Israeli extremism
The main headline of the Israeli elections was "extremism" in relation to the issues of security, peace and land.
The Labor Party, which had previously raised slogans about its readiness to accept compromises on lands in return for peace and a comprehensive settlement, backed out of its positions and entered into fierce competition with extremist parties.
This is why it carried out the savage aggression against Lebanon, increased suppressive and terrorist campaigns against Arab citizens in the occupied territories and closed the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.
Such Labor Party behavior encouraged extremism in Israeli society and increased the weight of the extremist parties.
For this reason, it was natural for the Likud to win, for the extremist religious parties to gain more votes and for the number of representatives of the aggressive military institutions to increase in the Knesset.
The government of the Labor Party was not convinced in peace and was not working seriously for peace. It did not try to convince Israeli public opinion of the necessity and benefits of peace.
The results of these elections might complicate the peace process even more, and we are basing our opinion on the slogans presented by Likud during the electoral campaign.
If the Likud Party tried to implement its electoral slogans, this will lead to the final burial of the peace process. It will also lead to an explosion in the region and will escalate the elements of tension and instability in the region.
Moreover, compromises by some Arab parties -- under the pretext of encouraging the Israelis to move forward on the road of peace -- did not achieve their objectives.
Actually, such compromises offered to Israel and the attempts to normalize ties with Israel were counter-productive.
Israeli society interpreted such Arab eagerness toward Israel as readiness to accept the Zionist imperialists proposals.
Also, the U.S. Administration's efforts, which were meant to provide suitable circumstances for Peres' success, led to a setback.
The U.S. peace efforts -- despite its bias towards the Israeli side -- was not welcomed by Israeli society ... because it felt that Washington would force it accept what the U.S. required: peace.
Damascus did not bet on any party or person in Israel. It bases its position toward any of the parties on their readiness to provide the requirements of a just peace.
Syria considers the complete withdrawal from the Golan Heights the key to peace and will not accept any other formula.
-- Tishrin, Damascus