NewsGuy
05-04-2004, 03:44 PM
An IsraelForum.com original article. Please feel free to post this article on other forums and sites, with a link back to www.IsraelForum.com
Dissecting the Disengagement Defeat
May 4, 2004
By Michael Rand
(IsraelForum.com) -- Thousands of Likud voters recently opposed Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s plan for an Israeli "disengagement" from the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and Samaria. The crux of the plan was that in the absence of a non-terrorist Palestinian partner with whom to negotiate a peace deal, Israel would act unilaterally to break the cycle of violence. Sharon proposed that Israel would withdraw Israeli troops and citizens from the Gaza Strip in the hopes of moving closer to peace.
Understandably, the forcible uprooting and transfer of a long-established Jewish community is a notion that drew fierce opposition not only from those citizens who were to be personally affected, but also from the wider Israeli population of Likud voters. Recognizing the controversy, Prime Minister Sharon brought the issue to vote in a Likud party referendum, in which his proposal was soundly defeated.
The rejection of Sharon’s plan showed a wide margin of disapproval from Sharon’s own political party, and indicated a deep disapproval among Israelis, in general, concerning the prime minister’s proposed strategy of dealing with the Palestinians.
What Went Wrong?
Sharon’s disengagement plan was originally rejected by the whole world. The Europeans opposed the Israeli withdrawal, because it did not require a European stamp of approval, and it did not result in lucrative infrastructure deals and billion-dollar bribes for the Europeans, as they have grown accustomed to in places like Iraq.
The Arabs rejected Sharon’s plan, because it would ease some of the conflict in the region, which is contrary to the interests of the Arab dictatorships who regularly use the Israeli-Arab conflict to deflect their own citizens’ anger.
The Palestinians opposed the Israeli concession not wishing to impede their long-time Jihad against Israel. And, the less land to dispute, the less convenient it becomes to slaughter innocent Israelis, in accordance with the true Palestinian national dream.
The Palestinians were also reluctant to approve Israel’s withdrawal, because they feared that the concession in Gaza would become Israel’s last. As a response to that concern, Israel agreed to forcefully eject yet more Jewish families out of areas of Samaria, signaling that the Palestinians would ultimately receive more territory than just Gaza and most of the West Bank. Still, despite the mountain of Israeli concessions, the Palestinians were still not pleased, because they could not adjust to a situation that would call for a reduction in terrorist activity.
American Turnaround
The U.S. was also originally opposed to Sharon’s disengagement plan. The Bush administration feared that the Sharon plan would preempt the now sacred Bush "vision" for the Middle East and its accompanying road map for peace. But Sharon lobbied the White House, eventually enlisting the President’s strong support. In a now-famous speech during a recent visit by Sharon to Washington, George Bush declared:
"Israel plans to remove certain military installations and all settlements from Gaza, and certain military installations and settlements from the West Bank. These are historic and courageous actions. If all parties choose to embrace this moment they can open the door to progress and put an end to one of the world's longest running conflicts...
These steps can open the door to progress toward a peaceful, democratic, viable Palestinian state. Working together, we can help build democratic Palestinian institutions, as well as strong capabilities dedicated to fighting terror so that the Palestinian people can meet their obligations under the road map on the path to peace.
This opportunity holds great promise for the Palestinian people to build a modern economy that will lift millions out of poverty, create the institutions and habits of liberty, and renounce the terror and violence that impede their aspirations and take a terrible toll on innocent life.
The Palestinian people must insist on change and on a leadership that is committed to reform and progress and peace."
With only about a week to go until the Likud’s referendum, Bush’s outspoken support was thought by analysts to give Sharon’s plan a major boost among Israeli voters. But, in fact, the Israeli voter was not as impressed with Bush’s speech as Sharon hoped.
Israeli Opposition
The Likud loyalists and much of the rest of Israel originally voted for Sharon as Prime Minister on the basis of Sharon’s plan to crack down on Palestinian terrorism, not to reward that terrorism with gifts of land that was developed with generations of Israeli blood, sweat and tears.
And, even among those who were willing to give up the Jewish Gaza settlements, many opposed the idea of doing so without a tangible return from the Palestinians. Indeed, the ongoing threats from Muslim terrorists and the slaughter of a pregnant Israeli woman and her four daughters on the morning of the vote drove home the realization that the Palestinians would never give up their dream of Jihad-genocide, even if appeased with land. That being the case, Israelis understood that moving out of Gaza would only bring the Palestinian terrorists and their missile assaults closer to the rest of Israel.
Sharon, from his part, learned that he needs to get clearance from his own political party and from the rest of the Israeli people first, before seeking clearance from abroad. Much to his credit, Sharon is a quick learner and has already announced that he will resubmit a modified version of his disengagement plan, which he hopes would receive more domestic support. Only then would it be time for Sharon to seek international backing.
* * *
What's your opinion?
Are the Likudniks who voted down the plan out of step with the rest of Israel?
