Many pro-Israel bloggers vehemently oppose disengagement because it is, in the words of one of Lynn’s recent posts on In Context something for nothing. Quite the opposite, according to Uri Dan:
Sharon believes disengagement is the only way Israel can retain some 50 percent of Judea and Samaria. If his opponents somehow succeed in derailing his plan, he told me recently, Israel will wind up with only about 4 percent of Judea and Samaria.
In other words, having won the Knesset vote on Tuesday night, Sharon is warning his opponents not to bring him down. If they do, disengagement from Gaza will be replaced by the kind of massive withdrawals championed in the plans sponsored by president Bill Clinton and prime minister Ehud Barak.
Bring down Sharon, and you in effect get Yossi Beilin’s Geneva Accord… Clearly, retreat from one part of the Land is being made to guarantee control over other parts.
I have yet to hear a compelling answer to this point. Israel withdraws on its own terms and gets to keep a large chunk of the West Bank. If Israel does not withdraw now, it will have the scope of its withdrawal decided for it later under far less favorable circumstances.
