Interesting. Bayit Yehudi is painted in the MSM as being to the Right of the Likud. I think Bennett's positions here are distinctly to the Left of Feiglin, Danon, Elkin et al. Granted, I think he is to the Right of Netanyahu... but not much. And I suspect Bibi is playing a diplomatic game - offereing concessions that he knows the Arabs will never accept because it will require them to give up on their "right" to destroy Israel. So it may be that Bennett is simply articulating the actual solution that Natanyahu has in mind but won't say publicly.
His positions essentially place the territorial results of the Oslo Accords as the way forward - as you say Shaul, not exactly what you expect from the leader of a "far right" party. But then all positions have moved gradually leftwards. The right used to advocate transfer of Arabs, the left partial land compromise, and the centre somewhere in between. The right now advocates partial land compromise, the "centre" full compromise and dividing Jerusalem, and the left has basically already moved to Europe/USA.
Bennett's 'pragmatic' attitude worries me. I'm tired of needing to come up with ideas for peace. I want my leaders to put their foot down and put the onus on the Arabs to come up with some 'pragmatic' plan. The onus is on them. Enough already of us wanting to solve everything.The Mafdal is not far-right and has not been since I can remember. Yishkon reminds me of an interesting idea of everyone moving left in their political opinions (adopting left ideas). By having the 'right' shift 'left', we now understand why it seems that the right is becoming stronger. Unfortunately, too many years of leftist media brainwashing will take longer to brush off.Josh
Rafi, are you part of https://www.facebook.com/groups/443417909047179/ ?
someone added me to that group