Disengagement from Gaza: A Choice for Life
July 28, 2005
Disengagement from Gaza: A Choice for Life
Jerusalem, Israel
With two weeks until Israel’s planned disengagement from Gaza, there is a palpable sense of tension felt throughout the country. On everyone’s minds are the possible obstacles and things that could go wrong to delay or cancel the disengagement. Some Israelis are praying for these obstacles to come to pass, but a majority is hoping that the disengagement from Gaza is just the first step toward a final peace settlement with the Palestinians. To reach such a settlement, the Palestinians still must demonstrate a lot of progress in their ability to competently run their own affairs. However, it is the internal divisions within Israel that will prove decisive in shaping the relationships Israel builds with its neighbors in the coming years.
Israel is a very young country. At 57 years old, the identity of the state is still taking shape. In its formative years, most of Israel’s identity has been defined in reaction to existential threats. There have always been, and continue to be, enemies intent on destroying Israel. At least five major wars have been fought to preserve Israel’s existence. At the same time, signed peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan have been successful at ending major components of the conflict.
While the Oslo peace process ultimately failed, the picture of a possible final settlement with the Palestinians has been painted and is widely seen in Israel as the probable eventual outcome. With the death of Arafat and the disengagement from Gaza, the question is not if there will be a settlement, but when conditions will be ripe to move forward. Israel must always be vigilant in ensuring security for its citizens, but it looks more and more likely that political solutions will eventually bring an end to most of the armed conflict.
The streets of downtown Jerusalem are almost full with tourists this summer, and business owners here that were begging for customers a few short years ago are beginning to feel a sense of relief. In the Old City of Jerusalem, Palestinian merchants are finally seeing a flow of tourists after several years of almost absolute silence. Are tourists coming back to visit Israel because other terrorist attacks around the world have made Israel seem unexceptional as a dangerous place? I don’t think so. Tourists are returning to Israel because there is relative quiet here and a sense of progress towards peace.
But, the most important question facing Israelis right now is what will be the legacy of this generation for the future of the Jewish state? Since the end of the Six Day War of 1967, a majority of secular, mainstream Israelis have been guilty of providing tacit acceptance of the settler movement and the idea of a “Greater Israel.” Even though most Israelis did not move their families to the Gaza Strip or to hilltop settlements in the West Bank, they also did not prevent those who did move from doing so. A small yet zealous and determined percentage of Israel’s population comprised of the very right wing and extreme religious parties have succeeded in co-opting an inordinate amount of power at the expense of the values held by the liberal, western oriented majority.
Why did this happen? The extremist element in Israel has traditionally had so much power in Israel because the issue they care about, the right of Jews to settle the Land of Israel regardless of the price that others have to pay, was considered sacrosanct and taboo to challenge. No leader until Yitzchak Rabin dared formulate a position counter to the status quo, knowing that doing so would be political suicide. Yet in the 1990s, the time was ripe for a sea-change and Rabin rose to the challenge. After him, Ehud Barak continued to break taboos when he negotiated with the Palestinians over a settlement involving Jerusalem. Even the ultimate Israeli hawk, Ariel Sharon recognized that living in a constant state of war is unsustainable. If only for selfish reasons, he seems to have accepted the fact that somehow, Israel must be proactive in ending the conflict.
Those against the disengagement from Gaza are getting desperate. Yesterday, a group of Rabbis issued a “Pulsa Denura,” or a death decree for Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. These Rabbis, and they are not alone in the ultra-orthodox community, claim that Sharon’s decision to disengage from Gaza is tantamount to heresy and treason against the Jewish people. As everyone in Israel is aware, such a decree was issued by a Rabbi prior to Yitzhak Rabin’s murder in 1995 and was seen by his assassin as a “green light” to act. Security will be extra tight around the Prime Minister for at least the next few weeks.
At this crucial time in its development, Israel is faced with a set of choices that will determine the character of the state for at least the foreseeable future and probably a lot longer. Will Israel be an inward looking state that bends to the will of a minority that believes it has a monopoly on truth and that Jews have a special, God-given right to settle all of Biblical Israel regardless of the consequences? Or, will Israel reject this notion and cease lending any credence to the elements in its society that do not accept basic 21st century notions of Human Rights?
The settler movement’s most popular slogan lately has been: “Jews Don’t Exile other Jews.” The liberal Peace Now movement’s signs read: “Choose Life, Choose the Disengagement.” Strong leadership will be the decisive factor in swaying Israeli popular opinion. Perhaps Sharon, with his hardliner past, is the only leader who can actually convince enough people that now is the time to focus on a potentially bright future, to choose life, and to relegate all extremists to the margins of society where they belong.
