 |
Alan Perlman is a resident of the community of Carmel in the Hebron Hills region and a technical writer. Perlman has a master's degree in social work.
|
|
|
|
By Alan Perlman
July 5, 2004
Written in response to A settler in favor of disengagement by David Margolis.
While writers sometimes refer to colleagues as their "good friends," fellow settler David Margolis and I really are the best of friends. But I feel compelled to respond to his article, A settler in favor of disengagement, because David is totally wrong. Retreat from Gaza is a terrible mistake, and here's why:
1) It undermines the democratic process in Israel. The Israel voter gets only one vote - for a party. This makes the integrity of the party platform critical. If the Prime Minister can wantonly discard his party's platforms, voting becomes a meaningless exercise. Not incidentally, by ignoring the will of party members, Sharon and the ministers who have gone along with him are seriously damaging the Likud party.
2) It rewards Arab terror. Instead of exiling the murderers and terrorists, Sharon plans to give them what they want - a Judenrein Gaza.
3) It sets a precedent that Jews can be uprooted with impunity. Gaza is not a one-shot deal. Sharon is including four Samarian settlements, and the Left has made it clear that, for them, Sharon's plan is only a start toward uprooting all Jewish settlement over the Green Line. So when a future Prime Minister decides to do just that, he'll only be continuing what Likud began. And if European governments later uproot Jews from certain areas as the simple solution to Muslim animus and lawlessness, they can point to the precedent set by the Jewish state. This may sound like a stretch now, but it might not be in the future, as Muslim power increases in Europe.
4) It undermines the Jewish claim to the Land of Israel. Unilateral retreat signals to the Arabs the idea that the Jews had no right to settle in Gaza in the first place. This opens Israel to the same charges regarding Jewish settlement on either side of the Green Line. Israelis need to recognize that the Land belongs to the Jews.
5) Unilateral retreat emboldens Israel's enemy, thus prolonging the war. Israel's retreat from Lebanon emboldened the Arabs to launch the Oslo war. The Arabs are now thoroughly discouraged by this war, but an Israeli retreat from Gaza will reinvigorate them. This can only result in more dead Israelis.
6) Israel's intelligence network in Gaza will be destroyed, putting Israelis at greater risk.
7) By relinquishing control of the northern Gaza strip, Israel will put Ashkelon and other major population centers in greater danger from rocket attacks.
8) There is an inherent ugliness in Jews from one place appropriating the right to ethnically cleanse Jews living somewhere else. If the cost of protecting kibbutzim on the northern border with Lebanon seems too great, should Israel send in the army and pack off those people to the Negev?
9) Uprooting the Jews of Gaza from their homes can precipitate very dangerous splits for the country. It will create a situation in which Jews, G-d forbid, fight Jews and Jewish soldiers find themselves compelled to disobey orders on moral or religious grounds. Retreat from Gaza may even lay the groundwork for a second Jewish state if settlers and supporters refuse to accept Arab sovereignty over parts of the Land of Israel and take it upon themselves, perhaps even as a religious obligation, to reestablish Jewish sovereignty over land relinquished by Israel - even as a separate Jewish state. Again, this might sound like a stretch, but it may prove to be a real danger as the government divests itself of Gaza, Judea and Samaria. Ancient Israel provided a lesson in the dangers of a divided kingdom. The Israeli government must recognize the religious obligations of the Jewish people and not ignore this danger inherent in relinquishing its sovereignty.
10) Only decisive victory will end this war. Israel is at war with an enemy hell-bent on its destruction. Israel must win, and win big. The way to win this war is by remaining in Gaza and destroying the terrorist infrastructure, not unilateral retreating.
The above arguments for remaining in Gaza also address most of David's points. But two arguments he cites in favor of withdrawal require further response.
First is the demographic issue, which is the only reason he cites that has any validity. I believe G-d is handling the demographic problem (as evidenced by the insane, even supernatural, Palestinian drive toward self-destruction). But even if you do not hold that belief, demographics are a "final status" issue. Right now, since the Arabs in Gaza don't vote in Israeli elections, they present no electoral threat. But as a physical threat to Israel, they are far more dangerous living in a terrorist "autonomy" than under Israeli domination.
The second of David's arguments requiring direct response is "Improve Israel's international position." It's a fact that any Israeli concession intended to boost Israel's international position brings but fleeting praise before it is forgotten and followed by demands for new concessions. David should more realistically have labeled this "Improve Israel's international position for 45 minutes" - a losing proposition. And the ugliness I cited above regarding Jews ethnically cleansing other Jews applies all the more so when there is a professed motivation for international approval.
David, come to your senses!
Views expressed by the author do not
necessarily reflect those of israelinsider.
 
|
|
|
|
Click on the blue headline to read a Talkback comment and respond to it. Click on the  icon to send a private email to the talkback writer. The icon appears only if the writer has decided to be contacted. If no popup window appears, please make sure your popup blocker allows israelinsider.com.
|
|
| |
|
|
