Friday, October 26, 2007

Ezzie's Blog Roundup: A Little Bit Different

Olah Chadasha has a fantastic post after the anniversary of Rabin's death, and finishes by noting that while many blame Rabin for so much that has happened since Oslo, the real blame lies with Yigal Amir. It's very well argued and thorough.
Also, it must be remembered that Rabin wasn't the lone person responsible for Oslo. The government voted to approve the deal. That's how democracy works. And, in a democracy, the people speak. Rabin was assassinated in '95. Elections were going to be in November of '96. Rabin would have LOST. Bibi would have won, and he would have stopped Oslo. Instead, Rabin became a martyr, and Oslo becomes his last charge that Israel was duty bound to carry out. So, in my mind, I disagree with those that say that Rabin has the blood of thousands on his hands b/c of Oslo. If we lived in a dictatorship or tyranny, I may agree with you, but we live in a democracy. The government voted on the Agreement, and they didn't have to. If Rabin hadn't been killed, Oslo would have ended for good in '96. Instead, it was forced to continue on a devastating path and didn't officially die until Barak's Taba and Camp David deals were killed by Arafat, and the Intifada. That's more than 5 years worth of terror and bloodshed that didn't have to happen, and it's because of Amir's actions. So, the minute Rabin was assassinated, I hold Yigal Amir personally responsible for every Jew and Israeli that was killed. It is Amir, NOT Rabin, that has the death of thousands on his hands.
Neil Harris has a great lesson from this week's parsha about kiruv, family, and life.


  1. How would Bibi have stopped Oslo? He certainly didn't make a serious attempt when he was PM years later.

  2. I always had the impression that Shimon Peres pushed the Oslo process through during Rabin's premiership despite Rabin's concerns/objections. Keep in mind that Peres has never been shy about enlisting foreign governments to push Israel into endorsing his pet projects.

  3. Although on one hand it is "iffy" to play "what ifs" with history, because we have no way to know how things would have turned out, I nevertheless tend to agree.
    It is entirely possible that if Rabin lived AND he got re-elected, then Rabin himself may have put a stop to it or at least pull in the reigns. If he went to Camp David instead of Barak, would he have offered the same wide concessions? He may have not.
    So, yes, Amir's murder of Rabin did not save any lives and likely made things much worse.

  4. It is entirely possible that if Rabin lived AND he got re-elected, then Rabin himself may have put a stop to it or at least pull in the reigns.

    What exactly does it mean to stop Oslo?

  5. Thanx for the link. Gut Shabbos Kodesh.