times over from their level at the start of the war, and achieved a more prominent place in Lebanese politics.
While police investigations of Olmert proceeded, he conducted negotiations with the Palestinians, charged by President George W. Bush with reaching an agreement before the end of 2008. On several occasions Olmert proclaimed the success of the negotiations, and indicated specific territorial concessions and the number of Palestinian refugees that Israel would accept. Other politicians and commentators charged that Olmert was selling out the country, without authorization, in order to save himself from a criminal conviction. Palestinian negotiators indicated that there was no progress in the talks, and that Olmert's offers were not good enough.
Olmert's management of the Gaza operation seemed to refurbish him, at least partly. He had stopped selling out the country. We heard that he was taking the most aggressive posture among the three key policymakers. In contrast with his practice in the Lebanon war, he was modest in talking about war aims.
It was early to talk about a career rehabilitated. When a popular web site asked readers to indicate if Olmert was improving his reputation via Gaza, 61 percent of 5,200 respondents said that he was not erasing previous mistakes and corruption.
The cliff that got in the way of his career pinnacle was the Security Council resolution calling for a cease fire, which passed with a United States abstention.
The resolution was nonbinding, and did not threaten Israel's capacity to continue fighting.
Nonetheless, Olmert announced to a party meeting, covered by the media, that he had heard that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice decided to support the resolution. He said that he called President Bush, and insisted on talking to him even though he was giving a speech away from Washington. Olmert claimed that he pressed the President to order Secretary Rice not to support the resolution, and the President complied.
Spokesmen of both the White House and the State Department have said that Olmert's story bore no resemblance to what happened.
We do not know the truth. Who said what to whom on the telephone is not important. The leader of a small and dependent country should not boast about his actions in a way that can embarrass the closest thing that exists to a world emperor, and his chief minister.
Olmert's revelation may have impressed some of those sitting in the party meeting, but it violated the norms of diplomacy.
What did he have to gain?
I have no answer.
What he had to lose was animosity toward himself, and his country, by the present and future American administrations.
God help us.
I welcome comments sent to my e-mail address below.
Ira Sharkansky (Emeritus)
Dept of Political Science
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
msira@mscc.huji.ac.il
Tel: +972-2-532-2725
Fax: +972-2-582-9144