Getting boring

Despite a general Israeli consensus over the necessity of the Gaza withdrawal, the public is losing interest, writes Emad Gad

---

The Israeli media's focus on the disengagement plan continued last week with the impending approach of withdrawal from the Gaza Strip in mid-August. The government has already begun calling on settlers to leave Gaza willingly in return for hefty financial compensation for their homes and land in the settlements.

Even as preparations for the disengagement plan are going full steam ahead, the debate over the plan inside Israel continues, even as Israel is prepared for the first time to fully withdraw from the Gaza Strip and dismantle -- indeed, destroy -- the existing settlements to make room for the PA to establish housing suitable for the Strip's high population densities.

Despite a general Israeli consensus over the necessity of the withdrawal, the debate continues over the consequences of the plan for the future of the Israeli presence in the West Bank and the cohesion of Israeli society itself. Opinion polls still show solid support for disengagement among Israeli public opinion although overall support is down. In an article in Yediot Aharonot of 15 June entitled "Sick of disengagement" Yonatan Touval argues that a majority of the public still supports the plan; the recent decline in support is not so much due to changed opinions but to the Israeli public's boredom with the ongoing debates and the severe split inside the Likud Party. Touval writes that a majority supports disengagement but many are sick of the procrastination and never-ending talk about it. Thus, although polls show that support for the plan has dropped from its high of 70 per cent in February 2005, Touval writes that the decline is due not to less support but to public boredom with the political debate over the plan -- what Touval calls "the disengagement effect". Ideological opponents of the plan remain steadfast in their opposition while broad segments of former supporters of the plan have turned lukewarm, not seeing the government serious enough about implementing the plan.

At the same time, opponents to the plan -- settlers, many rabbis, and several prominent activists on the far right -- continue their activities. They are joined by others who object to the way the government has administered the plan -- its hesitation, flip-flopping and tactical manoeuvres. For purely political reasons, this group of opponents believes that implementing the plan the government's way will harm the settlers and their children. Gia Ronen addressed this issue in an article published in Yediot Aharonot on 18 June entitled "The clamor of the bulldozers". Ronen writes that the government wants to evacuate all the settlers in the Gaza Strip in less than two months, uprooting settlers from their homes and lands after almost four decades. Many were born and raised in the settlements and will continue to be identified as settlers even after they are resettled inside Israel. Ronen argues that in doing so, the government is telling the settlers that they built castles on the sand and lived a dream for 40 years, and now the bulldozers will raze their homes to the ground. "Perhaps it is a good, correct move, but there is no call for joy," he writes.

Meanwhile, supporters of disengagement continue to insist on the inevitability of the withdrawal at the scheduled time. They are calling on the government to implement the plan without hesitation, seeing in it an important step towards rectifying the mistakes of successive Israeli governments. The Haaretz editorial of 12 June, entitled "Who disengaged from whom?" also addresses the issue. The article notes that even as the state is encouraging Gaza settlers to withdraw by offering them huge benefits and beachfront villas -- benefits never given to other citizens -- the settlers continue to reject legitimate decisions issued by the government, the Knesset and the High Court of Justice. The situation might have been brought under control had not the settlers and their supporters begun to talk about "a rift in the Israeli people" due to disengagement. The editorial argues that although the settlers have always described themselves as pioneers, they have turned out to be only pioneers for their own personal interests. The paper calls on the government to implement the plan in the interest of Israel as a Jewish state and for the Jewish people.

The same opinion was expressed by Danny Reshev on the website News First Class in an article entitled "The limits of legitimacy". Reshev argues that disengagement is of the utmost importance for the future of Israel and the Jewish people -- a step of existential significance. The settlers' objections might have received some sympathy, he writes, but what cannot be tolerated are the methods of protest they have taken up. Their slogan "a corrupt nation" touches on the very legitimacy of Israel. Is the government corrupt, the army corrupt, the High Court of Justice corrupt? The author writes that such methods damage Israel's security and its future and that disengagement ultimately serves Israel's interest. For Reshev, the primary issue now is how to manage the debate among the various political groups. This is a vital issue, for after the withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, there will come a day when the country must discuss the withdrawal from the West Bank and the future of Israel settlements there, especially isolated settlements that are not part of the larger settlement blocs. Reshev warns that if the settlers continue to use the same methods and language to express their objections when that time comes, Israel will face a grave danger. "It will pull the rug out from under our shared existence, hastening the end of the Jewish state."

please visit the website of Arabs Against Discrimination www.aad-online.org.