"The face of the generation is like the face of a dog, and there is no truth," says the Talmud. There are several interpretation of this saying. One goes like this: "The face of the generations" means its leaders. And why does it look like a dog? Because a dog runs ahead, as if it were leading the master. But when it comes to a parting of the way, the dog waits for the master to decide where to go. Then it runs ahead again.

The most shocking fact published after the Camp David summit was that Ehud Barak received a daily report on public opinion polls while he was there. His man in Jerusalem conducted a poll every morning and transmitted the results to his secluded master every evening on the "hot line" that was reserved solely for urgent security messages. Then, according to the results of the poll, Barak planned the next day's negotiations with Clinton and Arafat.

Barak likes to compare himself to David Ben-Gurion. If this comparison were valid, history would have looked something like this:

On May 13, 1948, Ben-Gurion ordered his pollster to conduct an urgent poll on the question: "Do you think that the establishment of the Jewish state should be declared tomorrow? Yes/No".

At the time it was clear that the declaration would be followed by the entry of the Arab armies into the country from all sides, and that a total war for the very existence of the Jewish community would break out. It was also clear that the United States firmly rejected the proclamation of the state. In the United Nations, a plan for placing the country under an international trusteeship was discussed. Important Zionist leaders, such as Moshe Sharett and Nachum Goldman, proposed postponing the declaration to a more opportune moment.

Therefore, the results of the poll did not come as a surprise: 63% answered that the state should not be declared on the morrow, 34% were in favor of the declaration, the rest (3%) had no opinion.

Ben-Gurion concluded that the declaration would be unpopular. As a canny politician, he decided not to make it. And so the State of Israel did not come into being on May 14, 1948…

But Ben-Gurion was no Barak. It did not enter his mind to conduct a poll. The very idea would have shocked him. He was aware of his responsibility as a leader, took the decision and implemented it. The whole Jewish community rallied behind him.

Nowadays, opinions differ on many of Ben-Gurion's acts. (At the time, I was one of his most severe critics.) But there is no disagreement on one point: the man was a leader. He had the guts to take fateful decisions. He did not ask himself: "What do the people want this morning" but, rather: "What must be done for the good of the people?"

More than once, when he made unpopular decisions, he told the people: This is my opinion. If you don't like it, I shall resign. Every time the people accepted his view. For example: When he decided to accept the partition of the country, when he accepted German reparations and when he sold arms to Germany, only a few years after the holocaust.

But Barak is no second Ben-Gurion. Far from it. The method of "government by opinion-poll" is as anti-Ben-Gurionic as you can get. It looks democratic. Indeed, it looks like the very epitome of democracy. The leader asks the people every day what they want and acts accordingly. What could be more democratic? But in actual fact, it has nothing to do with democracy.

Polls are based on false basic assumptions: that the majority of people are able to understand what is going on; that they have the information necessary for the comprehension of all aspects of a proposed decision; that they are glued to the media, and that the media are giving them a real, objective and full picture; that they are able to voice a considered opinion merely by answering the few questions in a poll. All these assumptions are completely unfounded.

A very good example was provided this week by a poll commissioned - of all people - by the settlers. A representative sample of the Jewish population in Israel was asked about the "concessions" attributed (rightly or wrongly) to Barak at Camp David. The results were as follows: 55% oppose the evacuation of some tens of thousands of settlers from isolated settlements, even if the bulk of the settlers will remain where they are under Israeli sovereignty; 66% oppose transferring the Jordan valley to Palestinian sovereignty; 69% oppose to the return of even 100 thousand refugees; 76% oppose Palestinian rule over East Jerusalem.

A clear picture? Not at all. Because, in the end, the decisive question was asked: Do you agree to a final settlement that includes all these concessions? And here came the surprise: More than 50% said "yes". If one adds the votes of the Arab citizens of Israel, who where not asked, there is a solid majority of 55% for a peace agreement that includes all these concessions.

How come? Simple: Each "concession" by itself arouses opposition. But when placed in the context of putting an end to the historic conflict, the public is ready for all these concessions - and more.

This poll, too, like all the polls, does not provide reliable answers. The real decisions can only be rendered once a written agreement is achieved and a public debate has taken place. For this to happen, Barak must make courageous decisions concerning Jerusalem, the Green Line, exchange of territories and refugees. There will probably be a big majority against "concessions " on each of these issues by itself in the daily polls. But the final outcome - the agreement that will contain all the "concessions" as all the achievements of both sides - will be endorsed by a big majority.

This is leadership on the Ben-Gurion model, a leadership that does not bear any resemblance to a dog that runs ahead while looking backwards.