Today's Situation

Two schools of thought about Sharon

Wednesday, March 10, 2004

There’s no question more discussion is needed – U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell is quoted this morning as bluntly stating that the U.S. has ‘a lot of questions’ about the plan – like what happens the day after Israel pulls out of Gaza, and for that matter, will it pull out from all of Gaza, most of Gaza, some of Gaza, what? Chief of Staff Moshe Ya’alon, who was the focus this week of a typically brief controversy in which he was perceived as publicly questioning the wisdom of the essentially political disengagement plan, actually said that ‘when there is a plan’ he would make his views known to the political echelon.

And while just last week Dov Weisglass, the prime minister’s lawyer and bureau chief, was leaking to Israeli reporters in Washington that Israel was discussing with the Americans how the Egyptians could take responsibility for security in Gaza – something Egyptian Hosni Mubarak immediately scotched – the reports this morning said that Sharon reassured Suleiman that Israel did not intend for Egypt to replace Israel in the Strip. Suleiman, it was reported here, told Sharon that the only way to proceed is with full coordination, not only with Egypt, but with the Palestinians, something Sharon seemingly is loathe to do.

here are now two schools of thought regarding the disengagement plan. One says that Sharon is completely serious about moving ahead with some form of unilateral withdrawal from most or even all the Israeli-held positions, civilian and military, in the Gaza Strip, and from some isolated settlements in the West Bank, to create a new reality on the ground that would last for the next 30 years. The new reality he hopes to create is U.S. backing for a de facto Israeli border that includes at least three large settlement blocs – Ariel, northeast of Tel Aviv, Maale Adumim, east of Jerusalem, and Gush Etzion, south of Jerusalem – as well as the northern Jerusalem suburbs annexed by Israel years ago. The Palestinians can have a rump state in Gaza and enclaves of various sizes in the West Bank, under this overall plan.

The other school of thought says that the entire disengagement plan is a diversionary tactic, meant to ease ever-mounting international pressure on Israel and to distract Israeli public opinion from ever-mounting domestic scandals involving Sharon and his sons. There are analysts, commentators, and politicians, who move from one school to the next and back, from week to week, sometimes in the same week, because of the way the prime minister is orchestrating the moves.

Next week, for example, he is slated to meet with Qurei’ – actually, as of today, maybe, since meetings have been scheduled more than a dozen times and each time canceled at the last minute because of either a terror attack or an IDF operation that takes civilian lives – and he is also supposed to meet with his Likud ministers, ostensibly seeking their support for the unilateral disengagement. He knows that as of today, he does not have a majority of Likud ministers, let alone a majority in his coalition for any steps that involve moving any Jews out of settlements, which the Right calls ‘a prize for terrorism.’ And the Right has reason to argue that – Hamas leader Ahmed Yassin last night told Reuter that the organization regards an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza as a victory, and will even consider a ceasefire following it, ‘depending on what happens’ in the West Bank.

n any case, nothing dramatic – such as an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and Hamas and Hezbollah flags flying from the red rooftops of settlements they leave behind -- will take place on the ground until at least the day after the American elections in November, if the Bush administration has anything to say about it. Since Israel is the one country in the world where the prime minister asks the Americans for permission to do something even before he asks his own ministers, for at least as long as Sharon is prime minister the Americans can count on him not to do anything that might anger President Bush – who meanwhile hasn’t invited him to Washington because he still doesn’t understand what Sharon wants.

That only leaves one question, which is being asked more and more often now in Israel – just how long can Sharon keep juggling all the domestic and foreign, legal and political balls in the air? The polls show that nearly 60 percent of the electorate now says it wants new elections – but the same polls show the electorate would more or less reproduce the current political spectrum in Israel, a 55-45 majority for the hawks against withdrawals, even though the same polls show the public is 60-40 in favor of withdrawals.

Today's Situation || Yesterday's Situation