SHALOM NETZARIM


Ariel Sharon has begun a political earthquake in Israel by initiating a plan to uproot the Gaza settlements beginning this coming summer as part of overall strategy of unilateral separation.


Sharon has been moving slowly but steadily towards such a plan over the past year. First, by embracing the security fence (a policy that emerged as result of a grassroots centrist movement and over the objection of both left-wing and right-wing elites) Sharon enacted policies that for the first time matched his rhetorical abandonment of Greater Israel by beginning to carve a de facto partition of the West Bank. Second, in his December Herzliyah speech (and more explicitly in the trial baloons of the increasingly more relevant Deputy PM Ehud Olmert), Sharon clearly expressed the logic behind a unilateral withdrawal and his willingness to embrace it as an alternative to a negotiated solution.


Opposition to the Sharon Plan for Gaza has come from three very different directions. The first stream of opposition comes from the uber-doves, led by Yossi Beillin, who oppose unilateral measures based on their near- messianic faith in the ability of a negotiated settlement to transform the Palestinian Authority into a viable, peaceful neighbor. The second stream of opposition comes naturally from the Settler Movement (not to be conflated with the average Yossi who lives in the Jerusalem suburbs), who oppose any withdrawals, negotiated or not based on their near-messianic faith that G-d intended the Jewish people to return to the ancient land where our...enemies the Phillistines used to live (At least the fanatics in Hebron have a legitimate historical tie to the place). The third stream of opposition (and the only based on actual logic) comes from those such as Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom who oppose unilateral withdrawal because it will be seen by the Palestinians as a victory for terror over negotiation and compromise. (See Lebanon). The third group supports continuing a war of attrition until the a Palestinian leadership emerges that is serious about peace.


Despite the very real fears of a short-term increase of Palestinian radicalism (which can be blunted depending upon the way the withdrawal is handled), the most cogent criticism of the Sharon plan is why he waited so long. Sharon has gained very little by proposing such a plan now, rather than a year ago. In the interim, the shock of the reoccupation of the West Bank for the Palestinians has wore off, Sharon's approval rating have eroded in the absence of decisive moves to address the problem, and he has become embroiled in a murky corruption scandal.

Still, Sharon's pragmatic instincts have moved him inevitably towards unilateral partition as the only solution to the Palestinain problem. Despite his strong preference for negotiation, expect Shimon Peres's instincts to lead him there as well, and for a unity government to this summer finally undo one of the biggest blunders of Israeli policy in the past 30 years - the Gaza settlements.