Have you noticed that while Sharon advocated his plan, the Europeans blasted it, but the moment that Likud voted it down, all of a sudden Europe supports the plan?
Dissecting the Disengagement Defeat
May 4, 2004
By Michael Rand
(IsraelForum.com) -- Thousands of Likud voters recently opposed Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s plan for an Israeli "disengagement" from the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and Samaria. The crux of the plan was that in the absence of a non-terrorist Palestinian partner with whom to negotiate a peace deal, Israel would act unilaterally to break the cycle of violence. Sharon proposed that Israel would withdraw Israeli troops and citizens from the Gaza Strip in the hopes of moving closer to peace.
Understandably, the forcible uprooting and transfer of a long-established Jewish community is a notion that drew fierce opposition not only from those citizens who were to be personally affected, but also from the wider Israeli population of Likud voters. Recognizing the controversy, Prime Minister Sharon brought the issue to vote in a Likud party referendum, in which his proposal was soundly defeated.
The rejection of Sharon’s plan showed a wide margin of disapproval from Sharon’s own political party, and indicated a deep disapproval among Israelis, in general, concerning the prime minister’s proposed strategy of dealing with the Palestinians.
What Went Wrong?
Sharon’s disengagement plan was originally rejected by the whole world. The Europeans opposed the Israeli withdrawal, because it did not require a European stamp of approval, and it did not result in lucrative infrastructure deals and billion-dollar bribes for the Europeans, as they have grown accustomed to in places like Iraq.
The Arabs rejected Sharon’s plan, because it would ease some of the conflict in the region, which is contrary to the interests of the Arab dictatorships who regularly use the Israeli-Arab conflict to deflect their own citizens’ anger.
The Palestinians opposed the Israeli concession not wishing to impede their long-time Jihad against Israel. And, the less land to dispute, the less convenient it becomes to slaughter innocent Israelis, in accordance with the true Palestinian national dream.
The Palestinians were also reluctant to approve Israel’s withdrawal, because they feared that the concession in Gaza would become Israel’s last. As a response to that concern, Israel agreed to forcefully eject yet more Jewish families out of areas of Samaria, signaling that the Palestinians would ultimately receive more territory than just Gaza and most of the West Bank. Still, despite the mountain of Israeli concessions, the Palestinians were still not pleased, because they could not adjust to a situation that would call for a reduction in terrorist activity.
American Turnaround
The U.S. was also originally opposed to Sharon’s disengagement plan. The Bush administration feared that the Sharon plan would preempt the now sacred Bush "vision" for the Middle East and its accompanying road map for peace. But Sharon lobbied the White House, eventually enlisting the President’s strong support. In a now-famous speech during a recent visit by Sharon to Washington, George Bush declared:
"Israel plans to remove certain military installations and all settlements from Gaza, and certain military installations and settlements from the West Bank. These are historic and courageous actions. If all parties choose to embrace this moment they can open the door to progress and put an end to one of the world's longest running conflicts...
These steps can open the door to progress toward a peaceful, democratic, viable Palestinian state. Working together, we can help build democratic Palestinian institutions, as well as strong capabilities dedicated to fighting terror so that the Palestinian people can meet their obligations under the road map on the path to peace.
This opportunity holds great promise for the Palestinian people to build a modern economy that will lift millions out of poverty, create the institutions and habits of liberty, and renounce the terror and violence that impede their aspirations and take a terrible toll on innocent life.
The Palestinian people must insist on change and on a leadership that is committed to reform and progress and peace."
With only about a week to go until the Likud’s referendum, Bush’s outspoken support was thought by analysts to give Sharon’s plan a major boost among Israeli voters. But, in fact, the Israeli voter was not as impressed with Bush’s speech as Sharon hoped.
Israeli Opposition
The Likud loyalists and much of the rest of Israel originally voted for Sharon as Prime Minister on the basis of Sharon’s plan to crack down on Palestinian terrorism, not to reward that terrorism with gifts of land that was developed with generations of Israeli blood, sweat and tears.
And, even among those who were willing to give up the Jewish Gaza settlements, many opposed the idea of doing so without a tangible return from the Palestinians. Indeed, the ongoing threats from Muslim terrorists and the slaughter of a pregnant Israeli woman and her four daughters on the morning of the vote drove home the realization that the Palestinians would never give up their dream of Jihad-genocide, even if appeased with land. That being the case, Israelis understood that moving out of Gaza would only bring the Palestinian terrorists and their missile assaults closer to the rest of Israel.
Sharon, from his part, learned that he needs to get clearance from his own political party and from the rest of the Israeli people first, before seeking clearance from abroad. Much to his credit, Sharon is a quick learner and has already announced that he will resubmit a modified version of his disengagement plan, which he hopes would receive more domestic support. Only then would it be time for Sharon to seek international backing.
* * *
What's your opinion?
Are the Likudniks who voted down the plan out of step with the rest of Israel?
Have you noticed that while Sharon advocated his plan, the Europeans blasted it, but the moment that Likud voted it down, all of a sudden Europe supports the plan?