The danger of allowing a mortally wounded Olmert to linger in office is obvious. Weakened by dissension within his own ranks – and a manifest lack of confidence in his ability on the part of Israelis – Olmert would be particularly vulnerable to pressure and unlikely to take decisive action if it was needed. The same fears might apply to a Livni-led government if it turned out to be an equally precarious coalition of lame ducks.
As his own administration winds down, President Bush will be less likely to restrain the desires of Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to flex her own feeble diplomatic muscles. Though Hamas may be plotting a rerun of the Hizbullah war in Gaza, the idea of a renewed push to create dialogue might be irresistible, even if the authors of these initiatives were the same Saudi scam-artists who conned Rice into believing that a Mecca summit might strengthen Palestinian “moderates.”
Even worse, Israel may be forced to confront a nuclear Iran in the next two years. While hope may still exist for some sort of solution to that threat via sanctions and diplomacy, an ineffectual Israeli leader will be in no position to deal with this life-and-death situation. A government that has lost the confidence of Washington – not to mention its own people – is not the sort of partner an American president will trust in such a dangerous endeavor.
The question is no longer whether the Israeli Left or Right – and their various cheerleaders here – will prevail. Rather, it’s whether a permanently crippled leader in the form of Olmert or his successor will be allowed to hang on to the detriment of the American alliance.
As much as non-Israelis have no business choosing the Jewish state’s leadership, the one message Israelis should be hearing from their friends abroad is this: Pick whomever you want, but don’t leave a weak government in place indefinitely.