Disengagement from Gaza: A Choice for Life
Jerusalem, Israel
With two weeks until Israel’s planned disengagement from Gaza, there is a palpable sense of tension felt throughout the country. On everyone’s minds are the possible obstacles and things that could go wrong to delay or cancel the disengagement. Some Israelis are praying for these obstacles to come to pass, but a majority is hoping that the disengagement from Gaza is just the first step toward a final peace settlement with the Palestinians. To reach such a settlement, the Palestinians still must demonstrate a lot of progress in their ability to competently run their own affairs. However, it is the internal divisions within Israel that will prove decisive in shaping the relationships Israel builds with its neighbors in the coming years.
Israel is a very young country. At 57 years old, the identity of the state is still taking shape. In its formative years, most of Israel’s identity has been defined in reaction to existential threats. There have always been, and continue to be, enemies intent on destroying Israel. At least five major wars have been fought to preserve Israel’s existence. At the same time, signed peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan have been successful at ending major components of the conflict.
While the Oslo peace process ultimately failed, the picture of a possible final settlement with the Palestinians has been painted and is widely seen in Israel as the probable eventual outcome. With the death of Arafat and the disengagement from Gaza, the question is not if there will be a settlement, but when conditions will be ripe to move forward. Israel must always be vigilant in ensuring security for its citizens, but it looks more and more likely that political solutions will eventually bring an end to most of the armed conflict.
The streets of downtown Jerusalem are almost full with tourists this summer, and business owners here that were begging for customers a few short years ago are beginning to feel a sense of relief. In the Old City of Jerusalem, Palestinian merchants are finally seeing a flow of tourists after several years of almost absolute silence. Are tourists coming back to visit Israel because other terrorist attacks around the world have made Israel seem unexceptional as a dangerous place? I don’t think so. Tourists are returning to Israel because there is relative quiet here and a sense of progress towards peace.
But, the most important question facing Israelis right now is what will be the legacy of this generation for the future of the Jewish state? Since the end of the Six Day War of 1967, a majority of secular, mainstream Israelis have been guilty of providing tacit acceptance of the settler movement and the idea of a “Greater Israel.” Even though most Israelis did not move their families to the Gaza Strip or to hilltop settlements in the West Bank, they also did not prevent those who did move from doing so. A small yet zealous and determined percentage of Israel’s population comprised of the very right wing and extreme religious parties have succeeded in co-opting an inordinate amount of power at the expense of the values held by the liberal, western oriented majority.
Why did this happen? The extremist element in Israel has traditionally had so much power in Israel because the issue they care about, the right of Jews to settle the Land of Israel regardless of the price that others have to pay, was considered sacrosanct and taboo to challenge. No leader until Yitzchak Rabin dared formulate a position counter to the status quo, knowing that doing so would be political suicide. Yet in the 1990s, the time was ripe for a sea-change and Rabin rose to the challenge. After him, Ehud Barak continued to break taboos when he negotiated with the Palestinians over a settlement involving Jerusalem. Even the ultimate Israeli hawk, Ariel Sharon recognized that living in a constant state of war is unsustainable. If only for selfish reasons, he seems to have accepted the fact that somehow, Israel must be proactive in ending the conflict.
Those against the disengagement from Gaza are getting desperate. Yesterday, a group of Rabbis issued a “Pulsa Denura,” or a death decree for Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. These Rabbis, and they are not alone in the ultra-orthodox community, claim that Sharon’s decision to disengage from Gaza is tantamount to heresy and treason against the Jewish people. As everyone in Israel is aware, such a decree was issued by a Rabbi prior to Yitzhak Rabin’s murder in 1995 and was seen by his assassin as a “green light” to act. Security will be extra tight around the Prime Minister for at least the next few weeks.
At this crucial time in its development, Israel is faced with a set of choices that will determine the character of the state for at least the foreseeable future and probably a lot longer. Will Israel be an inward looking state that bends to the will of a minority that believes it has a monopoly on truth and that Jews have a special, God-given right to settle all of Biblical Israel regardless of the consequences? Or, will Israel reject this notion and cease lending any credence to the elements in its society that do not accept basic 21st century notions of Human Rights?
The settler movement’s most popular slogan lately has been: “Jews Don’t Exile other Jews.” The liberal Peace Now movement’s signs read: “Choose Life, Choose the Disengagement.” Strong leadership will be the decisive factor in swaying Israeli popular opinion. Perhaps Sharon, with his hardliner past, is the only leader who can actually convince enough people that now is the time to focus on a potentially bright future, to choose life, and to relegate all extremists to the margins of society where they belong.
posted by AWR | 1:46 AM
|
0 comments
