The Decision in Dismantling Settlements in Gaza

Submitted by Shimon Z. Klein (Israel), Feb 14, 2004 at 04:55

There are many points in this article that are axiomatic and I have no argument with them. It is true that the settlements are not really the major issue that is a problem for attaining peace with the Palestinians. The main problem between Israel and the Palestinians is basically existential. The existential problem began the day that Israel was established in 1948. It would be a good idea to read Prof. Moshe Sharon's Article "Agenda for Islam – A War between Civilizations" as well as the "Hamas Manifesto" which illustrates this point very well. Today it is Hamas and their terrorist allied organizations that are ruling the Palestinian areas. The Palestinian Authority, with its leader Yasser Arafat holed up in the Muqata in Ramalla, is impotent and corrupt. It has outlived its relevancy in the Middle East.

http://www.freeman.org/m_online/feb04/sharon.htm

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/mideast/hamas.htm

All the wars that Israel had fought in the past were wars that were foisted onto her by the neighbouring Arab states. The whole of Israel was considered anathema to her Arab neighbours. The so called "occupation" phenomenon only occurred as a result of Israel's victory after the Six Day War in June 1967. What happened prior to that? Israel never had occupied territories and still there was this driving desire to destroy her. I hate to think what would have happened had Israel lost her wars of survival.

Having said all this, it is still desirable to vacate Gaza for security reasons. The safety of Israel's soldiers should not be compromised in defending settlements in close proximity to a hostile Palestinian population. Another problem is the settlers who are compromising their safety and the safety of their children in the areas near Gaza. The extra security burden that Israel has to face as well as the logistics problems involved getting to the settlements is a tremendous expense on Israel's limited budgetary resources as well as that of the taxpayer who has to foot the bill.

It would be more cost effective if Israel were to withdraw to defensible borders more or less along the green line with adjustments and resettle the settlers in the Negev area. The cost in lives would be avoided. The separation fence on defensible borders should be completed it should not be a point of argument of international proportions. Israel has the right to defend her citizens in the way that she sees appropriate.

Peace between Israel and the Palestinians will remain a dream for many years to come. The most that could be achieved would be some kind of "hudna" between Israel and the Palestinians and, as Prof. Sharon has pointed out in his article, a temporary peace settlement until the Moslems gain the strength to push the non-Moslem infidel (the Jews) into the sea. The fact that Israel exists on "Moslem (Arab) lands" will never be acceptable and this will drive an agreement even further from reality.

The U.S. has a similar problem in Iraq. Their rule – albeit temporary – is not acceptable in Iraq either. The suicide attacks against American soldiers will not cease until they (the infidel in Moslem eyes) will leave Iraqi soil.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".